Why the study?
Are guideline-based ICD indications applicable to all clinical practice settings given economic and political constraints?
Are guideline-based ICD indications applicable to all clinical practice settings given economic and political constraints?
This review critically examines the applicability of American and European guideline-based ICD indications to clinical practice, considering economic and political constraints.
The implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) has established itself as life-saving therapy in patients at risk for sudden cardiac death. Remarkable technological advances have made ICDs easier and safer to implant, with improved therapeutic and diagnostic functions and reduced morbidity. Guidelines on ICD indications have been proposed by American and European scientific societies since a number of years, based upon trials and expert opinion. In the context of variable economic and political constraints, it is questionable whether these guidelines may be applied to all settings. This review discusses the guideline-based indications, critically examines their applicability to clinical practice, and discusses alternatives to ICD therapy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Al-Jefairi et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: