Exercise interventions in patients with ICDs and CRT-Ds significantly reduced the occurrence of ICD shocks during follow-up (15.6% vs 23%; OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.48-0.80; P<0.001).
Systematic Review (n=2,547)
Patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators (CRT-Ds) (n=2,547)
Exercise interventions vs Control groups
Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks in follow-up — OR 0.68 (0.48-0.80), p=< .001
Effect estimate: OR 0.68 (95% CI 0.48-0.80)
Absolute Event Rate: 15.6% vs 23%
p-value: p=< .001
PURPOSE: Physical activity improves outcomes across a broad spectrum of cardiovascular disease. The safety and effectiveness of exercise-based interventions in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) including cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators (CRT-Ds) remain poorly understood. METHODS: We identified clinical studies using the following search terms: "implantable cardioverter-defibrillators"; "ICD"; "cardiac resynchronization therapy"; "CRT"; and any one of the following: "activity"; "exercise"; "training"; or "rehabilitation"; from January 1, 2000 to October 1, 2015. Eligible studies were evaluated for design and clinical endpoints. RESULTS: A total of 16 studies were included: 8 randomized controlled trials, 5 single-arm trials, 2 observational cohort trials, and 1 randomized crossover trial. A total of 2547 patients were included (intervention groups = 1215 patients, control groups = 1332 patients). Exercise interventions varied widely in character, duration (median 84 d, range: 23-168 d), and follow-up time (median 109 d, range: 23 d to 48 mo). Exercise performance measures were the most common primary endpoints (87.5%), with most studies (81%) demonstrating significant improvement. Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks were uncommon during active exercise intervention, with 6 shocks in 635 patients (0.9%). Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks in follow-up were less common in patients receiving any exercise intervention (15.6% vs 23%, OR = 0.68; 95% CI, 0.48-0.80, P < .001). (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2 peak improved significantly in patients receiving exercise intervention (1.98 vs 0.36 mL/kg/min, P < .001). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, exercise interventions in patients with ICDs and CRT-Ds appear safe and effective. Lack of consensus on design and endpoints remains a barrier to broader application to this important patient population.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Daniel A. Steinhaus
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
Steven A. Lubitz
Broad Institute
Peter A. Noseworthy
Electrophysiology
Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation and Prevention
Harvard University
Massachusetts General Hospital
Mayo Clinic
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Steinhaus et al. (Thu,) conducted a systematic review in Patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators (CRT-Ds) (n=2,547). Exercise interventions vs. Control groups was evaluated on Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks in follow-up (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.48-0.80, p=< .001). Exercise interventions in patients with ICDs and CRT-Ds significantly reduced the occurrence of ICD shocks during follow-up (15.6% vs 23%; OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.48-0.80; P<0.001).
synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1106f5c56c5252651a0b08 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/hcr.0000000000000389
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: