Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators for Long QT syndrome and Catecholaminergic Polymorphic Ventricular Tachycardia? (Not so fast, Louis).

IF 7.4 1区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Europace Pub Date : 2025-10-18 DOI:10.1093/europace/euaf266
Peter J Schwartz, Michael J Ackerman
{"title":"Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators for Long QT syndrome and Catecholaminergic Polymorphic Ventricular Tachycardia? (Not so fast, Louis).","authors":"Peter J Schwartz, Michael J Ackerman","doi":"10.1093/europace/euaf266","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Few medical decisions have a greater impact on the life of patients affected by either LQTS or CPVT as the one to recommend an ICD or not. If the decision is correct, a life might be saved or a litany of ICD-related complications might be avoided. If it is wrong, well you can fill in the blanks. Many physicians take the fastest and simplest road by recommending an ICD which represents \"double protection\": for the patients and for themselves. Our opinion is that this requires a very careful consideration about the pros and cons and should be taken neither lightly nor quickly. Moreover, there is another side to this moon, which also requires more thought than usually assumed. As to LQTS and CPVT, the current data strongly indicate that when high risk patients are treated with either combination drug therapy comprising beta blockers and mexiletine (LQTS) or beta blockers and flecainide (CPVT) or triple therapy with left cardiac sympathetic denervation as the treatment intensifier, mortality is close to zero and most patients have no life-threatening events. Thus, we stand by our view that most patients still do not need and should not receive an ICD. However, sometimes patients are desperately worried for the fear of dying suddenly and ask for an ICD despite being at low risk. Their request should be listened to, respected, and considered with empathy because immortality cannot be guaranteed. We believe that both expertise and compassion are quintessential to practicing the science and art of medicine.</p>","PeriodicalId":11981,"journal":{"name":"Europace","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Europace","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/euaf266","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Few medical decisions have a greater impact on the life of patients affected by either LQTS or CPVT as the one to recommend an ICD or not. If the decision is correct, a life might be saved or a litany of ICD-related complications might be avoided. If it is wrong, well you can fill in the blanks. Many physicians take the fastest and simplest road by recommending an ICD which represents "double protection": for the patients and for themselves. Our opinion is that this requires a very careful consideration about the pros and cons and should be taken neither lightly nor quickly. Moreover, there is another side to this moon, which also requires more thought than usually assumed. As to LQTS and CPVT, the current data strongly indicate that when high risk patients are treated with either combination drug therapy comprising beta blockers and mexiletine (LQTS) or beta blockers and flecainide (CPVT) or triple therapy with left cardiac sympathetic denervation as the treatment intensifier, mortality is close to zero and most patients have no life-threatening events. Thus, we stand by our view that most patients still do not need and should not receive an ICD. However, sometimes patients are desperately worried for the fear of dying suddenly and ask for an ICD despite being at low risk. Their request should be listened to, respected, and considered with empathy because immortality cannot be guaranteed. We believe that both expertise and compassion are quintessential to practicing the science and art of medicine.

植入式心律转复除颤器治疗长QT综合征和儿茶酚胺能多形性室性心动过速?(别着急,路易斯)。
很少有医疗决定对LQTS或CPVT患者的生活影响比推荐或不推荐ICD更大。如果决定是正确的,可能会挽救一条生命,或者避免一系列与国际疾病分类相关的并发症。如果是错的,你可以填空。许多医生采取最快和最简单的方式,推荐ICD,这代表了“双重保护”:对患者和对自己。我们的意见是,这需要对利弊进行非常仔细的考虑,不应掉以轻心,也不应草率行事。此外,月球还有另一面,这也需要比通常认为的更多的思考。对于LQTS和CPVT,目前的数据强烈表明,当高危患者采用-受体阻滞剂和美西汀(LQTS)联合治疗或-受体阻滞剂和氟卡奈(CPVT)联合治疗或以左心交感神经去神经为治疗强化剂的三联治疗时,死亡率接近于零,大多数患者没有发生危及生命的事件。因此,我们坚持我们的观点,即大多数患者仍然不需要也不应该接受ICD。然而,有时患者非常担心突然死亡,尽管风险很低,但仍要求进行ICD。他们的要求应该得到倾听、尊重和同情,因为永生是无法保证的。我们相信,专业知识和同情心是实践医学科学和艺术的精髓。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Europace
Europace 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
8.20%
发文量
851
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: EP - Europace - European Journal of Pacing, Arrhythmias and Cardiac Electrophysiology of the European Heart Rhythm Association of the European Society of Cardiology. The journal aims to provide an avenue of communication of top quality European and international original scientific work and reviews in the fields of Arrhythmias, Pacing and Cellular Electrophysiology. The Journal offers the reader a collection of contemporary original peer-reviewed papers, invited papers and editorial comments together with book reviews and correspondence.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信