Why the study?
Does implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy improve outcomes compared to antiarrhythmic drugs in patients with ventricular tachyarrhythmias?
Does implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy improve outcomes compared to antiarrhythmic drugs in patients with ventricular tachyarrhythmias?
This review portrays the available evidence suggesting the superiority of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators over antiarrhythmic drugs for treating ventricular tachyarrhythmias.
May support ICD preference over antiarrhythmics for ventricular tachyarrhythmias; leaves open updated RCTs in contemporary populations.
Sudden cardiac death accounts for approximately 50%of all cardiovascular deaths, making the developmentof treatment strategies a high medical priority. Non-pharmacological measures, such as map-guided anti-tachycardia surgery or catheter ablation are onlyapplicable to a minority of patients with ventriculartachyarrhythmias, whereas antiarrhythmic drug therapyand implantation of automatic cardioverter-defibrillators could possibly be applied to a greatmajority of patients.The dilemma for the physician is now to choosethe best therapy for any given patient at a time whenresults from randomized comparisons of implantabledefibrillators and antiarrhythmic drugs will only beavailable in years hence. Therefore, the purpose of thispaper is to portray the evidence currently available forthe superiority of implantable cardioverter-defibrillatortherapy over antiarrhythmic drugs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Böcker et al. (1997) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: