Primary prevention ICD patients were less likely to receive appropriate therapies than secondary prevention patients (18% vs 26%, P=0.02), but experienced similar mortality and quality of life.
RCT (n=582)
antitachycardia pacing or shock
Absolute Event Rate: 18% vs 26%
p-value: p=0.02
BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) reduce mortality in primary and secondary prevention. Quality of life, mortality, appropriate therapies for specific ventricular rhythms, and inappropriate therapies for supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) were compared among 582 patients (primary prevention=248; secondary prevention=334) in PainFREE Rx II, a 634-patient prospective, randomized study of antitachycardia pacing or shocks for fast ventricular tachycardia (FVT). METHODS AND RESULTS: ICDs were programmed identically with 3 zones (ventricular tachycardia VT 250 bpm) but randomized to antitachycardia pacing or shock as initial therapy for FVT. All treated episodes with electrograms were adjudicated. Primary prevention patients had lower ejection fractions and more coronary artery disease. beta-Blocker use, antiarrhythmic drug use, and follow-up duration were similar. Over 11+/-3 months, 1563 treated episodes were classified as VT (n=740), FVT (n=350), VF (n=77), and SVT (n=396). The distribution of VT, FVT, and VF was not different between primary and secondary prevention patients (respectively, VT 52% versus 54%, FVT 35% versus 35%, and VF 14% versus 10%). More secondary prevention patients had appropriate therapies (26% versus 18%, P=0.02), but among these patients, the median number of episodes per patient was similar. Inappropriate therapies occurred in 15% of both groups and accounted for similar proportions of all detected and treated episodes (46% in primary prevention patients versus 34% in secondary prevention patients, P=0.09). Quality of life improved modestly in both groups, and mortality was similar. CONCLUSIONS: Primary prevention patients are slightly less likely to have appropriate therapies than secondary prevention patients, but episode density is similar among patients with appropriate therapies. SVT resulted in more than one third of therapies in both groups, but quality of life and mortality were similar.
Sweeney et al. (Wed,) conducted a rct in Primary and secondary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) patients (n=582). Primary prevention ICD vs. Secondary prevention ICD was evaluated on Appropriate therapies (p=0.02). Primary prevention ICD patients were less likely to receive appropriate therapies than secondary prevention patients (18% vs 26%, P=0.02), but experienced similar mortality and quality of life.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: