Clinical Outcomes and Mortality in Patients with Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator for Primary Prevention.

Ahmet Anıl Başkurt, Sema Güneri, Reşit Yiğit Yılancıoğlu, Oğuzhan Ekrem Turan, Emin Evren Özcan
{"title":"Clinical Outcomes and Mortality in Patients with Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator for Primary Prevention.","authors":"Ahmet Anıl Başkurt, Sema Güneri, Reşit Yiğit Yılancıoğlu, Oğuzhan Ekrem Turan, Emin Evren Özcan","doi":"10.36660/abc.20240348","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is indicated for primary prevention in patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 35% and New York Heart Association class II or III heart failure despite 3 months of optimal medical therapy. However, studies that support this recommendation are over 20 years old, and they may not reflect modern heart failure patients' characteristics.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Retrospectively evaluate patients who received an ICD for primary prevention.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All-cause and sudden death rates were compared in patients who received ICD between January 1, 2015 and March 1, 2020 and those who did not accept ICD. Variables were analyzed at a 95% confidence interval, and p < 0.05 was considered as significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>When comparing mortality rates between patients with and without ICD, 67 of 228 patients (29.4%) in the ICD group and 39 of 150 patients (26%) in the control group died from all causes (p = 0.473). Age, LVEF, BNP value, and hospitalization were found to be independent predictors of all-cause mortality. Patients with BNP above 508.5, LVEF below 24.5%, and age over 68.5 years had a 25-fold increased all-cause mortality. Coronary artery disease was not found to be an independent risk factor. Survival in the control group was statistically significantly better in the first months. Although there was no statistical difference in the long term, survival was numerically better in the ICD arm. This could be attributed to the fact that ICD implantations were performed on patients with worse clinical conditions. The higher survival rate observed in patients with ICD may be due to the fact that they came in for device control and remained in follow-up.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>With advances in the treatment of heart failure, ICD implantation should be performed in selected patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":93887,"journal":{"name":"Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia","volume":"122 2","pages":"e20240348"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11870021/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36660/abc.20240348","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is indicated for primary prevention in patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 35% and New York Heart Association class II or III heart failure despite 3 months of optimal medical therapy. However, studies that support this recommendation are over 20 years old, and they may not reflect modern heart failure patients' characteristics.

Objectives: Retrospectively evaluate patients who received an ICD for primary prevention.

Methods: All-cause and sudden death rates were compared in patients who received ICD between January 1, 2015 and March 1, 2020 and those who did not accept ICD. Variables were analyzed at a 95% confidence interval, and p < 0.05 was considered as significant.

Results: When comparing mortality rates between patients with and without ICD, 67 of 228 patients (29.4%) in the ICD group and 39 of 150 patients (26%) in the control group died from all causes (p = 0.473). Age, LVEF, BNP value, and hospitalization were found to be independent predictors of all-cause mortality. Patients with BNP above 508.5, LVEF below 24.5%, and age over 68.5 years had a 25-fold increased all-cause mortality. Coronary artery disease was not found to be an independent risk factor. Survival in the control group was statistically significantly better in the first months. Although there was no statistical difference in the long term, survival was numerically better in the ICD arm. This could be attributed to the fact that ICD implantations were performed on patients with worse clinical conditions. The higher survival rate observed in patients with ICD may be due to the fact that they came in for device control and remained in follow-up.

Conclusions: With advances in the treatment of heart failure, ICD implantation should be performed in selected patients.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信