Vehmeijer Jim T, Brouwer Tom F, Limpens Jacqueline, Knops Reinoud E, Bouma Berto J, Mulder Barbara J M, de Groot Joris R
Department of Clinical and Experimental Cardiology, Heart Center, Academic Medical Center, PO Box 22700, 1100 DE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Medical Library, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Eur Heart J. 2016 May 7;37(18):1439-48. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv735. Epub 2016 Feb 11.
Sudden cardiac death is a major cause of mortality in adult congenital heart disease (ACHD) patients. The indications for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation in ACHD patients are still not well established. We aim to systematically review the literature on indications and outcome of ICD implantation in ACHD patients.
We performed a comprehensive search in EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar to identify all studies on ICD implantation in ACHD patients. We used random effects models to calculate proportions and 95% confidence intervals. Of 1356 articles, 24 studies with 2162 patients were included, with a mean follow-up of 3.6 ± 0.9 years. Half of patients had tetralogy of Fallot. Mean age at implantation was 36.5 ± 5.5 years old and 66% was male. Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators were implanted for primary prevention in 53% (43.5-62.7). Overall, 24% (18.6-31.3) of patients received one or more appropriate ICD interventions (anti-tachycardia pacing or shocks) during 3.7 ± 0.9 years: 22% (16.9-28.8) of patients with primary prevention in 3.3 ± 0.3 years and 35% (26.6-45.2) of patients with secondary prevention in 4.3 ± 1.2 years. Inappropriate shocks occurred in 25% (20.1-31.0) in 3.7 ± 0.8 years and other, particularly lead-related complications in 26% (18.9-33.6) of patients in 3.8 ± 0.8 years. All-cause mortality was 10% during 3.7 ± 0.9 years.
In ACHD, remarkably high rates of appropriate ICD therapy were reported, both in primary and secondary prevention. Because of the young age and lower death rates, the cumulative beneficial effects are likely greater in ACHD patients than in acquired heart disease patients. However, considering the high rates of inappropriate shocks and complications, case-by-case weighing of costs and benefits, remains essential.
心源性猝死是成人先天性心脏病(ACHD)患者死亡的主要原因。ACHD患者植入植入式心脏复律除颤器(ICD)的指征仍未明确。我们旨在系统回顾关于ACHD患者ICD植入指征和结局的文献。
我们在EMBASE、MEDLINE和谷歌学术上进行了全面检索,以确定所有关于ACHD患者ICD植入的研究。我们使用随机效应模型计算比例和95%置信区间。在1356篇文章中,纳入了24项研究,共2162例患者,平均随访3.6±0.9年。一半患者患有法洛四联症。植入时的平均年龄为36.5±5.5岁,66%为男性。53%(43.5 - 62.7)的患者植入ICD用于一级预防。总体而言,24%(18.6 - 31.3)的患者在3.7±0.9年期间接受了一次或多次适当的ICD干预(抗心动过速起搏或电击):一级预防患者中22%(16.9 - 28.8)在3.3±0.3年期间接受干预,二级预防患者中35%(26.6 - 45.2)在4.3±1.2年期间接受干预。在3.7±0.8年期间,25%(20.1 - 31.0)的患者发生不适当电击,在3.8±0.8年期间,26%(18.9 - 33.6)的患者发生其他并发症,尤其是与导线相关的并发症。在3.7±0.9年期间,全因死亡率为10%。
在ACHD中,一级和二级预防中均报告了相当高的适当ICD治疗率。由于ACHD患者年龄较轻且死亡率较低,其累积有益效果可能比后天性心脏病患者更大。然而,鉴于不适当电击和并发症的发生率较高,逐例权衡成本和效益仍然至关重要。