American journal of translational research · 2023
Effect of implantable cardioverter defibrillator on primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in high-risk patients.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Shen Feng, Lu Kongjie, Cheng Zhenfeng, Feng Xurong
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) on primary prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in patients with high risk.
METHODS: This retrospective analysis included 70 patients who received primary prevention of SCD by ICD implantation in Huzhou Central Hospital from March 2016 to May 2019. Based on survival, 15 patients who died during follow-up were placed into the death group and the 55 patients who survived were set as the survival group. The two groups were compared in terms of sex, age, non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT), diastolic pressure, systolic pressure, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), urea nitrogen, serum creatinine, history of diabetes, history of atrial fibrillation, history of myocardial ischemia, history of dilated cardiomyopathy, history of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, type I Brugada wave and cardiac function classification. Further, we analyzed the proportion of discharge, the survival of patients (Kaplan Meier method), and the risk factors of patient death (Logistic regression).
RESULTS: The analysis of baseline data showed that patients in the death group had older age and higher level of serum creatinine than the survival group (P<0.05), and the number of patients with non-sustained VT≥5 times/24 h in the survival group was higher than that in the death group (P<0.05). There was no obvious difference in other baseline indexes between the two groups (P>0.05). In addition, there was no difference in the proportion of patients receiving appropriate/inappropriate discharge (P>0.05) between the two groups. Follow-up data showed that 15 cases (21.43%) of spontaneous VT/ventricular fibrillation events were correctly diagnosed by pacemakers and properly treated by ICD (discharge or antitachycardia pacing (ATP)), while 55 cases (78.57%) received inappropriate ICD treatment. There were 15 patients (21.43%) who died during follow up, including 6 cases of cardiac insufficiency, 1 case of SCD, 2 cases of acute myocardial infarction, 1 case of respiratory failure, and 5 cases of unknown etiology; the survival time was (20.27±7.06) months. Logistic regression analysis showed that age and serum creatinine were the risk factors of patient death.
CONCLUSION: Primary prevention with ICD implantation benefits SCD patients. Non persistent VT≥5 times/24 h is a predictive value for ICD implantation in patients receiving primary prevention of SCD. Age and serum creatinine are risk factors for death.
METHODS: This retrospective analysis included 70 patients who received primary prevention of SCD by ICD implantation in Huzhou Central Hospital from March 2016 to May 2019. Based on survival, 15 patients who died during follow-up were placed into the death group and the 55 patients who survived were set as the survival group. The two groups were compared in terms of sex, age, non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT), diastolic pressure, systolic pressure, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), urea nitrogen, serum creatinine, history of diabetes, history of atrial fibrillation, history of myocardial ischemia, history of dilated cardiomyopathy, history of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, type I Brugada wave and cardiac function classification. Further, we analyzed the proportion of discharge, the survival of patients (Kaplan Meier method), and the risk factors of patient death (Logistic regression).
RESULTS: The analysis of baseline data showed that patients in the death group had older age and higher level of serum creatinine than the survival group (P<0.05), and the number of patients with non-sustained VT≥5 times/24 h in the survival group was higher than that in the death group (P<0.05). There was no obvious difference in other baseline indexes between the two groups (P>0.05). In addition, there was no difference in the proportion of patients receiving appropriate/inappropriate discharge (P>0.05) between the two groups. Follow-up data showed that 15 cases (21.43%) of spontaneous VT/ventricular fibrillation events were correctly diagnosed by pacemakers and properly treated by ICD (discharge or antitachycardia pacing (ATP)), while 55 cases (78.57%) received inappropriate ICD treatment. There were 15 patients (21.43%) who died during follow up, including 6 cases of cardiac insufficiency, 1 case of SCD, 2 cases of acute myocardial infarction, 1 case of respiratory failure, and 5 cases of unknown etiology; the survival time was (20.27±7.06) months. Logistic regression analysis showed that age and serum creatinine were the risk factors of patient death.
CONCLUSION: Primary prevention with ICD implantation benefits SCD patients. Non persistent VT≥5 times/24 h is a predictive value for ICD implantation in patients receiving primary prevention of SCD. Age and serum creatinine are risk factors for death.