Key result
WCD use in HF linked to no SCA or deaths and ~42% improving enough to discontinue.
Why the study?
Certain heart failure patients are not immediate candidates for ICDs due to short or uncertain risk duration, necessitating evaluation of WCD use for early defibrillation and risk monitoring.
Does a wearable cardioverter defibrillator prevent sudden cardiac death in high-risk heart failure patients awaiting ICD or transplant?
Population
89 eligible heart failure patients including those listed for cardiac transplantation, with dilated cardiomyopathy or on inotropes
Comparison
Wearable cardioverter defibrillator use with no comparator
Design
Prospective registry observational study across ten centers
Follow-up
75±58 days device wear time
Authors
Loading...
May inform ICD timing decisions in newly diagnosed or advanced HF; leaves open optimal patient selection for primary prevention.
Observational (n=89)
Yes
Does a wearable cardioverter defibrillator prevent sudden cardiac death in high-risk heart failure patients awaiting ICD or transplant?
The wearable cardioverter defibrillator safely bridged high-risk heart failure patients to either LVEF recovery or ICD implantation without any sudden cardiac deaths.
Kao et al. (2012) conducted an observational in Heart failure (n=89). Wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) was evaluated on Incidence of sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) and efficacy of early defibrillation. Among heart failure patients using a wearable cardioverter defibrillator, there were no sudden cardiac arrests or deaths during the study period, and 41.5% showed sufficient improvement to discontinue use.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: