Why the study?
Should implantable cardioverter-defibrillators and permanent pacemakers in patients with terminal illness be deactivated?
Should implantable cardioverter-defibrillators and permanent pacemakers in patients with terminal illness be deactivated?
Deactivating ICDs in terminally ill patients is ethically distinct from deactivating pacemakers and is viewed as a humane way to prevent painful shocks at the end of life.
Therapy of Cardiac Rhythm Abnormalities 1 include a discussion of ethical issues surrounding the deactivation of pacemakers, implanted cardioverter-defibrillator (ICDs), and CRT devices in patients who are terminally ill.The authors rightly note that most clinicians make an ethical distinction between deactivating an ICD and deactivating a permanent pacemaker.3][4][5][6][7][8] Many patients and physicians find the deactivation of an ICD in this situation as morally equivalent to a "do not resuscitate" order.Deactivation of an ICD in a patient who is dying of a terminal illness, whether cardiac or another condition, prevents the delivery of painful ICD shocks and allows the patient to die of the natural progression of their underlying disease.As such, this action seems a humane withdrawal of a futile medical treatment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kay et al. (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: