2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS focused update to 2015 expert consensus statement on optimal implantable cardioverter-defibrillator programming and testing

The 2015 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/SOLAECE Expert Consensus Statement on Optimal Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Programming and Testing provided guidance on bradycardia programming, tachycardia detection, tachycardia therapy, and defibrillation testing for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) p...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Heart rhythm 2020-01, Vol.17 (1), p.e220-e228
Hauptverfasser: Stiles, Martin K., Fauchier, Laurent, Morillo, Carlos A., Wilkoff, Bruce L.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page e228
container_issue 1
container_start_page e220
container_title Heart rhythm
container_volume 17
creator Stiles, Martin K.
Fauchier, Laurent
Morillo, Carlos A.
Wilkoff, Bruce L.
description The 2015 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/SOLAECE Expert Consensus Statement on Optimal Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Programming and Testing provided guidance on bradycardia programming, tachycardia detection, tachycardia therapy, and defibrillation testing for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) patient treatment. The 32 recommendations represented the consensus opinion of the writing group, graded by Class of Recommendation and Level of Evidence. In addition, Appendix B provided manufacturer-specific translations of these recommendations into clinical practice consistent with the recommendations within the parent document. In some instances, programming guided by quality evidence gained from studies performed in devices from some manufacturers was translated such that this programming was approximated in another manufacturer’s ICD programming settings. The authors found that the data, although not formally tested, were strong, consistent, and generalizable beyond the specific manufacturer and model of ICD. As expected, because these recommendations represented strategic choices to balance risks, there have been reports in which adverse outcomes were documented with ICDs programmed to Appendix B recommendations. The recommendations have been reviewed and updated to minimize such adverse events. Notably, patients who do not receive unnecessary ICD therapy are not aware of being spared potential harm, whereas patients in whom their ICD failed to treat life-threatening arrhythmias have their event recorded in detail. The revised recommendations employ the principle that the randomized trials and large registry data should guide programming more than anecdotal evidence. These recommendations should not replace the opinion of the treating physician who has considered the patient’s clinical status and desired outcome via a shared clinical decision-making process.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.hrthm.2019.02.034
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_hal_p</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_03655972v1</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1547527119302085</els_id><sourcerecordid>2232057054</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-6949e84a1778b59f3c3c14f2d3329f51d18267da00016629548f4b5a069d50193</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kctu1DAUhi1ERS_wBEjIS1gk40ucy4JFVJUO0khFBdaWY590PEriYDsjeBDet06ndMnGPrK___zngtB7SnJKaLk55Hsf92POCG1ywnLCi1foggpRZryu6Os1LqpMsIqeo8sQDoSwpiT8DTrnlCa6pBfo76rG2_vvm5vtfbtpv63hrk0n7p1eAhi8zEZFwNHhxAoMv2fwEWs3BZjCEnCI6XuEKWI3YTdHO6oB23Ee1BRVNwDWyhvrjkkFPjPQ287bYVDReTx79-DVONrpAavJ4AghpvgtOuvVEODd832Ffn65-XG9zXZ3t1-v212mC17HrGyKBupC0aqqO9H0XHNNi54ZzlnTC2pozcrKKELSvErWiKLui04oUjZGpL75Ffp0yrtXg5x9qtz_kU5ZuW13cn0jvBSiqdiRJvbjiU01_1pSnXK0QUNqZAK3BMkYZ0RURBQJ5SdUexeCh_4lNyVy3Z08yKfdyXX6krDks6o-PBss3QjmRfNvWQn4fAIgjeRowcugLUwajPWgozTO_tfgEc2IqeY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2232057054</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS focused update to 2015 expert consensus statement on optimal implantable cardioverter-defibrillator programming and testing</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Stiles, Martin K. ; Fauchier, Laurent ; Morillo, Carlos A. ; Wilkoff, Bruce L.</creator><creatorcontrib>Stiles, Martin K. ; Fauchier, Laurent ; Morillo, Carlos A. ; Wilkoff, Bruce L.</creatorcontrib><description>The 2015 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/SOLAECE Expert Consensus Statement on Optimal Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Programming and Testing provided guidance on bradycardia programming, tachycardia detection, tachycardia therapy, and defibrillation testing for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) patient treatment. The 32 recommendations represented the consensus opinion of the writing group, graded by Class of Recommendation and Level of Evidence. In addition, Appendix B provided manufacturer-specific translations of these recommendations into clinical practice consistent with the recommendations within the parent document. In some instances, programming guided by quality evidence gained from studies performed in devices from some manufacturers was translated such that this programming was approximated in another manufacturer’s ICD programming settings. The authors found that the data, although not formally tested, were strong, consistent, and generalizable beyond the specific manufacturer and model of ICD. As expected, because these recommendations represented strategic choices to balance risks, there have been reports in which adverse outcomes were documented with ICDs programmed to Appendix B recommendations. The recommendations have been reviewed and updated to minimize such adverse events. Notably, patients who do not receive unnecessary ICD therapy are not aware of being spared potential harm, whereas patients in whom their ICD failed to treat life-threatening arrhythmias have their event recorded in detail. The revised recommendations employ the principle that the randomized trials and large registry data should guide programming more than anecdotal evidence. These recommendations should not replace the opinion of the treating physician who has considered the patient’s clinical status and desired outcome via a shared clinical decision-making process.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1547-5271</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1556-3871</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2019.02.034</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31103461</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Antitachycardia pacing ; Arrhythmias, Cardiac - therapy ; Bradycardia mode and rate ; Cardiology ; Consensus ; Defibrillation testing ; Defibrillators, Implantable ; Electric Countershock - instrumentation ; Humanities and Social Sciences ; Humans ; Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator ; Programming ; Retrospective Studies ; Societies, Medical ; Sudden cardiac death ; Tachycardia detection ; Tachycardia therapy ; Ventricular fibrillation ; Ventricular tachycardia</subject><ispartof>Heart rhythm, 2020-01, Vol.17 (1), p.e220-e228</ispartof><rights>2019 The Heart Rhythm Society; the European Heart Rhythm Association, a registered branch of the European Society of Cardiology; the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society; and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society</rights><rights>Copyright © 2019 The Heart Rhythm Society; the European Heart Rhythm Association, a registered branch of the European Society of Cardiology; the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society; and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-6949e84a1778b59f3c3c14f2d3329f51d18267da00016629548f4b5a069d50193</citedby><orcidid>0000-0002-8425-3544 ; 0000-0002-9267-1658</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1547527119302085$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31103461$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://hal.science/hal-03655972$$DView record in HAL$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Stiles, Martin K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fauchier, Laurent</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morillo, Carlos A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilkoff, Bruce L.</creatorcontrib><title>2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS focused update to 2015 expert consensus statement on optimal implantable cardioverter-defibrillator programming and testing</title><title>Heart rhythm</title><addtitle>Heart Rhythm</addtitle><description>The 2015 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/SOLAECE Expert Consensus Statement on Optimal Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Programming and Testing provided guidance on bradycardia programming, tachycardia detection, tachycardia therapy, and defibrillation testing for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) patient treatment. The 32 recommendations represented the consensus opinion of the writing group, graded by Class of Recommendation and Level of Evidence. In addition, Appendix B provided manufacturer-specific translations of these recommendations into clinical practice consistent with the recommendations within the parent document. In some instances, programming guided by quality evidence gained from studies performed in devices from some manufacturers was translated such that this programming was approximated in another manufacturer’s ICD programming settings. The authors found that the data, although not formally tested, were strong, consistent, and generalizable beyond the specific manufacturer and model of ICD. As expected, because these recommendations represented strategic choices to balance risks, there have been reports in which adverse outcomes were documented with ICDs programmed to Appendix B recommendations. The recommendations have been reviewed and updated to minimize such adverse events. Notably, patients who do not receive unnecessary ICD therapy are not aware of being spared potential harm, whereas patients in whom their ICD failed to treat life-threatening arrhythmias have their event recorded in detail. The revised recommendations employ the principle that the randomized trials and large registry data should guide programming more than anecdotal evidence. These recommendations should not replace the opinion of the treating physician who has considered the patient’s clinical status and desired outcome via a shared clinical decision-making process.</description><subject>Antitachycardia pacing</subject><subject>Arrhythmias, Cardiac - therapy</subject><subject>Bradycardia mode and rate</subject><subject>Cardiology</subject><subject>Consensus</subject><subject>Defibrillation testing</subject><subject>Defibrillators, Implantable</subject><subject>Electric Countershock - instrumentation</subject><subject>Humanities and Social Sciences</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator</subject><subject>Programming</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Societies, Medical</subject><subject>Sudden cardiac death</subject><subject>Tachycardia detection</subject><subject>Tachycardia therapy</subject><subject>Ventricular fibrillation</subject><subject>Ventricular tachycardia</subject><issn>1547-5271</issn><issn>1556-3871</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kctu1DAUhi1ERS_wBEjIS1gk40ucy4JFVJUO0khFBdaWY590PEriYDsjeBDet06ndMnGPrK___zngtB7SnJKaLk55Hsf92POCG1ywnLCi1foggpRZryu6Os1LqpMsIqeo8sQDoSwpiT8DTrnlCa6pBfo76rG2_vvm5vtfbtpv63hrk0n7p1eAhi8zEZFwNHhxAoMv2fwEWs3BZjCEnCI6XuEKWI3YTdHO6oB23Ee1BRVNwDWyhvrjkkFPjPQ287bYVDReTx79-DVONrpAavJ4AghpvgtOuvVEODd832Ffn65-XG9zXZ3t1-v212mC17HrGyKBupC0aqqO9H0XHNNi54ZzlnTC2pozcrKKELSvErWiKLui04oUjZGpL75Ffp0yrtXg5x9qtz_kU5ZuW13cn0jvBSiqdiRJvbjiU01_1pSnXK0QUNqZAK3BMkYZ0RURBQJ5SdUexeCh_4lNyVy3Z08yKfdyXX6krDks6o-PBss3QjmRfNvWQn4fAIgjeRowcugLUwajPWgozTO_tfgEc2IqeY</recordid><startdate>202001</startdate><enddate>202001</enddate><creator>Stiles, Martin K.</creator><creator>Fauchier, Laurent</creator><creator>Morillo, Carlos A.</creator><creator>Wilkoff, Bruce L.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>1XC</scope><scope>BXJBU</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8425-3544</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9267-1658</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202001</creationdate><title>2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS focused update to 2015 expert consensus statement on optimal implantable cardioverter-defibrillator programming and testing</title><author>Stiles, Martin K. ; Fauchier, Laurent ; Morillo, Carlos A. ; Wilkoff, Bruce L.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-6949e84a1778b59f3c3c14f2d3329f51d18267da00016629548f4b5a069d50193</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Antitachycardia pacing</topic><topic>Arrhythmias, Cardiac - therapy</topic><topic>Bradycardia mode and rate</topic><topic>Cardiology</topic><topic>Consensus</topic><topic>Defibrillation testing</topic><topic>Defibrillators, Implantable</topic><topic>Electric Countershock - instrumentation</topic><topic>Humanities and Social Sciences</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator</topic><topic>Programming</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Societies, Medical</topic><topic>Sudden cardiac death</topic><topic>Tachycardia detection</topic><topic>Tachycardia therapy</topic><topic>Ventricular fibrillation</topic><topic>Ventricular tachycardia</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Stiles, Martin K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fauchier, Laurent</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morillo, Carlos A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilkoff, Bruce L.</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL)</collection><collection>HAL-SHS: Archive ouverte en Sciences de l'Homme et de la Société</collection><jtitle>Heart rhythm</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Stiles, Martin K.</au><au>Fauchier, Laurent</au><au>Morillo, Carlos A.</au><au>Wilkoff, Bruce L.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS focused update to 2015 expert consensus statement on optimal implantable cardioverter-defibrillator programming and testing</atitle><jtitle>Heart rhythm</jtitle><addtitle>Heart Rhythm</addtitle><date>2020-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>17</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>e220</spage><epage>e228</epage><pages>e220-e228</pages><issn>1547-5271</issn><eissn>1556-3871</eissn><abstract>The 2015 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/SOLAECE Expert Consensus Statement on Optimal Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Programming and Testing provided guidance on bradycardia programming, tachycardia detection, tachycardia therapy, and defibrillation testing for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) patient treatment. The 32 recommendations represented the consensus opinion of the writing group, graded by Class of Recommendation and Level of Evidence. In addition, Appendix B provided manufacturer-specific translations of these recommendations into clinical practice consistent with the recommendations within the parent document. In some instances, programming guided by quality evidence gained from studies performed in devices from some manufacturers was translated such that this programming was approximated in another manufacturer’s ICD programming settings. The authors found that the data, although not formally tested, were strong, consistent, and generalizable beyond the specific manufacturer and model of ICD. As expected, because these recommendations represented strategic choices to balance risks, there have been reports in which adverse outcomes were documented with ICDs programmed to Appendix B recommendations. The recommendations have been reviewed and updated to minimize such adverse events. Notably, patients who do not receive unnecessary ICD therapy are not aware of being spared potential harm, whereas patients in whom their ICD failed to treat life-threatening arrhythmias have their event recorded in detail. The revised recommendations employ the principle that the randomized trials and large registry data should guide programming more than anecdotal evidence. These recommendations should not replace the opinion of the treating physician who has considered the patient’s clinical status and desired outcome via a shared clinical decision-making process.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>31103461</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.hrthm.2019.02.034</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8425-3544</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9267-1658</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1547-5271
ispartof Heart rhythm, 2020-01, Vol.17 (1), p.e220-e228
issn 1547-5271
1556-3871
language eng
recordid cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_03655972v1
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete
subjects Antitachycardia pacing
Arrhythmias, Cardiac - therapy
Bradycardia mode and rate
Cardiology
Consensus
Defibrillation testing
Defibrillators, Implantable
Electric Countershock - instrumentation
Humanities and Social Sciences
Humans
Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator
Programming
Retrospective Studies
Societies, Medical
Sudden cardiac death
Tachycardia detection
Tachycardia therapy
Ventricular fibrillation
Ventricular tachycardia
title 2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS focused update to 2015 expert consensus statement on optimal implantable cardioverter-defibrillator programming and testing
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-13T02%3A40%3A58IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_hal_p&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=2019%20HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS%20focused%20update%20to%202015%20expert%20consensus%20statement%20on%20optimal%20implantable%20cardioverter-defibrillator%20programming%20and%20testing&rft.jtitle=Heart%20rhythm&rft.au=Stiles,%20Martin%20K.&rft.date=2020-01&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=e220&rft.epage=e228&rft.pages=e220-e228&rft.issn=1547-5271&rft.eissn=1556-3871&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.hrthm.2019.02.034&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_hal_p%3E2232057054%3C/proquest_hal_p%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2232057054&rft_id=info:pmid/31103461&rft_els_id=S1547527119302085&rfr_iscdi=true