MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1161/jaha.117.008292

Медицинская библиотека · Journal of the American Heart Association · 2018

Device Therapies Among Patients Receiving Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators in the Cardiovascular Research Network.

Greenlee Robert T, Go Alan S, Peterson Pamela N, Cassidy-Bushrow Andrea E, Gaber Charles, Garcia-Montilla Romel, Glenn Karen A, Gupta Nigel, Gurwitz Jerry H, Hammill Stephen C, Hayes John J, Kadish Alan, Magid David J, McManus David D, Multerer Deborah, Powers J David, Reifler Liza M, Reynolds Kristi, Schuger Claudio, Sharma Param P, Smith David H, Suits Mary, Sung Sue Hee, Varosy Paul D, Vidaillet Humberto J, Masoudi Frederick A

СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНаблюдательное исследованиеПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПоддержка службы здравоохранения СШАПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

Primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) reduce mortality in selected patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction by delivering therapies (antitachycardia pacing or shocks) to terminate potentially lethal arrhythmias; inappropriate therapies also occur. We assessed device therapies among adults receiving primary prevention ICDs in 7 healthcare systems.

METHODS AND

RESULTS

We linked medical record data, adjudicated device therapies, and the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry. Survival analysis evaluated therapy probability and predictors after ICD implant from 2006 to 2009, with attention to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Coverage With Evidence Development subgroups: left ventricular ejection fraction, 31% to 35%; nonischemic cardiomyopathy <9 months' duration; and New York Heart Association class IV heart failure with cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator. Among 2540 patients, 35% were <65 years old, 26% were women, and 59% were white. During 27 (median) months, 738 (29%) received ≥1 therapy. Three-year therapy risk was 36% (appropriate, 24%; inappropriate, 12%). Appropriate therapy was more common in men (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.43-2.35). Inappropriate therapy was more common in patients with atrial fibrillation (adjusted HR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.68-2.87), but less common among patients ≥65 years old versus younger (adjusted HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.54-0.95) and in recent implants (eg, in 2009 versus 2006; adjusted HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.46-0.95). In Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Coverage With Evidence Development analysis, inappropriate therapy was less common with cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator versus single chamber (adjusted HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.36-0.84); therapy risk did not otherwise differ for Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Coverage With Evidence Development subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this community cohort of primary prevention patients receiving ICD, therapy delivery varied across demographic and clinical characteristics, but did not differ meaningfully for Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Coverage With Evidence Development subgroups.

Для цитирования: Greenlee Robert T, Go Alan S, Peterson Pamela N, Cassidy-Bushrow Andrea E, Gaber Charles, Garcia-Montilla Romel, Glenn Karen A, Gupta Nigel, Gurwitz Jerry H, Hammill Stephen C, Hayes John J, Kadish Alan, Magid David J, McManus David D, Multerer Deborah, Powers J David, Reifler Liza M, Reynolds Kristi, Schuger Claudio, Sharma Param P, Smith David H, Suits Mary, Sung Sue Hee, Varosy Paul D, Vidaillet Humberto J, Masoudi Frederick A. Device Therapies Among Patients Receiving Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators in the Cardiovascular Research Network.. Journal of the American Heart Association. 2018. DOI: 10.1161/jaha.117.008292.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.