4.4 Article

Evaluation of MADIT-II Risk Stratification Score Among Nationwide Registry of Heart Failure Patients With Primary Prevention Implantable Cardiac Defibrillators or Resynchronization Therapy Devices

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
Volume 211, Issue -, Pages 17-28

Publisher

EXCERPTA MEDICA INC-ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2023.10.044

Keywords

ICD; primary prevention; score; survival benefit

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The current guidelines recommend prophylactic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) for patients with symptomatic heart failure (HF) and low left ventricular ejection fraction. However, not all patients will benefit from ICD treatment. This study evaluated the feasibility of using the MADIT-II-based Risk Stratification Score (MRSS) to predict the survival benefit of prophylactic ICDs in patients with HF. The results showed that different risk subgroups had varying levels of ICD survival benefit.
The current guidelines advocate prophylactic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) for all patients with symptomatic heart failure (HF) with low left ventricular ejection fraction. Because many patients will never use their device, a score delineating subgroups with differential ICD benefit is crucial. We aimed to evaluate the MADIT-II-based Risk Stratification Score (MRSS) feasibility to delineate the ICD survival benefit in a nationwide registry of patients with HF with prophylactic ICDs. Accordingly, all Israeli patients with HF with prophylactic ICD/cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators were categorized into MRSS-based risk subgroups. The study end points included overall mortality, sustained ventricular arrhythmia (VA), and a competing risk of VA (potential preventable arrhythmic death, where ICD could benefit survival) versus nonarrhythmic death. Potential ICD survival benefit was estimated by the area between these cumulative incidence curves. In 2,177 patients with HF implanted prophylactic device, 189 patients (8.7%) had VA and 316 (14.5%) died during a median follow-up of 2.9 years. The MRSS risk subgroups were significantly associated with overall mortality (p <0.001) and weakly with VA (p = 0.3). The competing risk analysis of VA versus nonarrhythmic death revealed a significantly shorter duration (p <0.001) and smaller magnitude of ICD survival benefit with increased risk subgroups, yielding an estimated 76, 60, 38, and 0 life days gained from prophylactic ICD implant during a 5-year follow-up for the MRSS low-, intermediate-, high-, and very high-risk subgroups, respectively (p for trend <0.05). In conclusion, MRSS use in a nationwide registry of patients with ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy, revealed subgroups with differing ICD survival benefit, suggesting it could help evaluate prophylactic ICD survival benefit. (c) 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. (Am J Cardiol 2024;211:17-28)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available