These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A comparison of outcomes for patients receiving implantable cardioverter defibrillators for primary vs secondary-prevention.
    Author: Giedrimas A, Giedrimiene D, Guertin D, White CM, Clyne CA, Kluger J.
    Journal: Conn Med; 2008; 72(6):329-33. PubMed ID: 18610705.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: Compare characteristics and outcomes of patients receiving implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) for primary vs secondary cardiac arrest prevention. METHODS: Patients in this cohort study were identified from a prospectively collected ICD database from June 1999 to August 2003 and divided into groups based on whether they received their ICD for primary or secondary-prevention of cardiac arrest. Patient follow-up continued until August of 2006 and the occurrence of appropriate ICD shocks, inappropriate ICD shocks, and mortality were compared between groups. RESULTS: Of the 437 patients, 80.8% were male, 70.3% had coronary disease, and the mean age was 65.7+/-13.1 years. At baseline, primary-prevention patients had lower left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), use of a single chamber device and utilization of beta blockers and antiarrhythmics while having a greater use of biventricular pacing as compared to secondary-prevention patients. Over the first 12 months after implantation, the primary-prevention group was 43.0% less likely to receive an appropriate shock for ventricular arrhythmias (P=0.002) and 34.2% less likely to have an appropriate shock over the entire follow-up period (P=0.018). The incidence of inappropriate ICD shocks over the first 12 months after implantation and over the entire follow-up period was similar between groups (P=0.900 and P=0.217, respectively) as was mortality (P=0.228 and P=0.757, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Primary-prevention patients are characteristically different in numerous ways from secondary-prevention patients, but despite having a greater risk of experiencing appropriate shocks, exhibit a similar risk of inappropriate shocks and mortality over an average follow-up time exceeding 41 months.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]