Key result
Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators were associated with a significantly lower EQ-5D index (adjusted difference -0.018) at 1 year compared to pacemakers after adjusting for baseline characteristics.
Why the study?
Data on the association of cardiac implantable electronic devices (PM, ICD, CRT-P, and CRT-D) with health-related quality of life were lacking.
Does the implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) improve health-related quality of life at 1 year in patients requiring pacing or defibrillation?
Cohort (n=1,479)
Yes
Does the implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) improve health-related quality of life at 1 year in patients requiring pacing or defibrillation?
CIED implantation, particularly pacemakers and CRT-P, is associated with significant improvements in patient-reported health-related quality of life at 1 year, though defibrillators may have a less pronounced benefit.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Caution against assuming equivalent HRQoL benefits across CIEDs; leaves open whether device type causally affects outcomes.
Abstract Aim The association of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED), namely pacemaker (PM), implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization therapy with (CRT-D) or without defibrillator (CRT-P), on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is lacking. Methods and results Data from the Swedish Pacemaker and ICD Registry together with the European Quality of Life-5 Dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D) administered before and after one year the CIED implant from January 2019 to February 2022 were used to analyze the HRQoL with the EQ-5D visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) and the EQ-5D index. Of 1,479 who completed the EQ-5D, 80% had a PM, 10% an ICD, 5% a CRT-P and 6% a CRT-D. The median age was 77 years with a prevalence of females ranging from 38% in the PM group to 17% in the ICD group. The EQ-VAS and the EQ-5D index significantly increased in patients with PM and CRT-P (EQ-VAS +2.8, standard deviations (SD) 23 and +5.8, SD 24.9; EQ-5D index +0.019, SD 0.114 and +0.051, SD 0.125) while only the EQ-5D index increased in patients with ICD (+0.002, SD 0.104 ). After adjusting for age, sex and HRQoL at baseline, the presence of defibrillator was associated with lower EQ-VAS (-3.4, 95% confidence intervals (CI) -6.7; -0.1 and -4.8, 95% CI -8.8;-0.7) and EQ-5D index (-0.018, 95% CI -0.035; -0.0003 and -0.025 95% CI 0.046;0.004) at follow-up compared to PM. Conclusion These findings, showing the HRQoL associated with CIED, are important to support physicians' and pacemaker nurses' care after device implantation by embracing the patients’ perspectives.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gatti et al. (2024) conducted a cohort in Cardiac implantable electronic devices (n=1,479). Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) vs. Pacemaker (PM) was evaluated on EQ-5D index at 1 year (Adjusted difference -0.018, 95% CI -0.035 to -0.0003). Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators were associated with a significantly lower EQ-5D index (adjusted difference -0.018) at 1 year compared to pacemakers after adjusting for baseline characteristics.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: