Køber Lars, Thune Jens J, Nielsen Jens C, Haarbo Jens, Videbæk Lars, Korup Eva, Jensen Gunnar, Hildebrandt Per, Steffensen Flemming H, Bruun Niels E, Eiskjær Hans, Brandes Axel, Thøgersen Anna M, Gustafsson Finn, Egstrup Kenneth, Videbæk Regitze, Hassager Christian, Svendsen Jesper H, Høfsten Dan E, Torp-Pedersen Christian, Pehrson Steen
From the Department of Cardiology, Rigshospitalet (L.K., J.J.T., F.G., R.V., C.H., J.H.S., D.E.H., S.P.), and the Department of Cardiology, Bispebjerg Hospital (J.J.T.), University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen; the Department of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus (J.C.N., H.E.); the Department of Cardiology, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Hellerup (J.H., N.E.B.); the Department of Cardiology, Odense University Hospital, Odense (L.V., A.B.); the Department of Cardiology, Aalborg University Hospital (E.K., A.M.T., C.T.-P.), and the Clinical Institute, Aalborg University (N.E.B.), Aalborg; the Department of Cardiology, Zealand University Hospital, Roskilde (G.J.); Frederiksberg Heart Clinic, Frederiksberg (P.H.); the Department of Cardiology, Lillebaelt Hospital, Vejle (F.H.S.); and the Department of Cardiology, Odense University Hospital, Svendborg (K.E.) - all in Denmark.
N Engl J Med. 2016 Sep 29;375(13):1221-30. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1608029. Epub 2016 Aug 27.
The benefit of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) in patients with symptomatic systolic heart failure caused by coronary artery disease has been well documented. However, the evidence for a benefit of prophylactic ICDs in patients with systolic heart failure that is not due to coronary artery disease has been based primarily on subgroup analyses. The management of heart failure has improved since the landmark ICD trials, and many patients now receive cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).
In a randomized, controlled trial, 556 patients with symptomatic systolic heart failure (left ventricular ejection fraction, ≤35%) not caused by coronary artery disease were assigned to receive an ICD, and 560 patients were assigned to receive usual clinical care (control group). In both groups, 58% of the patients received CRT. The primary outcome of the trial was death from any cause. The secondary outcomes were sudden cardiac death and cardiovascular death.
After a median follow-up period of 67.6 months, the primary outcome had occurred in 120 patients (21.6%) in the ICD group and in 131 patients (23.4%) in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68 to 1.12; P=0.28). Sudden cardiac death occurred in 24 patients (4.3%) in the ICD group and in 46 patients (8.2%) in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.82; P=0.005). Device infection occurred in 27 patients (4.9%) in the ICD group and in 20 patients (3.6%) in the control group (P=0.29).
In this trial, prophylactic ICD implantation in patients with symptomatic systolic heart failure not caused by coronary artery disease was not associated with a significantly lower long-term rate of death from any cause than was usual clinical care. (Funded by Medtronic and others; DANISH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00542945 .).
植入式心脏复律除颤器(ICD)对冠心病所致有症状收缩性心力衰竭患者的益处已有充分记录。然而,预防性ICD对非冠心病所致收缩性心力衰竭患者有益的证据主要基于亚组分析。自具有里程碑意义的ICD试验以来,心力衰竭的管理有所改善,现在许多患者接受心脏再同步治疗(CRT)。
在一项随机对照试验中,556例非冠心病所致有症状收缩性心力衰竭(左心室射血分数≤35%)患者被分配接受ICD,560例患者被分配接受常规临床护理(对照组)。两组中,58%的患者接受了CRT。试验的主要结局是任何原因导致的死亡。次要结局是心源性猝死和心血管死亡。
中位随访67.6个月后,ICD组120例患者(21.6%)出现主要结局,对照组131例患者(23.4%)出现主要结局(风险比,0.87;95%置信区间[CI],0.68至1.12;P=0.28)。ICD组24例患者(4.3%)发生心源性猝死,对照组46例患者(8.2%)发生心源性猝死(风险比,0.50;95%CI,0.31至0.82;P=0.005)。ICD组27例患者(4.9%)发生装置感染,对照组20例患者(3.6%)发生装置感染(P=0.29)。
在本试验中,对非冠心病所致有症状收缩性心力衰竭患者进行预防性ICD植入与常规临床护理相比,并未使任何原因导致的长期死亡率显著降低。(由美敦力公司等资助;丹麦临床试验.gov编号,NCT00542945。)