Key result
Primary prevention ICDs show no survival benefit over no device in transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis.
Why the study?
Due to poor long-term prognosis in transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis, the role of primary prevention ICDs remains controversial, and their impact on survival needed evaluation.
Does primary prevention ICD implantation improve survival in patients with transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis?
Cohort (n=76)
No
Does primary prevention ICD implantation improve survival in patients with transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis?
Hazard Ratio: 0.72 (95% CI 0.4–1.3)
Absolute Event Rate: 84% vs 75%
p-value: p=0.27
Primary prevention ICDs do not appear to prolong survival in patients with ATTR-CA and reduced ejection fraction, and may deliver inappropriate shocks.
Does not support primary prevention ICDs in ATTR-CA; leaves open need for randomized trials to assess benefit.
BACKGROUND: Due to the poor long-term prognosis of patients with transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis (ATTR-CA), the role of primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) in this patient population remains controversial. We aimed to study the impact of primary prevention ICDs on survival in patients with ATTR-CA. METHODS: Among 382 patients diagnosed with ATTR-CA at our institution between 2004 and 2018, 19 had primary prevention ICDs implanted. This cohort was matched in a 1:3 manner on the basis of age, gender, ejection fraction (EF) and ATTR-CA stage with 57 patients without cardiac devices. Patients were followed up for a mean of 23 ± 19 months. Our primary outcome of interest was all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Mean EF at the time of ICD implantation was 28 ± 8%. No patients had a history of sustained ventricular arrhythmia (VA) at the time of implant. Only a minority of patients were tolerant of optimal medical therapy due to renal impairment, hypotension, or a combination of the two. Death occurred in 43 (75%) patients without primary prevention ICDs and 16 (84%) patients with primary prevention ICDs, P = .26. Of the 19 patients with ICDs, three had inappropriate shocks delivered for atrial fibrillation, and none had therapies for sustained VAs. On Cox proportional hazards analyses, the presence of a primary prevention ICD was not associated with improved survival (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.4-1.3, P = .27). CONCLUSION: Primary prevention ICDs do not prolong survival in patients with ATTR-CA and a reduced EF. Our findings are observational and will need to be validated in future prospective studies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Donnellan et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis (ATTR-CA) (n=76). Primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) vs. No cardiac devices was evaluated on All-cause mortality (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.4-1.3, p=0.27). Primary prevention ICDs were not associated with improved survival compared to no devices in patients with transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis (HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.4-1.3; P=0.27).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: