Why the study?
LVEF has low sensitivity for predicting arrhythmic events in patients with symptomatic heart failure and LVEF 35% or less receiving an ICD, prompting a search for predictors of sustained ventricular arrhythmias.
Does a clinical score based on comorbidities predict sustained ventricular arrhythmias in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction receiving an ICD for primary prevention?
Cohort (n=193)
No
Does a clinical score based on comorbidities predict sustained ventricular arrhythmias in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction receiving an ICD for primary prevention?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A simple clinical score based on comorbidities can help predict sustained ventricular arrhythmias in patients with HFrEF receiving an ICD for primary prevention.
AIMS: Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is an effective treatment to reduce mortality in patients with symptomatic heart failure and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 35% or less. LVEF presents a low sensitivity for predicting arrhythmic events. Aim of this study was to identify predictors of sustained ventricular arrhythmias (SVAs), overall and according to the cause of heart failure. METHODS: Single-center, retrospective, cohort study of 193 patients (51 nonischemic and 142 ischemic) with chronic heart failure and LVEF less than 35% who had received ICD for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death. We collected clinical data, echocardiographic parameters and SVAs detected by the ICD. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 1440 days, 32 (16.2%) patients had SVAs. SVAs incidence was similar in patients with nonischemic (15.6%) and ischemic cause of heart failure (16.9%). Hypertension, diabetes, chronic renal failure, atrial fibrillation, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, New York Heart Association class at least III were predictors at univariate analysis of SVAs. A clinical score, assigning one point to each of these variables, was associated with a significantly increased risk of SVAs [odds ratio for each point increase = 1.92, 95% confidence interval 1.40-2.65, P < 0.0001, area under the curve (AUC) 0.73], with 72% sensitivity and 60% specificity for a cutoff at least three and remained significant in nonischemic (AUC 0.84) and ischemic (AUC 0.68) patients. CONCLUSION: Our study shows the benefit of ICD implantation in primary prevention and its independency of cause. A simple clinical score, based on comorbidities, identifies patients with more benefits from ICD implantation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Santangelo et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in chronic heart failure with LVEF <35% (n=193). Clinical score based on comorbidities was evaluated on sustained ventricular arrhythmias (SVAs) (OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.40-2.65, p=< 0.0001).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: