The New England Journal of Medicine
e-mail icon  FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |    Advanced Search
Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe
 
Original Article
PreviousPrevious
Volume 359:1009-1017 September 4, 2008 Number 10
NextNext

Prognostic Importance of Defibrillator Shocks in Patients with Heart Failure
Jeanne E. Poole, M.D., George W. Johnson, B.S.E.E., Anne S. Hellkamp, M.S., Jill Anderson, R.N., David J. Callans, M.D., Merritt H. Raitt, M.D., Ramakota K. Reddy, M.D., Francis E. Marchlinski, M.D., Raymond Yee, M.D., Thomas Guarnieri, M.D., Mario Talajic, M.D., David J. Wilber, M.D., Daniel P. Fishbein, M.D., Douglas L. Packer, M.D., Daniel B. Mark, M.D., M.P.H., Kerry L. Lee, Ph.D., and Gust H. Bardy, M.D.

 Sign up for free e-toc
 

This Article
-Full Text
- PDF
-PDA Full Text
-PowerPoint Slide Set
-Purchase this article

Commentary
-Editorial
 by Healey, J.

Tools and Services
-Add to Personal Archive
-Add to Citation Manager
-Notify a Friend
-E-mail When Cited
-E-mail When Letters Appear

More Information
-PubMed Citation
ABSTRACT

Background Patients with heart failure who receive an implantable cardioverter–defibrillator (ICD) for primary prevention (i.e., prevention of a first life-threatening arrhythmic event) may later receive therapeutic shocks from the ICD. Information about long-term prognosis after ICD therapy in such patients is limited.

Methods Of 829 patients with heart failure who were randomly assigned to ICD therapy, we implanted the ICD in 811. ICD shocks that followed the onset of ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation were considered to be appropriate. All other ICD shocks were considered to be inappropriate.

Results Over a median follow-up period of 45.5 months, 269 patients (33.2%) received at least one ICD shock, with 128 patients receiving only appropriate shocks, 87 receiving only inappropriate shocks, and 54 receiving both types of shock. In a Cox proportional-hazards model adjusted for baseline prognostic factors, an appropriate ICD shock, as compared with no appropriate shock, was associated with a significant increase in the subsequent risk of death from all causes (hazard ratio, 5.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.97 to 8.12; P<0.001). An inappropriate ICD shock, as compared with no inappropriate shock, was also associated with a significant increase in the risk of death (hazard ratio, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.29 to 3.05; P=0.002). For patients who survived longer than 24 hours after an appropriate ICD shock, the risk of death remained elevated (hazard ratio, 2.99; 95% CI, 2.04 to 4.37; P<0.001). The most common cause of death among patients who received any ICD shock was progressive heart failure.

Conclusions Among patients with heart failure in whom an ICD is implanted for primary prevention, those who receive shocks for any arrhythmia have a substantially higher risk of death than similar patients who do not receive such shocks.


Source Information

From the University of Washington (J.E.P., D.P.F., G.H.B.); and the Seattle Institute for Cardiac Research (G.W.J., J.A., G.H.B.) — both in Seattle; Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC (A.S.H., D.B.M., K.L.L.); University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (D.J.C., F.E.M.); Portland Veterans Affairs Medical Center and Oregon Health Sciences University, Portland (M.H.R.); Oregon Cardiology Associates, Eugene (R.K.R.); University Hospital, London, ON, Canada (R.Y.); Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore (T.G.); Institut de Cardiologie de Montréal, Université de Montréal, Montreal (M.T.); Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL (D.J.W.); and the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN (D.L.P.).

Address reprint requests to Dr. Poole at the Division of Cardiology, University of Washington School of Medicine, 1959 NE Pacific St., Box 356422, Seattle, WA 98195-6422, or at jpoole{at}u.washington.edu.

Full Text of this Article


This article has been cited by other articles:



HOME  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SEARCH  |  CURRENT ISSUE  |  PAST ISSUES  |  COLLECTIONS  |  PRIVACY  |  HELP  |  beta.nejm.org

Comments and questions? Please contact us.

The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2008 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.