Kim Ju Youn, Kim Sung-Hwan, Kim Sung Su, Lee Ki Hong, Park Hyung-Wook, Cho Jeong-Gwan, Uhm Jae-Sun, Joung Boyoung, Pak Hui-Nam, Lee Moon-Hyoung, Park Seung-Jung, On Young Keun, Kim June Soo, Lim Hong Euy, Shim Jaemin, Choi Jong-Il, Park Sang Weon, Kim Young-Hoon, Lee Woo Seok, Kim Jun, Nam Gi-Byoung, Choi Kee-Joon, Kim You-Ho, Oh Yong-Seog, Lee Man-Young, Rho Tai-Ho
Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea.
Heart Research Center, Chonnam National University Hospital, Chonnam National University.
Int J Cardiol. 2015;187:340-4. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.03.262. Epub 2015 Mar 20.
An implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is the only proven effective therapeutic strategy for patients with Brugada syndrome (BS). However, it is controversial whether the device should be replaced even in patients who had never experienced appropriate ICD therapy until the time of generator replacement.
This was a nationwide, multicenter retrospective study that enrolled patients who were diagnosed with BS and had an ICD implantation between January 1998 and April 2014. Appropriate ICD therapies administered for ventricular tachyarrhythmia were evaluated during follow-up. A total of 117 patients (age 43 ± 12 years, male 115 [98.3%]) were enrolled, and the mean follow-up duration was 6.0 ± 4.1 years. Thirty-seven (31.6%) patients had experienced appropriate ICD therapy during follow-up. Of all patients, 46 underwent replacement of the device. After the first generator replacement, the incidence of appropriate ICD therapy remained as high as 65.2% in patients who previously experienced appropriate ICD therapy before generator replacement. In 30 patients who did not experience any cardiac events until the first generator change, two (8.7%) had an episode of appropriate ICD therapy afterwards.
No episode of ICD therapy before generator replacement could not guarantee a safe clinical course. ICD generator replacement should be considered even in patients without ICD therapy before.
植入式心脏复律除颤器(ICD)是布加综合征(BS)患者唯一经证实有效的治疗策略。然而,即使对于那些在发生器更换时从未接受过合适ICD治疗的患者,是否应该更换该装置仍存在争议。
这是一项全国性、多中心的回顾性研究,纳入了1998年1月至2014年4月期间被诊断为BS并植入ICD的患者。在随访期间评估了针对室性快速心律失常给予的合适ICD治疗。共纳入117例患者(年龄43±12岁,男性115例[98.3%]),平均随访时间为6.0±4.1年。37例(31.6%)患者在随访期间接受过合适的ICD治疗。所有患者中,46例进行了装置更换。在首次更换发生器后,之前在发生器更换前接受过合适ICD治疗的患者中,合适ICD治疗的发生率仍高达65.2%。在30例直到首次更换发生器时未发生任何心脏事件的患者中,有2例(8.7%)随后发生了一次合适的ICD治疗。
在发生器更换前未发生ICD治疗事件并不能保证临床过程安全。即使是之前未接受过ICD治疗的患者,也应考虑更换ICD发生器。