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: Risk for Complications after Pacemaker or Cardioverter Defibrillator Implantations in Patients with Myotonic Dystrophy Type 1.
    Author: Sochala M, Wahbi K, Sorbets E, Lazarus A, Bécane HM, Stojkovic T, Fayssoil A, Laforêt P, Béhin A, Sroussi M, Eymard B, Duboc D, Meune C.
    Journal: J Neuromuscul Dis; 2017; 4(3):175-181. PubMed ID: 28598855.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Pacemakers (PM) and implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) may be indicated for sudden death prevention in myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1), however the risk of complications after the placement of these devices is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To compare the rate of device-related complications between PM and ICD implantations in patients with DM1. METHODS: Among 914 patients with DM1 included in the DM1 Heart Registry between January 2000 and January 2010, we retrospectively selected 23 patients who were implanted with an ICD and matched them to 46 controls with a PM on age, gender, and year of device placement. RESULTS: Over a 6 years follow-up period, we observed device-related complications in 9 ICD recipients (inappropriate shocks in 5, lead dysfunction in 5, infection in 2) and in 3 PM recipients (lead dysfunction in 3). Patients with an ICD had, compared to those with a PM, higher rates of complications (39.1% vs. 6.5%, p = 0.0006) and more frequent complications requiring hospitalisation and/or re-intervention (respectively 30.4% and 21.7% vs. 0%). CONCLUSION: Our study shows a higher risk of device-related complications after the implantation of an ICD than for a PM in patients presenting with DM1.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]