Key result
Nonthoracotomy ICD implantation had similar 2-year survival compared to a thoracotomy approach (80% vs 87%; P=0.56), but was associated with reduced surgical morbidity and hospital costs.
Why the study?
Does nonthoracotomy ICD implantation reduce surgical morbidity and improve clinical outcomes compared to thoracotomy implantation in patients requiring ICD therapy?
Population
212 consecutive patients undergoing attempted implantable cardioverter/defibrillator system implantation…
Comparison
Attempted ICD implantation via a nonthoracotomy… vs Attempted ICD implantation via a thoracotomy…
Design
Cohort, None (not randomized)
Follow-up
16 +/- 9 months
Authors
Loading...
May reduce morbidity and costs with similar survival; extends early observational data but leaves open need for randomized confirmation.
Cohort (n=212)
No
Does nonthoracotomy ICD implantation reduce surgical morbidity and improve clinical outcomes compared to thoracotomy implantation in patients requiring ICD therapy?
Absolute Event Rate: 80% vs 87%
p-value: p=0.56
Nonthoracotomy ICD implantation is associated with reduced surgical morbidity, shorter hospital stays, and lower costs compared to thoracotomy, while maintaining similar survival efficacy.
Kleman et al. (1994) conducted a cohort in Life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias (n=212). Nonthoracotomy ICD implantation vs. Thoracotomy ICD implantation was evaluated on 2-year survival probability (p=0.56). Nonthoracotomy ICD implantation had similar 2-year survival compared to a thoracotomy approach (80% vs 87%; P=0.56), but was associated with reduced surgical morbidity and hospital costs.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: