Impact of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Interventions on All-Cause Mortality in Heart Failure Patients: A Meta-Analysis

Cardiol Rev. 2019 May/Jun;27(3):160-166. doi: 10.1097/CRD.0000000000000226.

Abstract

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) have a unique role in the primary and secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death. However, appropriate and inappropriate ICD interventions [antitachycardia pacing (ATP) or shocks] can result in deleterious effects. The aim of our study was to systematically review the existing data about the impact of ICD interventions on all-cause mortality in heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We systematically searched MEDLINE (by using PubMed Web-based search engine) without any limits until September 30, 2017. After screening 17,752 records, a total of 17 studies met our inclusion criteria and were included in our meta-analysis. Our data showed that in patients with HFrEF, appropriate [hazard ratio (HR), 2.00; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.52-2.63; P < 0.01; I 88%] and inappropriate [HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.07-1.58; P < 0.01; I 26%] ICD interventions were significantly associated with increased all-cause mortality. However, neither appropriate ATP [HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.80-2.02; P = 0.30; I 62%] nor inappropriate ATP [HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.49-2.07; P = 0.98; I 46%] were significantly associated with all-cause mortality in this patient population. In conclusion, ICD shocks are associated with a worse prognosis in HFrEF.

Publication types

  • Meta-Analysis
  • Review

MeSH terms

  • Cause of Death / trends
  • Death, Sudden, Cardiac / etiology
  • Death, Sudden, Cardiac / prevention & control*
  • Defibrillators, Implantable*
  • Global Health
  • Heart Failure / complications
  • Heart Failure / mortality*
  • Heart Failure / therapy
  • Humans
  • Primary Prevention / methods*
  • Risk Factors
  • Secondary Prevention / methods*
  • Survival Rate / trends