Survival of Patients Receiving a Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator in Clinical Practice vs Clinical Trials
- 2 January 2013
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Medical Association (AMA) in Jama-Journal Of The American Medical Association
- Vol. 309 (1), 55-62
- https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2012.157182
Abstract
Importance Randomized clinical trials have shown that implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy saves lives. Whether the survival of patients who received an ICD in primary prevention clinical trials differs from that of trial-eligible patients receiving a primary prevention ICD in clinical practice is unknown. Objective To determine whether trial-eligible patients who received a primary prevention ICD as documented in a large national registry have a survival rate that differs from the survival rate of similar patients who received an ICD in the 2 largest primary prevention clinical trials, MADIT-II (n = 742) and SCD-HeFT (n = 829). Design, Setting, and Patients Retrospective analysis of data for patients enrolled in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2007, meeting the MADIT-II criteria (2464 propensity score-matched patients) or the SCD-HeFT criteria (3352 propensity score-matched patients). Mortality data for the registry patients were collected through December 31, 2009. Main Outcome Measures Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare mortality from any cause. Results The median follow-up time in MADIT-II, SCD-HeFT, and the ICD Registry was 19.5, 46.1, and 35.2 months, respectively. Compared with patients enrolled in the clinical trials, patients in the ICD Registry were significantly older and had a higher burden of comorbidities. In the matched cohorts, there was no significant difference in survival between MADIT-II-like patients in the registry and MADIT-II patients randomized to receive an ICD (2-year mortality rates: 13.9% and 15.6%, respectively; adjusted ICD Registry vs trial hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.85-1.31; P = .62). Likewise, the survival among SCD-HeFT-like patients in the registry was not significantly different from survival among patients randomized to receive ICD therapy in SCD-HeFT (3-year mortality rates: 17.3% and 17.4%, respectively; adjusted registry vs trial hazard ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.97-1.38; P = .11). Conclusions and Relevance There was no significant difference in survival between clinical trial patients randomized to receive an ICD and a similar group of clinical registry patients who received a primary prevention ICD. Our findings support the continued use of primary prevention ICDs in similar patients seen in clinical practice.This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- Clinical Effectiveness of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators Among Medicare Beneficiaries With Heart FailureCirculation: Heart Failure, 2010
- Amiodarone or an Implantable Cardioverter–Defibrillator for Congestive Heart FailureThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2005
- How Many Subjects With Major Depressive Disorder Meet Eligibility Requirements of an Antidepressant Efficacy Trial?British Journal of Psychology, 2003
- Generalizability of guidelines and physicians' adherence. Case study on the Sixth Joint National Commitee's guidelines on hypertensionBMC Public Health, 2003
- Patients with chronic heart failure encountered in daily clinical practice are different from the "typical" patient enrolled in therapeutic trials.2003
- Direct comparison of characteristics, treatment, and outcomes of patients enrolled versus patients not enrolled in a clinical trial at centers participating in the TIMI 9 Trial and TIMI 9 RegistryAmerican Heart Journal, 2003
- Prophylactic Implantation of a Defibrillator in Patients with Myocardial Infarction and Reduced Ejection FractionThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2002
- Clinical trials of unfractionated heparin and low-molecular-weight heparin in addition to aspirin for the treatment of unstable angina pectoris: do the results apply to all patients?The American Journal of Cardiology, 2000
- A Randomized Study of the Prevention of Sudden Death in Patients with Coronary Artery DiseaseThe New England Journal of Medicine, 1999
- Improved Survival with an Implanted Defibrillator in Patients with Coronary Disease at High Risk for Ventricular ArrhythmiaThe New England Journal of Medicine, 1996