Outcomes following implantable cardioverter–defibrillator generator replacement in adults: A systematic review

Randomized trials inform the use of implantable cardioverter–defibrillators (ICDs) for prevention of sudden cardiac death, yet management of patients considering ICD generator replacement procedures remains largely dependent on clinical judgment. Thus, we performed a systematic review of all studies...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Heart rhythm 2020-06, Vol.17 (6), p.1036-1042
Hauptverfasser: McCarthy, Killian J., Locke, Andrew H., Coletti, Margo, Young, Diane, Merchant, Faisal M., Kramer, Daniel B.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1042
container_issue 6
container_start_page 1036
container_title Heart rhythm
container_volume 17
creator McCarthy, Killian J.
Locke, Andrew H.
Coletti, Margo
Young, Diane
Merchant, Faisal M.
Kramer, Daniel B.
description Randomized trials inform the use of implantable cardioverter–defibrillators (ICDs) for prevention of sudden cardiac death, yet management of patients considering ICD generator replacement procedures remains largely dependent on clinical judgment. Thus, we performed a systematic review of all studies evaluating outcomes associated with ICD generator replacement. We queried PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for relevant studies with a prespecified search and adjudication strategy (PROSPERO registration number CRD42018100818) to evaluate outcomes including (1) survival; (2) clinical complications (eg, infection, hematoma); or (3) incidence of ICD therapy. From 1607 unique titles, 37 studies met inclusion criteria, describing outcomes for 238,949 patients. Procedural mortality was rare, but complications including reoperation (median 4.57%; range 0.38%–10.31%), infections (median 2.01%; range 0.03%–9.27%), and hematoma (median 1.22%, range 0.17%–2.53%) were observed in a small fraction of patients. Appropriate ICD therapy after generator replacement was common (median rate 23.03%; range 10.9%–31.4%), with an overall annualized event rate of 8.52% at median duration of follow-up of 32.4 months. Appropriate ICD therapy continued to occur at a significant annual rate even in patients who no longer met implantation criteria (5.27%) and in patients who never previously received ICD therapy (4.87%). This analysis of published observational data regarding ICD generator replacement procedures identifies relatively low risks of procedural complications and clinically meaningful rates of appropriate ICD therapies. These estimates may guide clinical decisions and inform the design of definitive trials.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.hrthm.2020.01.005
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2338076685</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1547527120300096</els_id><sourcerecordid>2338076685</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c359t-2cb51bda6123c7fbd71c13b38d1bcf9b755c1ef7b097f5e4aae7fd1b38c7b0033</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1O3TAQx62qVfk8ARLKspsET4zjpFIXCJWChMSmXVv-GIOfkvhhOyB23KEX6Fl6FE5SPx7tsiuP7N_fM_Mj5AhoAxS6k1VzF_Pd1LS0pQ2FhlL-juwC513NegHvN_WpqHkrYIfspbSitB06yj6SHQYDAxBsl9zfLNmECVPlwjiGRz_fVn5aj2rOSo9YGRWtDw8YM8aX558WndfRj6PKIVa3OGN8rSKWiMEJ51z5uVJ2GXP6XJ39_pWeUsZJZW8K9ODx8YB8cGpMePh27pMfF1-_n1_W1zffrs7PrmvD-JDr1mgO2qoOWmaE01aAAaZZb0EbN2jBuQF0QtNBOI6nSqFw5Y31ptxRxvbJp-2_6xjuF0xZTj4ZLKPPGJYkW8Z6Krqu5wVlW9TEkFJEJ9fRTyo-SaBy41qu5KtruXEtKcjiuqSO3xosekL7L_NXbgG-bAEsa5bVo0zG42zQ-ogmSxv8fxv8ASogltA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2338076685</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Outcomes following implantable cardioverter–defibrillator generator replacement in adults: A systematic review</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>McCarthy, Killian J. ; Locke, Andrew H. ; Coletti, Margo ; Young, Diane ; Merchant, Faisal M. ; Kramer, Daniel B.</creator><creatorcontrib>McCarthy, Killian J. ; Locke, Andrew H. ; Coletti, Margo ; Young, Diane ; Merchant, Faisal M. ; Kramer, Daniel B.</creatorcontrib><description>Randomized trials inform the use of implantable cardioverter–defibrillators (ICDs) for prevention of sudden cardiac death, yet management of patients considering ICD generator replacement procedures remains largely dependent on clinical judgment. Thus, we performed a systematic review of all studies evaluating outcomes associated with ICD generator replacement. We queried PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for relevant studies with a prespecified search and adjudication strategy (PROSPERO registration number CRD42018100818) to evaluate outcomes including (1) survival; (2) clinical complications (eg, infection, hematoma); or (3) incidence of ICD therapy. From 1607 unique titles, 37 studies met inclusion criteria, describing outcomes for 238,949 patients. Procedural mortality was rare, but complications including reoperation (median 4.57%; range 0.38%–10.31%), infections (median 2.01%; range 0.03%–9.27%), and hematoma (median 1.22%, range 0.17%–2.53%) were observed in a small fraction of patients. Appropriate ICD therapy after generator replacement was common (median rate 23.03%; range 10.9%–31.4%), with an overall annualized event rate of 8.52% at median duration of follow-up of 32.4 months. Appropriate ICD therapy continued to occur at a significant annual rate even in patients who no longer met implantation criteria (5.27%) and in patients who never previously received ICD therapy (4.87%). This analysis of published observational data regarding ICD generator replacement procedures identifies relatively low risks of procedural complications and clinically meaningful rates of appropriate ICD therapies. These estimates may guide clinical decisions and inform the design of definitive trials.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1547-5271</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1556-3871</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2020.01.005</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31931173</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Health policy ; Implantable cardioverter–defibrillator ; Outcomes research ; Shared decision-making ; Sudden cardiac death</subject><ispartof>Heart rhythm, 2020-06, Vol.17 (6), p.1036-1042</ispartof><rights>2020 Heart Rhythm Society</rights><rights>Copyright © 2020 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c359t-2cb51bda6123c7fbd71c13b38d1bcf9b755c1ef7b097f5e4aae7fd1b38c7b0033</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c359t-2cb51bda6123c7fbd71c13b38d1bcf9b755c1ef7b097f5e4aae7fd1b38c7b0033</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2020.01.005$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31931173$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>McCarthy, Killian J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Locke, Andrew H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coletti, Margo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Young, Diane</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Merchant, Faisal M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kramer, Daniel B.</creatorcontrib><title>Outcomes following implantable cardioverter–defibrillator generator replacement in adults: A systematic review</title><title>Heart rhythm</title><addtitle>Heart Rhythm</addtitle><description>Randomized trials inform the use of implantable cardioverter–defibrillators (ICDs) for prevention of sudden cardiac death, yet management of patients considering ICD generator replacement procedures remains largely dependent on clinical judgment. Thus, we performed a systematic review of all studies evaluating outcomes associated with ICD generator replacement. We queried PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for relevant studies with a prespecified search and adjudication strategy (PROSPERO registration number CRD42018100818) to evaluate outcomes including (1) survival; (2) clinical complications (eg, infection, hematoma); or (3) incidence of ICD therapy. From 1607 unique titles, 37 studies met inclusion criteria, describing outcomes for 238,949 patients. Procedural mortality was rare, but complications including reoperation (median 4.57%; range 0.38%–10.31%), infections (median 2.01%; range 0.03%–9.27%), and hematoma (median 1.22%, range 0.17%–2.53%) were observed in a small fraction of patients. Appropriate ICD therapy after generator replacement was common (median rate 23.03%; range 10.9%–31.4%), with an overall annualized event rate of 8.52% at median duration of follow-up of 32.4 months. Appropriate ICD therapy continued to occur at a significant annual rate even in patients who no longer met implantation criteria (5.27%) and in patients who never previously received ICD therapy (4.87%). This analysis of published observational data regarding ICD generator replacement procedures identifies relatively low risks of procedural complications and clinically meaningful rates of appropriate ICD therapies. These estimates may guide clinical decisions and inform the design of definitive trials.</description><subject>Health policy</subject><subject>Implantable cardioverter–defibrillator</subject><subject>Outcomes research</subject><subject>Shared decision-making</subject><subject>Sudden cardiac death</subject><issn>1547-5271</issn><issn>1556-3871</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kE1O3TAQx62qVfk8ARLKspsET4zjpFIXCJWChMSmXVv-GIOfkvhhOyB23KEX6Fl6FE5SPx7tsiuP7N_fM_Mj5AhoAxS6k1VzF_Pd1LS0pQ2FhlL-juwC513NegHvN_WpqHkrYIfspbSitB06yj6SHQYDAxBsl9zfLNmECVPlwjiGRz_fVn5aj2rOSo9YGRWtDw8YM8aX558WndfRj6PKIVa3OGN8rSKWiMEJ51z5uVJ2GXP6XJ39_pWeUsZJZW8K9ODx8YB8cGpMePh27pMfF1-_n1_W1zffrs7PrmvD-JDr1mgO2qoOWmaE01aAAaZZb0EbN2jBuQF0QtNBOI6nSqFw5Y31ptxRxvbJp-2_6xjuF0xZTj4ZLKPPGJYkW8Z6Krqu5wVlW9TEkFJEJ9fRTyo-SaBy41qu5KtruXEtKcjiuqSO3xosekL7L_NXbgG-bAEsa5bVo0zG42zQ-ogmSxv8fxv8ASogltA</recordid><startdate>202006</startdate><enddate>202006</enddate><creator>McCarthy, Killian J.</creator><creator>Locke, Andrew H.</creator><creator>Coletti, Margo</creator><creator>Young, Diane</creator><creator>Merchant, Faisal M.</creator><creator>Kramer, Daniel B.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202006</creationdate><title>Outcomes following implantable cardioverter–defibrillator generator replacement in adults: A systematic review</title><author>McCarthy, Killian J. ; Locke, Andrew H. ; Coletti, Margo ; Young, Diane ; Merchant, Faisal M. ; Kramer, Daniel B.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c359t-2cb51bda6123c7fbd71c13b38d1bcf9b755c1ef7b097f5e4aae7fd1b38c7b0033</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Health policy</topic><topic>Implantable cardioverter–defibrillator</topic><topic>Outcomes research</topic><topic>Shared decision-making</topic><topic>Sudden cardiac death</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>McCarthy, Killian J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Locke, Andrew H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coletti, Margo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Young, Diane</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Merchant, Faisal M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kramer, Daniel B.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Heart rhythm</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>McCarthy, Killian J.</au><au>Locke, Andrew H.</au><au>Coletti, Margo</au><au>Young, Diane</au><au>Merchant, Faisal M.</au><au>Kramer, Daniel B.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Outcomes following implantable cardioverter–defibrillator generator replacement in adults: A systematic review</atitle><jtitle>Heart rhythm</jtitle><addtitle>Heart Rhythm</addtitle><date>2020-06</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>17</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1036</spage><epage>1042</epage><pages>1036-1042</pages><issn>1547-5271</issn><eissn>1556-3871</eissn><abstract>Randomized trials inform the use of implantable cardioverter–defibrillators (ICDs) for prevention of sudden cardiac death, yet management of patients considering ICD generator replacement procedures remains largely dependent on clinical judgment. Thus, we performed a systematic review of all studies evaluating outcomes associated with ICD generator replacement. We queried PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for relevant studies with a prespecified search and adjudication strategy (PROSPERO registration number CRD42018100818) to evaluate outcomes including (1) survival; (2) clinical complications (eg, infection, hematoma); or (3) incidence of ICD therapy. From 1607 unique titles, 37 studies met inclusion criteria, describing outcomes for 238,949 patients. Procedural mortality was rare, but complications including reoperation (median 4.57%; range 0.38%–10.31%), infections (median 2.01%; range 0.03%–9.27%), and hematoma (median 1.22%, range 0.17%–2.53%) were observed in a small fraction of patients. Appropriate ICD therapy after generator replacement was common (median rate 23.03%; range 10.9%–31.4%), with an overall annualized event rate of 8.52% at median duration of follow-up of 32.4 months. Appropriate ICD therapy continued to occur at a significant annual rate even in patients who no longer met implantation criteria (5.27%) and in patients who never previously received ICD therapy (4.87%). This analysis of published observational data regarding ICD generator replacement procedures identifies relatively low risks of procedural complications and clinically meaningful rates of appropriate ICD therapies. These estimates may guide clinical decisions and inform the design of definitive trials.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>31931173</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.hrthm.2020.01.005</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1547-5271
ispartof Heart rhythm, 2020-06, Vol.17 (6), p.1036-1042
issn 1547-5271
1556-3871
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2338076685
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete
subjects Health policy
Implantable cardioverter–defibrillator
Outcomes research
Shared decision-making
Sudden cardiac death
title Outcomes following implantable cardioverter–defibrillator generator replacement in adults: A systematic review
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T21%3A44%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Outcomes%20following%20implantable%20cardioverter%E2%80%93defibrillator%20generator%20replacement%20in%20adults:%20A%C2%A0systematic%20review&rft.jtitle=Heart%20rhythm&rft.au=McCarthy,%20Killian%20J.&rft.date=2020-06&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1036&rft.epage=1042&rft.pages=1036-1042&rft.issn=1547-5271&rft.eissn=1556-3871&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.hrthm.2020.01.005&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2338076685%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2338076685&rft_id=info:pmid/31931173&rft_els_id=S1547527120300096&rfr_iscdi=true