scholarly journals Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Internal Cardioversion with Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Device for Atrial Fibrillation in Systolic Heart Failure Patients

2015 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-188 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hamza Sunman ◽  
Kudret Aytemir ◽  
Hikmet Yorgun ◽  
Uğur Canpolat ◽  
Muhammet Ulvi Yalçin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Systolic Heart Failure ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Internal Cardioversion ◽  
Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Heart Failure Patients

scholarly journals DIAGNOSIS OF ATRIAL FIBRILLATION IN HEART FAILURE PATIENTS WITH IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER DEFIBRILLATOR OR CARDIAC RESYNCHRONISATION THERAPY.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Dominik ◽  
Mitkowski Przemyslaw ◽  
Wojciech Zorawski ◽  
Ilona Kowalik ◽  
Adam Ciesielski
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy ◽  
Predisposing Factors ◽  
Study Group ◽  
Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Cardiac Resynchronisation ◽  
Resynchronisation Therapy

IntroductionImplantable cardioverter defibrillators register various types of arrhythmias. Thus they can be exploited to better identify patients with atrial fibrillation episodes and increase the proportion of patients who may benefit from implementation of pharmacological prophylaxis of thromboembolic events, most of which it turns out are asymptomatic.Material and methodsAssessment of the frequency, symptoms and predisposing factors for the occurrence of atrial fibrillation episodes in patients with implanted ICD (implantable cardioverter defibrillator) and CRT-D (cardiac resynchronisation therapy with defibrillator) based on the analysis of intracardiac electrocardiograms (IEGM) records. The study included 174 consecutive outpatient cases with heart failure, sinus rhythm and Implanted Cardioverter Defibrillator and Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy with Defibrillator. Control visits with analysis of IEGM records occurred every three months. During mean follow-up of 20 months, 901 visits were carried out. 147 patients had at least one year of follow-up.ResultsAtrial fibrillation episodes in the study group occurred in 54 (31.0%) of patients and 71.4% were asymptomatic. Predisposing factors were: history of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (37.0% vs 13.3%, p ˂ 0.001), atrioventricular conduction abnormalities (42.6% vs. 20.0%, p = 0.002), intraventricular conduction abnormalities (59.3% vs 40.8%, p = 0.02) and more severe mitral regurgitation (7.4% vs 0.8%, p = 0.04). Chronic renal disease was a risk factor for death in the study group. No stroke occurred during the study.ConclusionsEpisodes of paroxysmal AF in patients with systolic heart failure and implanted cardioverter-defibrillator systems are quite common. The majority of the episodes recorded in the study were asymptomatic.

scholarly journals Usefulness of the MAGGIC Score in Predicting the Competing Risk of Non-Sudden Death in Heart Failure Patients Receiving an Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator: A Sub-Analysis of the OBSERVO-ICD Registry

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 121
Author(s):  
Marco Canepa ◽  
Pietro Palmisano ◽  
Gabriele Dell’Era ◽  
Matteo Ziacchi ◽  
Ernesto Ammendola ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Sudden Death ◽  
Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Competing Risk ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
Icd Therapy ◽  
Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Heart Failure Patients ◽  
Probability Of Death

The role of prognostic risk scores in predicting the competing risk of non-sudden death in heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) receiving an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is unclear. To this goal, we evaluated the accuracy and usefulness of the Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure (MAGGIC) score. The present analysis included 1089 HFrEF ICD recipients enrolled in the OBSERVO-ICD registry (NCT02735811). During a median follow-up of 36 months (1st–3rd IQR 25–48 months), 193 patients (17.7%) experienced at least one appropriate ICD therapy, and 133 patients died (12.2%) without experiencing any ICD therapy. The frequency of patients receiving ICD therapies was stable around 17–19% across increasing tertiles of 3-year MAGGIC probability of death, whereas non-sudden mortality increased (6.4% to 9.8% to 20.8%, p < 0.0001). Accuracy of MAGGIC score was 0.60 (95% CI, 0.56–0.64) for the overall outcome, 0.53 (95% CI, 0.49–0.57) for ICD therapies and 0.65 (95% CI, 0.60–0.70) for non-sudden death. In patients with higher 3-year MAGGIC probability of death, the increase in the competing risk of non-sudden death during follow-up was greater than that of receiving an appropriate ICD therapy. Results were unaffected when analysis was limited to ICD shocks only. The MAGGIC risk score proved accurate and useful in predicting the competing risk of non-sudden death in HFrEF ICD recipients. Estimation of mortality risk should be taken into greater consideration at the time of ICD implantation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document