4.3 Article

Digitalis Therapy and Risk of Recurrent Ventricular Tachyarrhythmias and ICD Therapies in Atrial Fibrillation and Heart Failure

期刊

CARDIOLOGY
卷 142, 期 3, 页码 129-140

出版社

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000497271

关键词

Ventricular tachycardia; Ventricular fibrillation; Mortality; Digitalis; Heart failure; Atrial fibrillation; Implantable cardioverter defibrillator; Medical treatment; Pharmacological drugs

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: This study sought to assess the impact of treatment with digitalis on recurrences of ventricular tachyarrhythmias in implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) recipients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF). Background: The data regarding outcomes of digitalis therapy in ICD recipients are limited. Methods: A large retrospective registry was used, including consecutive ICD recipients with episodes of ventricular tachyarrhythmia between 2002 and 2016. Patients treated with digitalis were compared to patients without digitalis treatment. The primary prognostic outcome was first recurrence of ventricular tachyarrhythmia at 5 years. Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression analyses were applied. Results: A total of 394 ICD recipients with AF and/or HF was included (26% with digitalis treatment and 74% without). Digitalis treatment was associated with decreased freedom from recurrent ventricular tachyarrhythmias (HR = 1.423; 95% CI 1.047-1.934; p = 0.023). Accordingly, digitalis treatment was associated with decreased freedom from appropriate ICD therapies (HR = 1.622; 95% CI 1.166-2.256; p = 0.004) and, moreover, higher rates of rehospitalization (38 vs. 21%; p = 0.001) and all-cause mortality (33 vs. 20%; p = 0.011). Conclusion: Among ICD recipients suffering from AF and HF, treatment with digitalis was associated with increased rates of recurrent ventricular tachyarrhythmias and ICD therapies. However, the endpoints may also have been driven by interactions between digitalis, AF, and HF.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据