首页> 外文期刊>Journal of the American College of Cardiology >Recurrence of symptomatic ventricular arrhythmias in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillator after the first device therapy: implications for antiarrhythmic therapy and driving restrictions. CARE Group.
【24h】

Recurrence of symptomatic ventricular arrhythmias in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillator after the first device therapy: implications for antiarrhythmic therapy and driving restrictions. CARE Group.

机译:植入式心脏复律除颤器的首例器械治疗后症状性室性心律失常的复发:对抗心律不齐治疗和驾驶限制的影响。关怀集团。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether clinical or electrophysiologic characteristics could predict initial and subsequent implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy. BACKGROUND: Identification of markers to predict subsequent ICD therapy and symptoms after the first event could affect patient management. METHODS: We analyzed baseline and follow-up data on 125 ICD patients followed for 408+/-321 days. Medications and ICD programming were not changed after first ICD therapy. RESULTS: Implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy occurred in 58 patients (46%). Clinical features were as follows: mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 29%+/-15%; coronary artery disease 84%; presenting arrhythmia with sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (SMVT) in 68%. In a multivariate analysis the relative risk for ICD therapy in patients presenting with SMVT versus cardiac arrest (CA) was 2.57 (range, 1.32 to 5.01), and for patients with LVEF < or =25%, 1.95 (1.11 to 3.45), respectively (p < 0.05). Implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy was not predicted by any other variable. Forty-six patients had second ICD therapy. Mean time to second ICD therapy was only 66+/-93 days compared with 138+/-168 days for first ICD therapy (p < 0.05). No predictor for second ICD therapy was found. Regarding symptoms, impaired consciousness during initial ICD therapy was predicted only by SMVT cycle length <250 ms at electrophysiologic testing. In contrast, symptoms were similar between first and second ICD therapy (p = 0.0001). Of note, ventricular tachycardia cycle length preceding first and second ICD therapy was similar (r = 0.76, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: First ICD therapy tends to occur in patients presenting with SMVT and LVEF < or =25%. Subsequent therapy occurs sooner and is unpredictable, suggesting that antiarrhythmic drug therapy should be considered after the first symptomatic ICD therapy. Symptoms during first ICD therapy predict subsequent symptoms, and patients presenting with SMVT and asymptomatic first ICD therapy are at very low risk for future syncopal ICD therapy.
机译:目的:本研究的目的是研究临床或电生理特征是否可以预测植入式心脏复律除颤器(ICD)的初始和后续治疗。背景:识别标志物以预测首次事件后的后续ICD治疗和症状可能会影响患者管理。方法:我们分析了125位ICD患者的基线和随访数据,随访时间为408 +/- 321天。首次ICD治疗后药物和ICD程序未改变。结果:58例患者(46%)发生了植入式心脏复律除颤器治疗。临床特征如下:平均左心室射血分数(LVEF)为29%+ /-15%;冠心病84%;心律失常伴持续性单形性室性心动过速(SMVT)占68%。在多变量分析中,SMVT合并心脏骤停(CA)的患者进行ICD治疗的相对风险分别为2.57(范围1.32至5.01)和LVEF <或= 25%的患者为1.95(1.11至3.45)。 (p <0.05)。植入式心脏复律除颤器治疗未通过任何其他变量预测。 46例患者接受了第二次ICD治疗。与第一次ICD治疗的138 ​​+/- 168天相比,第二次ICD治疗的平均时间仅为66 +/- 93天(p <0.05)。没有发现第二次ICD疗法的预测指标。关于症状,仅在电生理测试中,SMVT周期长度<250 ms可以预测初始ICD治疗期间意识受损。相反,第一次和第二次ICD治疗之间的症状相似(p = 0.0001)。值得注意的是,第一次和第二次ICD治疗前的室性心动过速周期长度相似(r = 0.76,p = 0.001)。结论:首次ICD治疗倾向于发生在SMVT和LVEF≤25%的患者中。随后的治疗较早发生并且是不可预测的,这表明在首次对症ICD治疗后应考虑抗心律不齐药物治疗。首次ICD治疗期间的症状可预测随后的症状,并且有SMVT和无症状的首次ICD治疗的患者未来晕厥ICD治疗的风险非常低。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号