Advertisement






Click here for more guidelines.
CME Topic Collections Past Issues Search Current Issue Home
     

J Am Coll Cardiol, 2009; 54:1993-2000, doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2009.07.039
© 2009 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mishkin, J. D.
Right arrow Articles by Aranda, J. M.
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Mishkin, J. D.
Right arrow Articles by Aranda, J. M., Jr

QUARTERLY FOCUS ISSUE: HEART RHYTHM DISORDERS: STATE-OF-THE-ART PAPER

Appropriate Evaluation and Treatment of Heart Failure Patients After Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Discharge

Time to Go Beyond the Initial Shock

Joseph D. Mishkin, MD*, Sherry J. Saxonhouse, MD*, Gregory W. Woo, MD*, Thomas A. Burkart, MD*, William M. Miles, MD*, Jamie B. Conti, MD*, Richard S. Schofield, MD*, Samuel F. Sears, PhD{dagger} and Juan M. Aranda, Jr, MD*,*

* Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida
{dagger} Departments of Psychology and Cardiovascular Sciences, East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina

Manuscript received May 15, 2009; revised manuscript received June 25, 2009, accepted July 12, 2009.

* Reprints requests and correspondence: Dr. Juan M. Aranda, Jr, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Florida College of Medicine, 1600 SW Archer Road, Room M421, Gainesville, Florida 32610 (Email: arandjm{at}medicine.ufl.edu).

Multiple clinical trials support the use of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) for prevention of sudden cardiac death in patients with heart failure (HF). Unfortunately, several complicating issues have arisen from the universal use of ICDs in HF patients. An estimated 20% to 35% of HF patients who receive an ICD for primary prevention will experience an appropriate shock within 1 to 3 years of implant, and one-third of patients will experience an inappropriate shock. An ICD shock is associated with a 2- to 5-fold increase in mortality, with the most common cause being progressive HF. The median time from initial ICD shock to death ranges from 168 to 294 days depending on HF etiology and the appropriateness of the ICD therapy. Despite this prognosis, current guidelines do not provide a clear stepwise approach to managing these high-risk patients. An ICD shock increases HF event risk and should trigger a thorough evaluation to determine the etiology of the shock and guide subsequent therapeutic interventions. Several combinations of pharmacologic and device-based interventions such as adding amiodarone to baseline beta-blocker therapy, adjusting ICD sensitivity, and employing antitachycardia pacing may reduce future appropriate and inappropriate shocks. Aggressive HF surveillance and management is required after an ICD shock, as the risk of sudden cardiac death is transformed to an increased HF event risk.

Key Words: implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy • heart failure • appropriate shock • inappropriate shock

Abbreviations and Acronyms
  ACEI = angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor
  AF = atrial fibrillation
  ATP = antitachycardia pacing
  AV = atrioventricular
  HF = heart failure
  ICD = implantable cardioverter-defibrillator
  NYHA = New York Heart Association
  RV = right ventricular
  SVT = supraventricular tachycardia
  VF = ventricular fibrillation
  VT = ventricular tachycardia






 
  CME Topic Collections Past Issues Search Current Issue Home

Advertisement