4.6 Article

Efficacy and safety of implantable cardiac defibrillators for treatment of ventricular arrhythmias in patients with cardiac sarcoidosis

Journal

EUROPACE
Volume 15, Issue 3, Pages 347-354

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/europace/eus316

Keywords

Implantable cardiac defibrillator; Cardiac sarcoidosis

Funding

  1. Medtronic Inc.
  2. St. Jude Medical
  3. Boston Scientific Corp
  4. Cardiovascular Center at the University of Michigan for development of cardiac sarcoidosis registry
  5. Boston Scientific
  6. Boston Scientific Corp.
  7. Biotronik
  8. CardioInsight Inc.
  9. Thoratec Inc.
  10. Biosense Webster
  11. Biosense Web
  12. Sanofi

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims Implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) implantation is a class IIA recommendation for patients with cardiac sarcoidosis (CS). However, little is known about the efficacy and safety of ICDs in this population. The goal of this multi-centre retrospective data review was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ICDs in patients with CS. Methods and results Electrophysiologists at academic medical centres were asked to identify consecutive patients with CS and an ICD. Clinical information, ICD therapy history, and device complications were collected for each patient. Data were collected on 235 patients from 13 institutions, 64.7% male with mean age 55.6 +/- 11.1. Over a mean follow-up of 4.2 +/- 4.0 years, 85 of 234 (36.2%) patients received an appropriate ICD therapy (shocks and/or anti-tachycardia pacing) and 67 of 226 (29.7%) received an appropriate shock. Fifty-seven of 235 patients (24.3%) received a total of 222 inappropriate shocks. Forty-six adverse events occurred in 41 of 235 patients (17.4%). Patients who received appropriate ICD therapies were more likely to be male (73.8 vs. 59.6%, P = 0.0330), have a history of syncope (40.5 vs. 22.5%, P = 0.0044), lower left ventricular ejection fraction (38.1 +/- 15.2 vs. 48.8 +/- 14.7%, P <= 0.0001), ventricular pacing on baseline electrocardiogram (16.1 vs. 2.1%, P = 0.0002), and a secondary prevention indication (60.7 vs. 24.5%, P < 0.0001) compared with those who did not receive appropriate ICD therapies. Conclusion Patients with CS and ICDs are at high risk for ventricular arrhythmias. This population also has high rates of inappropriate shocks and device complications.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available