Poole Jeanne E, Johnson George W, Hellkamp Anne S, Anderson Jill, Callans David J, Raitt Merritt H, Reddy Ramakota K, Marchlinski Francis E, Yee Raymond, Guarnieri Thomas, Talajic Mario, Wilber David J, Fishbein Daniel P, Packer Douglas L, Mark Daniel B, Lee Kerry L, Bardy Gust H
Division of Cardiology, University of Washington School of Medicine, 1959 NE Pacific St., Box 356422, Seattle, WA 98195-6422, USA.
N Engl J Med. 2008 Sep 4;359(10):1009-17. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa071098.
Patients with heart failure who receive an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) for primary prevention (i.e., prevention of a first life-threatening arrhythmic event) may later receive therapeutic shocks from the ICD. Information about long-term prognosis after ICD therapy in such patients is limited.
Of 829 patients with heart failure who were randomly assigned to ICD therapy, we implanted the ICD in 811. ICD shocks that followed the onset of ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation were considered to be appropriate. All other ICD shocks were considered to be inappropriate.
Over a median follow-up period of 45.5 months, 269 patients (33.2%) received at least one ICD shock, with 128 patients receiving only appropriate shocks, 87 receiving only inappropriate shocks, and 54 receiving both types of shock. In a Cox proportional-hazards model adjusted for baseline prognostic factors, an appropriate ICD shock, as compared with no appropriate shock, was associated with a significant increase in the subsequent risk of death from all causes (hazard ratio, 5.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.97 to 8.12; P<0.001). An inappropriate ICD shock, as compared with no inappropriate shock, was also associated with a significant increase in the risk of death (hazard ratio, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.29 to 3.05; P=0.002). For patients who survived longer than 24 hours after an appropriate ICD shock, the risk of death remained elevated (hazard ratio, 2.99; 95% CI, 2.04 to 4.37; P<0.001). The most common cause of death among patients who received any ICD shock was progressive heart failure.
Among patients with heart failure in whom an ICD is implanted for primary prevention, those who receive shocks for any arrhythmia have a substantially higher risk of death than similar patients who do not receive such shocks.
因一级预防(即预防首次危及生命的心律失常事件)而接受植入式心脏复律除颤器(ICD)治疗的心力衰竭患者,日后可能会接受ICD的治疗性电击。关于此类患者接受ICD治疗后的长期预后信息有限。
在829例随机分配接受ICD治疗的心力衰竭患者中,我们为811例植入了ICD。室性心动过速或心室颤动发作后发生的ICD电击被视为恰当电击。所有其他ICD电击均被视为不恰当电击。
在中位随访期45.5个月期间,269例患者(33.2%)接受了至少一次ICD电击,其中128例患者仅接受恰当电击,87例仅接受不恰当电击,54例接受了两种类型的电击。在针对基线预后因素进行调整的Cox比例风险模型中,与未接受恰当电击相比,接受恰当ICD电击与随后全因死亡风险显著增加相关(风险比,5.68;95%置信区间[CI],3.97至8.12;P<0.001)。与未接受不恰当电击相比,接受不恰当ICD电击也与死亡风险显著增加相关(风险比,1.98;95%CI,1.29至3.05;P=0.002)。对于在恰当ICD电击后存活超过24小时的患者,死亡风险仍然升高(风险比,2.99;95%CI,2.04至4.37;P<0.001)。接受任何ICD电击的患者中最常见的死亡原因是进行性心力衰竭。
在因一级预防而植入ICD的心力衰竭患者中,因任何心律失常接受电击的患者比未接受此类电击的类似患者死亡风险要高得多。