Biventricular Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators Improve Survival Compared with Biventricular Pacing Alone in Patients with Severe Left Ventricular Dysfunction
- 24 August 2004
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology
- Vol. 15 (8), 862-866
- https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1540-8167.2004.04044.x
Abstract
Biventricular cardiac pacemakers provide important hemodynamic benefit in selected patients with heart failure and severe left ventricular (LV) dysfunction. Nevertheless, these patients remain at high mortality risk. To address this issue, we examined mortality outcome in patients with heart failure treated with biventricular pacemakers alone and those treated with biventricular implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs). The study population consisted of 126 consecutive patients with LV dysfunction and heart failure who received either a biventricular ICD (n = 62) or a biventricular pacemaker (n = 64) between January 1998 and December 2002. A minimum 12 months of follow-up was obtained in all survivors. ICD indications were conventional in all patients. Kaplan-Meier actuarial method and log rank statistics were used to calculate and compare survival rates in both groups. Comparison of mortality rates utilized Chi-square test. The two groups had similar clinical and demographic features, LV ejection fraction, and medication use. Average follow-up times were 13 +/- 11.8 months (range 4-60) and 18 +/- 13.2 months (range 0.5-53) for biventricular ICD and pacemaker groups, respectively. Overall mortality rate was significantly lower in the biventricular ICD group (13%, 8 deaths) compared to the pacemaker group (41%, 26 deaths) (P = 0.01). Further, the predominant survival benefit for ICD-treated patients becomes evident after the first 12 months of follow-up. The findings in this study, although necessarily limited in their interpretation by the absence of treatment randomization, suggest that biventricular ICDs offer a survival benefit compared to biventricular pacing alone. Furthermore, this benefit may be most apparent if other clinical factors do not preclude patient survival >1 year postimplant.Keywords
This publication has 26 references indexed in Scilit:
- Cardiac-Resynchronization Therapy with or without an Implantable Defibrillator in Advanced Chronic Heart FailureThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2004
- Effect of Epicardial or Biventricular Pacing to Prolong QT Interval and Increase Transmural Dispersion of RepolarizationCirculation, 2003
- Cardiac Resynchronization in Chronic Heart FailureThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2002
- Prophylactic Implantation of a Defibrillator in Patients with Myocardial Infarction and Reduced Ejection FractionThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2002
- Effects of Multisite Biventricular Pacing in Patients with Heart Failure and Intraventricular Conduction DelayThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2001
- A Randomized Study of the Prevention of Sudden Death in Patients with Coronary Artery DiseaseThe New England Journal of Medicine, 1999
- Evaluation of Different Ventricular Pacing Sites in Patients With Severe Heart FailureCirculation, 1997
- Improved Survival with an Implanted Defibrillator in Patients with Coronary Disease at High Risk for Ventricular ArrhythmiaThe New England Journal of Medicine, 1996
- Multisite Pacing for End‐Stage Heart Failure: Early ExperiencePacing and Clinical Electrophysiology, 1996
- Increased risk of progressive hemodynamic deterioration in advanced heart failure patients requiring permanent pacemakersAmerican Heart Journal, 1993