PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
October 30, 2017Circulation43 citations

Systematic Review for the 2017 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for Management of Patients With Ventricular Arrhythmias and the Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death

View Full Paper
FKFred KusumotoKBKent R. BaileyACAhmad Sami Chaouki

Key Result

Inducible VA in asymptomatic Brugada syndrome was not significantly associated with major arrhythmic events (OR 2.3; 95% CI 0.63-8.66; P=0.2), while ICDs improved survival in older/comorbid patients.

Study Design

Type

Systematic Review (n=1,138)

Structured PICO

Does ICD implantation improve survival in older/comorbid patients, and does inducible ventricular arrhythmia predict arrhythmic events in asymptomatic Brugada syndrome?

P
Population
Asymptomatic patients with Brugada syndrome (n=1138 across 6 studies) AND older patients (>75 years) or those with significant comorbidities (renal disease, COPD, atrial fibrillation, heart disease) who meet criteria for primary prevention ICD based on symptoms or left ventricular function.
I
Intervention
Programmed electrostimulation (for Brugada syndrome) AND Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation for primary prevention (for older/comorbid patients).
C
Comparator
No inducible ventricular arrhythmia (for Brugada syndrome) AND no ICD implantation (for older/comorbid patients).
O
Outcome
Major arrhythmic events (sustained VAs, sudden cardiac death, or appropriate ICD therapy) for Brugada syndrome; All-cause mortality for older/comorbid patients.hard clinical

ICD implantation for primary prevention is associated with improved survival in older patients and those with significant comorbidities, while inducible ventricular arrhythmia in asymptomatic Brugada syndrome showed a non-significant trend towards higher risk of major arrhythmic events.

Main Result

Effect estimate: OR 2.3 (95% CI 0.63-8.66)

p-value: p=0.2

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although large randomized clinical trials have found that primary prevention use of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) improves survival in patients with cardiomyopathy and heart failure symptoms, patients who receive ICDs in practice are often older and have more comorbidities than patients who were enrolled in the clinical trials. In addition, there is a debate among clinicians on the usefulness of electrophysiological study for risk stratification of asymptomatic patients with Brugada syndrome. AIM: Our analysis has 2 objectives. First, to evaluate whether ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) induced with programmed electrostimulation in asymptomatic patients with Brugada syndrome identify a higher risk group that may require additional testing or therapies. Second, to evaluate whether implantation of an ICD is associated with a clinical benefit in older patients and patients with comorbidities who would otherwise benefit on the basis of left ventricular ejection fraction and heart failure symptoms. METHODS: Traditional statistical approaches were used to address 1) whether programmed ventricular stimulation identifies a higher-risk group in asymptomatic patients with Brugada syndrome and 2) whether ICD implantation for primary prevention is associated with improved outcomes in older patients (>75 years of age) and patients with significant comorbidities who would otherwise meet criteria for ICD implantation on the basis of symptoms or left ventricular function. RESULTS: Evidence from 6 studies of 1138 asymptomatic patients were identified. Brugada syndrome with inducible VA on electrophysiological study was identified in 390 (34.3%) patients. To minimize patient overlap, the primary analysis used 5 of the 6 studies and found an odds ratio of 2.3 (95% CI: 0.63-8.66; P=0.2) for major arrhythmic events (sustained VAs, sudden cardiac death, or appropriate ICD therapy) in asymptomatic patients with Brugada syndrome and inducible VA on electrophysiological study versus those without inducible VA. Ten studies were reviewed that evaluated ICD use in older patients and 4 studies that evaluated unique patient populations were identified. In our analysis, ICD implantation was associated with improved survival (overall hazard ratio: 0.75; 95% confidence interval: 0.67-0.83; P<0.001). Ten studies were identified that evaluated ICD use in patients with various comorbidities including renal disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, atrial fibrillation, heart disease, and others. A random effects model demonstrated that ICD use was associated with reduced all-cause mortality (overall hazard ratio: 0.72; 95% confidence interval: 0.65-0.79; P<0.0001), and a second "minimal overlap" analysis also found that ICD use was associated with reduced all-cause mortality (overall hazard ratio: 0.71; 95% confidence interval: 0.61-0.82; P<0.0001). In 5 studies that included data on renal dysfunction, ICD implantation was associated with reduced all-cause mortality (overall hazard ratio: 0.71; 95% confidence interval: 0.60-0.85; P<0.001).

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Kusumoto et al. (2017) conducted a systematic review in Ventricular arrhythmias and prevention of sudden cardiac death (n=1,138). Programmed ventricular stimulation and ICD implantation vs. No inducible VA / No ICD was evaluated on Major arrhythmic events (sustained VAs, sudden cardiac death, or appropriate ICD therapy) (OR 2.3, 95% CI 0.63-8.66, p=0.2). Inducible VA in asymptomatic Brugada syndrome was not significantly associated with major arrhythmic events (OR 2.3; 95% CI 0.63-8.66; P=0.2), while ICDs improved survival in older/comorbid patients.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1bfd9db33628da419d15a5https://doi.org/10.1161/cir.0000000000000550
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper