Why the study?
Does a dual-chamber ICD reduce mortality and arrhythmogenic morbidity compared to a single-chamber ICD in patients without an antibradycardia pacing indication?
Population
100 patients with an indication for an implantable cardioverter defibrillator and without antibradycardia…
Comparison
Dual-chamber implantable cardioverter… vs Single-chamber implantable cardioverter…
Design
RCT, randomly assigned
Follow-up
mean 52+/-14 months
Authors
Loading...
Dual-chamber ICDs confer no mortality or VT benefit without pacing indication; confirms single-chamber sufficiency and challenges routine dual-chamber use.
Does a dual-chamber ICD reduce mortality and arrhythmogenic morbidity compared to a single-chamber ICD in patients without an antibradycardia pacing indication?
In patients without a pacing indication, dual-chamber ICDs offer no mortality or morbidity advantage over single-chamber devices, and frequent ventricular pacing may increase mortality.
Kolb et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: