Appropriateness of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator device implants in the United States
The appropriate use criteria (AUCs) are a diverse group of indications aimed to better evaluate the benefits of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization therapy. The purpose of this study was to quantify the proportion of ICD and cardiac resynchronization therapy wi...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Heart rhythm 2024-04, Vol.21 (4), p.397-407 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 407 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 397 |
container_title | Heart rhythm |
container_volume | 21 |
creator | Yousuf, Omair K. Kennedy, Kevin Russo, Andrea Varosy, Paul Lindsay, Bruce D. Steinberg, Benjamin Atwater, Brett D. Calkins, Hugh Spertus, John A. |
description | The appropriate use criteria (AUCs) are a diverse group of indications aimed to better evaluate the benefits of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization therapy.
The purpose of this study was to quantify the proportion of ICD and cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D) implants as appropriate, may be appropriate (MA), or rarely appropriate (RA) on the basis of the AUC guidelines.
This is a multicenter retrospective study of patients within the National Cardiovascular Data Registry undergoing ICD implantation between April 2018 and March 2019 at >1500 US hospitals. The appropriateness of ICD implants was adjudicated using the AUC.
Of 309,318 ICDs, 241,438 were primary prevention implants (78.1%) and 67,880 secondary prevention implants (21.9%); 243,532 (79%) were mappable to the AUC. For primary prevention, 185,431 ICDs (96.4%) were appropriate, 5660 (2.9%) MA, and 1205 (0.6%) RA. For secondary prevention, 47,498 ICDs (92.7%) were appropriate, 2581 (5%) MA, and 1157 (2.3%) RA. A significant number of RA devices were implanted in patients with New York Heart Association class IV heart failure who were ineligible for advanced therapies (53.9%) and those with myocardial infarction within 40 days (18.1%). The appropriateness of the pacing lead was more variable, with 48,470 dual-chamber ICD implants (62%) being classified as appropriate, 29,209 (37.4%) MA, and 448 (0.6%) RA. Among CRT-D implants, 63,848 (82.2%) were appropriate, 9900 (12.7%) MA, and 3940 (5.1%) RA for left ventricular pacing. A total of 99,754 implants were deemed appropriate but excluded from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services National Coverage Determination. More than 92% of hospitals had an RA implant rate of |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.hrthm.2023.12.005 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2904571740</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1547527123030011</els_id><sourcerecordid>2904571740</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c274t-f85198e62f95963e22d7bbba92f7852798f4903285a1015777b30e46f6fff4013</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kLtOwzAUhi0EoqXwBEgoI0uCr3EyMFQVN6kSA3TFcpJj1VVu2G4l3h6XUkamc4bvXP4PoWuCM4JJfrfJ1i6su4xiyjJCM4zFCZoSIfKUFZKc7nsuU0ElmaAL7zcY0zLH7BxNWEEow5xP0cd8HN0wOqsD9OB9MpjEdmOr-6CrFpJau8YOO3ABXNqAsZWzbavD4JIGdraGI-0T2ydhDcmqtwGa5C3Ejf4SnRnderj6rTO0enx4Xzyny9enl8V8mdZU8pCaQpCygJyaUpQ5A0obWVWVLqmRRQxQFoaXmNFC6BhdSCkrhoHnJjfGcEzYDN0e9sYwn1vwQXXW1xA_7WHYekVLzIUkkuOIsgNau8F7B0bF9J12X4pgtRerNupHrNqLVYSqKDZO3fwe2FYdNH8zR5MRuD8AEGPuLDjlawt9DY11UAfVDPbfA9-6aos_</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2904571740</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Appropriateness of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator device implants in the United States</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Yousuf, Omair K. ; Kennedy, Kevin ; Russo, Andrea ; Varosy, Paul ; Lindsay, Bruce D. ; Steinberg, Benjamin ; Atwater, Brett D. ; Calkins, Hugh ; Spertus, John A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Yousuf, Omair K. ; Kennedy, Kevin ; Russo, Andrea ; Varosy, Paul ; Lindsay, Bruce D. ; Steinberg, Benjamin ; Atwater, Brett D. ; Calkins, Hugh ; Spertus, John A.</creatorcontrib><description>The appropriate use criteria (AUCs) are a diverse group of indications aimed to better evaluate the benefits of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization therapy.
The purpose of this study was to quantify the proportion of ICD and cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D) implants as appropriate, may be appropriate (MA), or rarely appropriate (RA) on the basis of the AUC guidelines.
This is a multicenter retrospective study of patients within the National Cardiovascular Data Registry undergoing ICD implantation between April 2018 and March 2019 at >1500 US hospitals. The appropriateness of ICD implants was adjudicated using the AUC.
Of 309,318 ICDs, 241,438 were primary prevention implants (78.1%) and 67,880 secondary prevention implants (21.9%); 243,532 (79%) were mappable to the AUC. For primary prevention, 185,431 ICDs (96.4%) were appropriate, 5660 (2.9%) MA, and 1205 (0.6%) RA. For secondary prevention, 47,498 ICDs (92.7%) were appropriate, 2581 (5%) MA, and 1157 (2.3%) RA. A significant number of RA devices were implanted in patients with New York Heart Association class IV heart failure who were ineligible for advanced therapies (53.9%) and those with myocardial infarction within 40 days (18.1%). The appropriateness of the pacing lead was more variable, with 48,470 dual-chamber ICD implants (62%) being classified as appropriate, 29,209 (37.4%) MA, and 448 (0.6%) RA. Among CRT-D implants, 63,848 (82.2%) were appropriate, 9900 (12.7%) MA, and 3940 (5.1%) RA for left ventricular pacing. A total of 99,754 implants were deemed appropriate but excluded from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services National Coverage Determination. More than 92% of hospitals had an RA implant rate of <4%.
In this large national registry, 95% of mappable ICD and CRT-D implants were considered appropriate, with <2% of RA implants. Nearly 100,000 appropriate implants are excluded by Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services National Coverage Determination.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1547-5271</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1556-3871</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1556-3871</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2023.12.005</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38123044</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Aged ; American College of Cardiology ; Appropriateness ; Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy ; Defibrillators, Implantable ; Heart Failure - diagnosis ; Heart Failure - therapy ; Humans ; Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator ; Medicare ; National Cardiovascular Data Registry ; Outcomes ; Pacemaker, Artificial ; Primary prevention ; Registries ; Retrospective Studies ; Secondary prevention ; Sudden cardiac death ; United States - epidemiology</subject><ispartof>Heart rhythm, 2024-04, Vol.21 (4), p.397-407</ispartof><rights>2024</rights><rights>Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c274t-f85198e62f95963e22d7bbba92f7852798f4903285a1015777b30e46f6fff4013</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c274t-f85198e62f95963e22d7bbba92f7852798f4903285a1015777b30e46f6fff4013</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-1969-0983</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2023.12.005$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38123044$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Yousuf, Omair K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kennedy, Kevin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Russo, Andrea</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Varosy, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lindsay, Bruce D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Steinberg, Benjamin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Atwater, Brett D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Calkins, Hugh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spertus, John A.</creatorcontrib><title>Appropriateness of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator device implants in the United States</title><title>Heart rhythm</title><addtitle>Heart Rhythm</addtitle><description>The appropriate use criteria (AUCs) are a diverse group of indications aimed to better evaluate the benefits of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization therapy.
The purpose of this study was to quantify the proportion of ICD and cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D) implants as appropriate, may be appropriate (MA), or rarely appropriate (RA) on the basis of the AUC guidelines.
This is a multicenter retrospective study of patients within the National Cardiovascular Data Registry undergoing ICD implantation between April 2018 and March 2019 at >1500 US hospitals. The appropriateness of ICD implants was adjudicated using the AUC.
Of 309,318 ICDs, 241,438 were primary prevention implants (78.1%) and 67,880 secondary prevention implants (21.9%); 243,532 (79%) were mappable to the AUC. For primary prevention, 185,431 ICDs (96.4%) were appropriate, 5660 (2.9%) MA, and 1205 (0.6%) RA. For secondary prevention, 47,498 ICDs (92.7%) were appropriate, 2581 (5%) MA, and 1157 (2.3%) RA. A significant number of RA devices were implanted in patients with New York Heart Association class IV heart failure who were ineligible for advanced therapies (53.9%) and those with myocardial infarction within 40 days (18.1%). The appropriateness of the pacing lead was more variable, with 48,470 dual-chamber ICD implants (62%) being classified as appropriate, 29,209 (37.4%) MA, and 448 (0.6%) RA. Among CRT-D implants, 63,848 (82.2%) were appropriate, 9900 (12.7%) MA, and 3940 (5.1%) RA for left ventricular pacing. A total of 99,754 implants were deemed appropriate but excluded from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services National Coverage Determination. More than 92% of hospitals had an RA implant rate of <4%.
In this large national registry, 95% of mappable ICD and CRT-D implants were considered appropriate, with <2% of RA implants. Nearly 100,000 appropriate implants are excluded by Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services National Coverage Determination.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>American College of Cardiology</subject><subject>Appropriateness</subject><subject>Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy</subject><subject>Defibrillators, Implantable</subject><subject>Heart Failure - diagnosis</subject><subject>Heart Failure - therapy</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator</subject><subject>Medicare</subject><subject>National Cardiovascular Data Registry</subject><subject>Outcomes</subject><subject>Pacemaker, Artificial</subject><subject>Primary prevention</subject><subject>Registries</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Secondary prevention</subject><subject>Sudden cardiac death</subject><subject>United States - epidemiology</subject><issn>1547-5271</issn><issn>1556-3871</issn><issn>1556-3871</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kLtOwzAUhi0EoqXwBEgoI0uCr3EyMFQVN6kSA3TFcpJj1VVu2G4l3h6XUkamc4bvXP4PoWuCM4JJfrfJ1i6su4xiyjJCM4zFCZoSIfKUFZKc7nsuU0ElmaAL7zcY0zLH7BxNWEEow5xP0cd8HN0wOqsD9OB9MpjEdmOr-6CrFpJau8YOO3ABXNqAsZWzbavD4JIGdraGI-0T2ydhDcmqtwGa5C3Ejf4SnRnderj6rTO0enx4Xzyny9enl8V8mdZU8pCaQpCygJyaUpQ5A0obWVWVLqmRRQxQFoaXmNFC6BhdSCkrhoHnJjfGcEzYDN0e9sYwn1vwQXXW1xA_7WHYekVLzIUkkuOIsgNau8F7B0bF9J12X4pgtRerNupHrNqLVYSqKDZO3fwe2FYdNH8zR5MRuD8AEGPuLDjlawt9DY11UAfVDPbfA9-6aos_</recordid><startdate>202404</startdate><enddate>202404</enddate><creator>Yousuf, Omair K.</creator><creator>Kennedy, Kevin</creator><creator>Russo, Andrea</creator><creator>Varosy, Paul</creator><creator>Lindsay, Bruce D.</creator><creator>Steinberg, Benjamin</creator><creator>Atwater, Brett D.</creator><creator>Calkins, Hugh</creator><creator>Spertus, John A.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><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><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1969-0983</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202404</creationdate><title>Appropriateness of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator device implants in the United States</title><author>Yousuf, Omair K. ; Kennedy, Kevin ; Russo, Andrea ; Varosy, Paul ; Lindsay, Bruce D. ; Steinberg, Benjamin ; Atwater, Brett D. ; Calkins, Hugh ; Spertus, John A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c274t-f85198e62f95963e22d7bbba92f7852798f4903285a1015777b30e46f6fff4013</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>American College of Cardiology</topic><topic>Appropriateness</topic><topic>Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy</topic><topic>Defibrillators, Implantable</topic><topic>Heart Failure - diagnosis</topic><topic>Heart Failure - therapy</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator</topic><topic>Medicare</topic><topic>National Cardiovascular Data Registry</topic><topic>Outcomes</topic><topic>Pacemaker, Artificial</topic><topic>Primary prevention</topic><topic>Registries</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Secondary prevention</topic><topic>Sudden cardiac death</topic><topic>United States - epidemiology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Yousuf, Omair K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kennedy, Kevin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Russo, Andrea</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Varosy, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lindsay, Bruce D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Steinberg, Benjamin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Atwater, Brett D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Calkins, Hugh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spertus, John A.</creatorcontrib><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><jtitle>Heart rhythm</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Yousuf, Omair K.</au><au>Kennedy, Kevin</au><au>Russo, Andrea</au><au>Varosy, Paul</au><au>Lindsay, Bruce D.</au><au>Steinberg, Benjamin</au><au>Atwater, Brett D.</au><au>Calkins, Hugh</au><au>Spertus, John A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Appropriateness of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator device implants in the United States</atitle><jtitle>Heart rhythm</jtitle><addtitle>Heart Rhythm</addtitle><date>2024-04</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>21</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>397</spage><epage>407</epage><pages>397-407</pages><issn>1547-5271</issn><issn>1556-3871</issn><eissn>1556-3871</eissn><abstract>The appropriate use criteria (AUCs) are a diverse group of indications aimed to better evaluate the benefits of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization therapy.
The purpose of this study was to quantify the proportion of ICD and cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D) implants as appropriate, may be appropriate (MA), or rarely appropriate (RA) on the basis of the AUC guidelines.
This is a multicenter retrospective study of patients within the National Cardiovascular Data Registry undergoing ICD implantation between April 2018 and March 2019 at >1500 US hospitals. The appropriateness of ICD implants was adjudicated using the AUC.
Of 309,318 ICDs, 241,438 were primary prevention implants (78.1%) and 67,880 secondary prevention implants (21.9%); 243,532 (79%) were mappable to the AUC. For primary prevention, 185,431 ICDs (96.4%) were appropriate, 5660 (2.9%) MA, and 1205 (0.6%) RA. For secondary prevention, 47,498 ICDs (92.7%) were appropriate, 2581 (5%) MA, and 1157 (2.3%) RA. A significant number of RA devices were implanted in patients with New York Heart Association class IV heart failure who were ineligible for advanced therapies (53.9%) and those with myocardial infarction within 40 days (18.1%). The appropriateness of the pacing lead was more variable, with 48,470 dual-chamber ICD implants (62%) being classified as appropriate, 29,209 (37.4%) MA, and 448 (0.6%) RA. Among CRT-D implants, 63,848 (82.2%) were appropriate, 9900 (12.7%) MA, and 3940 (5.1%) RA for left ventricular pacing. A total of 99,754 implants were deemed appropriate but excluded from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services National Coverage Determination. More than 92% of hospitals had an RA implant rate of <4%.
In this large national registry, 95% of mappable ICD and CRT-D implants were considered appropriate, with <2% of RA implants. Nearly 100,000 appropriate implants are excluded by Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services National Coverage Determination.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>38123044</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.hrthm.2023.12.005</doi><tpages>11</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1969-0983</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1547-5271 |
ispartof | Heart rhythm, 2024-04, Vol.21 (4), p.397-407 |
issn | 1547-5271 1556-3871 1556-3871 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2904571740 |
source | MEDLINE; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier) |
subjects | Aged American College of Cardiology Appropriateness Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Defibrillators, Implantable Heart Failure - diagnosis Heart Failure - therapy Humans Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator Medicare National Cardiovascular Data Registry Outcomes Pacemaker, Artificial Primary prevention Registries Retrospective Studies Secondary prevention Sudden cardiac death United States - epidemiology |
title | Appropriateness of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator device implants in the United States |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-02T08%3A25%3A21IST&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=Appropriateness%20of%20implantable%20cardioverter-defibrillator%20device%20implants%20in%20the%20United%20States&rft.jtitle=Heart%20rhythm&rft.au=Yousuf,%20Omair%20K.&rft.date=2024-04&rft.volume=21&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=397&rft.epage=407&rft.pages=397-407&rft.issn=1547-5271&rft.eissn=1556-3871&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.hrthm.2023.12.005&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2904571740%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=2904571740&rft_id=info:pmid/38123044&rft_els_id=S1547527123030011&rfr_iscdi=true |