Key result
Spironolactone 25 mg daily did not reduce the risk of recurrent VT/VF requiring ICD therapy compared with placebo in patients with ICDs (HR 1.01; 95% CI 0.64-1.83; P=0.71).
Why the study?
Does spironolactone reduce the recurrence of VT/VF requiring ICD therapy in patients with ICDs at moderately high risk for recurrent VT/VF?
RCT (n=90)
double-blind
randomized
Does spironolactone reduce the recurrence of VT/VF requiring ICD therapy in patients with ICDs at moderately high risk for recurrent VT/VF?
In patients with ICDs at moderately high risk for recurrent VT/VF who do not have a standard heart failure indication for aldosterone blockade, spironolactone does not reduce the risk of recurrent VT/VF.
Spironolactone does not prevent recurrent VT/VF in ICD patients without HF indication; confirms neutral effect and advises against routine use.
BACKGROUND: Previous studies have suggested that aldosterone blockade can reduce the incidence of ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) in patients with heart failure. The SPIronolactone to Reduce ICD Therapy (SPIRIT) trial was designed to test the hypothesis that spironolactone reduces the incidence of VT/VF in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) who are at moderately high risk for recurrent VT/VF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Ninety patients who had ICDs who were at moderately high risk for recurrent VT/VF and who were not candidates for spironolactone by current heart failure guidelines were randomized to receive spironolactone 25 mg daily or placebo in a double-blind fashion. All patients had previously received ICD therapy (shock or antitachycardia pacing) for VT/VF within 2 years of randomization or an ICD for secondary prevention of VT/VF within 6 months of randomization. The primary end point was time to first recurrence of VT/VF requiring ICD therapy. After a median follow-up of 35 months, the Kaplan-Meier probability estimates for VT/VF requiring ICD therapy were 68.7% in the placebo group and 84.7% in the spironolactone group. Compared with placebo, spironolactone was associated with a similar risk of VT/VF (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.64-1.83; P=0.71). There was no significant difference between the median times to first VT/VF recurrence requiring ICD therapy in the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ICDs who were at moderately high risk for recurrent VT/VF on account of a recent VT/VF event that was either sustained or treated by the ICD and who were not candidates for spironolactone by current heart failure guidelines, spironolactone did not delay the first recurrence of VT/VF or reduce the risk of recurrent VT/VF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zarraga et al. (2012) conducted an RCT in Patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators at moderately high risk for recurrent VT/VF (n=90). Spironolactone vs. Placebo was evaluated on Time to first recurrence of VT/VF requiring ICD therapy (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.64-1.83, p=0.71). Spironolactone 25 mg daily did not reduce the risk of recurrent VT/VF requiring ICD therapy compared with placebo in patients with ICDs (HR 1.01; 95% CI 0.64-1.83; P=0.71).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: