Key result
Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are reviewed for their efficacy compared to antiarrhythmic drugs in the primary and secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death.
Why the study?
Do implantable cardioverter defibrillators prevent sudden cardiac death in patients at risk of sudden cardiac death?
Do implantable cardioverter defibrillators prevent sudden cardiac death in patients at risk of sudden cardiac death?
This review highlights the role and efficacy of implantable cardioverter defibrillators compared to antiarrhythmic drugs in the primary and secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death.
Review supports ICD preference in SCD prevention; leaves open need for updated head-to-head trials versus modern drugs.
The article highlights the role of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) in the primary and secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death. It considers the results of multicenter studies comparing the efficacy of antiarrhythmic drugs and implantable devices in the primary and secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death, including that in patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy and discusses quality of life in patients with ICDs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bockeriа et al. (2017) conducted a review in Sudden cardiac death. Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) vs. Antiarrhythmic drugs was evaluated on Sudden cardiac death. Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are reviewed for their efficacy compared to antiarrhythmic drugs in the primary and secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: