Automatic implantable cardioverter defibrillator: when not to implant

Submitted: January 3, 2020
Accepted: February 4, 2020
Published: February 21, 2020
Abstract Views: 1029
PDF: 593
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Authors

The implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is the mainstay therapy for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in patients with heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction. Current indications for prophylactic ICD are based on the results of randomized controlled trials dating back to 15-20 years ago, which have usually enrolled highly selected patients with few comorbidities and only a small number of patients aged >75 years. Existing literature suggest an age-dependent attenuation of the efficacy of the ICD. Because of the ageing of the population, there is need for data addressing device efficacy among older patients that also considers the impact of geriatric syndromes on health status. The assessment of frailty may be of value in identifying elderly patients who may or may not benefit from ICD placement for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death.

Dimensions

Altmetric

PlumX Metrics

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Citations

How to Cite

La Rovere, Maria Teresa, and Egidio Traversi. 2020. “Automatic Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator: When Not to Implant”. Monaldi Archives for Chest Disease 90 (1). https://doi.org/10.4081/monaldi.2020.1225.