Suppr超能文献

初始植入用于一级预防指征的患者在更换时ICD指征的持续性:对后续ICD治疗的影响。

Persistence of ICD indication at the time of replacement in patients with initial implant for primary prevention indication: Effect on subsequent ICD therapies.

作者信息

Dell'Era Gabriele, Degiovanni Anna, Occhetta Eraldo, Magnani Andrea, Bortnik Miriam, Francalacci Gabriella, Plebani Laura, Prenna Eleonora, Valsecchi Sergio, Marino Paolo

机构信息

Clinica Cardiologica A.O.U. Maggiore della Carità, Novara, Italy.

Clinica Cardiologica A.O.U. Maggiore della Carità, Novara, Italy.

出版信息

Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J. 2017 Mar-Apr;17(2):29-33. doi: 10.1016/j.ipej.2016.11.008. Epub 2016 Nov 14.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Indication to implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) for primary prevention of sudden death relies on left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). We measured the proportion of patients in whom indication to ICD persisted at the time of generator replacement (GR) and searched for predictors of appropriate therapies after GR.

METHODS

We identified all consecutive patients who had received an ICD at our hospital, for LVEF ≤35% and no previous arrhythmias or unexplained syncope. Then, we included the 166 patients who outlived their first device and underwent GR.

RESULTS

At the time of GR (mean follow-up 59 ± 20 months), ICD indication (i.e. LVEF ≤35% or previously treated ventricular arrhythmias) persisted in 114 (69%) patients. After GR, appropriate ICD therapies were delivered in 30 (26%) patients with persistent ICD indication and in 12 (23%) of the remaining patients (p = 0.656). Nonetheless, the annual rate of therapies was higher in the first group (1.08 versus 0.53 events/year; p < 0.001), as well as the rate of inappropriate therapies (0.03 versus 0 events/year; p = 0.031). The only independent predictor of appropriate ICD therapies after GR was the rate of shocks received before replacement (Hazard Ratio: 1.41; 95% confidence interval: 1.01-1.96; p = 0.041).

CONCLUSION

In heart failure with reduced LVEF, ICD indication persisted at the time of GR in 69% of patients. However, even in the absence of persistent ICD indication at GR, the risk of recurrence of arrhythmic events was not null.

摘要

背景

植入式心脏复律除颤器(ICD)用于猝死一级预防的指征依赖于左心室射血分数(LVEF)。我们测量了在发生器更换(GR)时ICD指征仍然存在的患者比例,并寻找GR后适当治疗的预测因素。

方法

我们确定了我院所有因LVEF≤35%且既往无心律失常或不明原因晕厥而接受ICD治疗的连续患者。然后,我们纳入了166例首次植入装置后存活并接受GR的患者。

结果

在GR时(平均随访59±20个月),114例(69%)患者的ICD指征(即LVEF≤35%或既往有室性心律失常治疗史)仍然存在。GR后,114例有持续ICD指征的患者中有30例(26%)接受了适当的ICD治疗,其余患者中有12例(23%)接受了适当的ICD治疗(p = 0.656)。尽管如此,第一组的年治疗率更高(1.08次/年对0.53次/年;p < 0.001),不适当治疗率也更高(0.03次/年对0次/年;p = 0.031)。GR后适当ICD治疗的唯一独立预测因素是更换前接受电击的频率(风险比:1.41;95%置信区间:1.01 - 1.96;p = 0.041)。

结论

在LVEF降低的心力衰竭患者中,69%的患者在GR时ICD指征仍然存在。然而,即使在GR时没有持续的ICD指征,心律失常事件复发的风险也并非为零。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d6f0/5405747/8f308b1bbeaa/gr1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验