Efficacy and safety of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation in the elderly—The I-70 Study: A randomized clinical trial

IF 2.5 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Heart Rhythm O2 Pub Date : 2024-06-01 DOI:10.1016/j.hroo.2024.04.010
Steven N. Singh MD , Michael Wininger PhD , Merritt Raitt MD , Selcuk Adabag MD, MS, FHRS , Hans Moore MD , Jeffrey N. Rottman MD , Alexandra Scrymgeour PharmD , Jane Zhang PhD , Kevin Zheng MPH , Peter Guarino PhD, MPH , Tassos C. Kyriakides PhD , I-70 Study Group, Gary Johnson MS , Alicia Williams MA , Alex Beed MS , Karen MacMurdy MD , Pablo Saavedra MD
{"title":"Efficacy and safety of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation in the elderly—The I-70 Study: A randomized clinical trial","authors":"Steven N. Singh MD ,&nbsp;Michael Wininger PhD ,&nbsp;Merritt Raitt MD ,&nbsp;Selcuk Adabag MD, MS, FHRS ,&nbsp;Hans Moore MD ,&nbsp;Jeffrey N. Rottman MD ,&nbsp;Alexandra Scrymgeour PharmD ,&nbsp;Jane Zhang PhD ,&nbsp;Kevin Zheng MPH ,&nbsp;Peter Guarino PhD, MPH ,&nbsp;Tassos C. Kyriakides PhD ,&nbsp;I-70 Study Group,&nbsp;Gary Johnson MS ,&nbsp;Alicia Williams MA ,&nbsp;Alex Beed MS ,&nbsp;Karen MacMurdy MD ,&nbsp;Pablo Saavedra MD","doi":"10.1016/j.hroo.2024.04.010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>There is conflicting evidence on the efficacy of primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation in the elderly.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of ICD implantation in patients 70 years and older.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Patients (n = 167) aged 70 years or older and eligible for ICD implantation were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either optimal medical therapy (OMT) (n = 85) or OMT plus ICD (n = 82).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of the 167 participants (mean age 76.4 years; 165 men), 144 completed the study protocol according to their assigned treatment. Average participant follow-up was 31.5 months. Mortality was similar between the 2 groups: 27 deaths in OMT vs 26 death in ICD (unadjusted hazard ratio 0.92; 95% confidence interval 0.53–1.57), but there was a trend favoring the ICD over the first 36 months of follow-up. Rates of sudden death (7 vs 5; <em>P</em> = .81) and all-cause hospitalization (2.65 events per participant in OMT vs 3.09 in ICD; <em>P</em> = .31) were not statistically significantly different. Eleven participants randomized to ICD received appropriate therapy. Five participants received an inappropriate therapy that included at least 1 ICD shock.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The study did not recruit to target sample size, and accumulated data did not show benefit of ICD therapy in patients 70 years or older. Future studies similar in design might be feasible but will need to contend with patient treatment preference given the large number of patients who do not want an ICD implanted. Further research is needed to determine whether the ICD is effective in prolonging life among elderly device candidates.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":29772,"journal":{"name":"Heart Rhythm O2","volume":"5 6","pages":"Pages 365-373"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666501824001053/pdfft?md5=d47d90ddba53fa13d59fa4b8b23b9d56&pid=1-s2.0-S2666501824001053-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heart Rhythm O2","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666501824001053","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

There is conflicting evidence on the efficacy of primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation in the elderly.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of ICD implantation in patients 70 years and older.

Methods

Patients (n = 167) aged 70 years or older and eligible for ICD implantation were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either optimal medical therapy (OMT) (n = 85) or OMT plus ICD (n = 82).

Results

Of the 167 participants (mean age 76.4 years; 165 men), 144 completed the study protocol according to their assigned treatment. Average participant follow-up was 31.5 months. Mortality was similar between the 2 groups: 27 deaths in OMT vs 26 death in ICD (unadjusted hazard ratio 0.92; 95% confidence interval 0.53–1.57), but there was a trend favoring the ICD over the first 36 months of follow-up. Rates of sudden death (7 vs 5; P = .81) and all-cause hospitalization (2.65 events per participant in OMT vs 3.09 in ICD; P = .31) were not statistically significantly different. Eleven participants randomized to ICD received appropriate therapy. Five participants received an inappropriate therapy that included at least 1 ICD shock.

Conclusion

The study did not recruit to target sample size, and accumulated data did not show benefit of ICD therapy in patients 70 years or older. Future studies similar in design might be feasible but will need to contend with patient treatment preference given the large number of patients who do not want an ICD implanted. Further research is needed to determine whether the ICD is effective in prolonging life among elderly device candidates.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
老年人植入植入式心律转复除颤器的疗效和安全性--I-70 研究:随机临床试验
背景关于老年人植入一级预防植入式心律转复除颤器(ICD)的疗效,存在相互矛盾的证据。目的本研究旨在确定 70 岁及以上患者植入 ICD 的疗效和安全性。方法将符合 ICD 植入条件的 70 岁及以上患者(n = 167)随机分配(1:1)至最佳医疗疗法(OMT)(n = 85)或 OMT 加 ICD(n = 82)。平均随访时间为 31.5 个月。两组的死亡率相似:OMT 27 例死亡 vs ICD 26 例死亡(未经调整的危险比为 0.92;95% 置信区间为 0.53-1.57),但在随访的前 36 个月中,有倾向于 ICD 的趋势。猝死率(7 例 vs 5 例;P = .81)和全因住院率(OMT 每名参与者 2.65 例 vs ICD 每名参与者 3.09 例;P = .31)在统计学上没有显著差异。随机接受 ICD 治疗的 11 名参与者接受了适当的治疗。结论该研究没有招募到目标样本量,积累的数据没有显示 ICD 治疗对 70 岁或以上患者的益处。今后类似设计的研究可能可行,但需要考虑患者的治疗偏好,因为大量患者不希望植入 ICD。要确定 ICD 是否能有效延长老年患者的生命,还需要进一步的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Heart Rhythm O2
Heart Rhythm O2 Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
52 days
期刊最新文献
Needle-free atrial transseptal access: A safe and reproducible alternative for left atrial catheterization Differences in clinical significance of atrial tachyarrhythmias in idiopathic ventricular fibrillation vs Brugada syndrome: A multicenter study Temporal changes in device-derived daily activity related to ventricular arrhythmias from the CERTITUDE registry Ventricular arrhythmias after atrial fibrillation electrical cardioversion: A multicenter study Ventricular tachycardia: Focal pulsed field electroporation as a rescue therapy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1