6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      To submit to Bentham Journals, please click here

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators: An Overview of Implantation Techniques and Clinical Outcomes

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Sudden Cardiac Death (SCD) is a significant health problem worldwide.

          Multiple randomized controlled trials have shown that Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators (ICDs) are effective life-saving management option for individuals at risk of SCD in both primary and sec-ondary prevention. Although the conventional transvenous ICDs (TV-ICDs) are safe and effective, there are potential complications associated with its use, including localized pocket or wound infection or systematic infection, a vascular access related complication such as pneumothorax, and venous thrombosis, and lead related complications such as dislodgement, malfunction, and perforation.

          Furthermore, transvenous leads placement may not be feasible in certain patients like those with ve-nous anomaly or occlusion, or with the presence of intracardiac shunts. Transvenous leads extraction, when needed, is associated with considerable morbidity & mortality and requires significant skills and costs. Totally subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) is designed to afford the same life-saving benefit of the conventional TV-ICDs while avoiding the shortcomings of the TV-leads and to simplify the implant techniques and hence expand the use of ICDs in clinical practice. It becomes commercially available after receiving CE mark in 2009, and its use increased significantly after its FDA approval in 2012. This review aims to give an overview of the S-ICD system components, implantation procedure, clin-ical indications, safety, efficacy, and future directions.

          Related collections

          Most cited references43

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Meta-analysis of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator secondary prevention trials. AVID, CASH and CIDS studies. Antiarrhythmics vs Implantable Defibrillator study. Cardiac Arrest Study Hamburg . Canadian Implantable Defibrillator Study.

          Three randomized trials of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy vs medical treatment for the prevention of death in survivors of ventricular fibrillation or sustained ventricular tachycardia have been reported with what might appear to be different results. The present analysis was performed to obtain the most precise estimate of the efficacy of the ICD, compared to amiodarone, for prolonging survival in patients with malignant ventricular arrhythmia. Individual patient data from the Antiarrhythmics vs Implantable Defibrillator (AVID) study, the Cardiac Arrest Study Hamburg (CASH) and the Canadian Implantable Defibrillator Study (CIDS) were merged into a master database according to a pre-specified protocol. Proportional hazard modelling of individual patient data was used to estimate hazard ratios and to investigate subgroup interactions. Fixed effect meta-analysis techniques were also used to evaluate treatment effects and to assess heterogeneity across studies. The classic fixed effects meta-analysis showed that the estimates of ICD benefit from the three studies were consistent with each other (P heterogeneity=0.306). It also showed a significant reduction in death from any cause with the ICD; with a summary hazard ratio (ICD:amiodarone) of 0.72 (95% confidence interval 0.60, 0.87;P=0.0006). For the outcome of arrhythmic death, the hazard ratio was 0.50 (95% confidence interval 0.37, 0.67;P<0.0001). Survival was extended by a mean of 4.4 months by the ICD over a follow-up period of 6 years. Patients with left ventricular ejection fraction < or = 35% derived significantly more benefit from ICD therapy than those with better preserved left ventricular function. Patients treated before the availability of non-thoracotomy ICD implants derived significantly less benefit from ICD therapy than those treated in the non-thoracotomy era. Results from the three trials of the ICD vs amiodarone are consistent with each other. There is a 28% reduction in the relative risk of death with the ICD that is due almost entirely to a 50% reduction in arrhythmic death. Copyright 2000 The European Society of Cardiology.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Sudden cardiac death.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Effect of long-detection interval vs standard-detection interval for implantable cardioverter-defibrillators on antitachycardia pacing and shock delivery: the ADVANCE III randomized clinical trial.

              Using more intervals to detect ventricular tachyarrhythmias has been associated with reducing unnecessary implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapies.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Curr Cardiol Rev
                Curr Cardiol Rev
                CCR
                Current Cardiology Reviews
                Bentham Science Publishers
                1573-403X
                1875-6557
                February 2019
                February 2019
                : 15
                : 1
                : 38-48
                Affiliations
                Heart Center, Alfaisal University, College of Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Centre, Zahrawi St, Al Maather, Riyadh, 12713 , Saudi Arabia
                Author notes
                [* ]Address correspondence to this author at the Heart Center, Alfaisal University, College of Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Centre, Zahrawi St, Al Maather, Riyadh 12713, Saudi Arabia; Tel: 9664647272- Ext. 3158; Fax. 966; E-mails: bandar2001sa@ 123456yahoo.com ; balghamdi@ 123456kfshrc.edu.sa
                Article
                CCR-15-38
                10.2174/1573403X14666180716164740
                6367695
                30014805
                eeb7ee2d-7e90-4d4e-90ba-22d80449b1f2
                © 2019 Bentham Science Publishers

                This is an open access article licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial 4.0 International Public License (CC BY-NC 4.0) ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/legalcode), which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the work is properly cited.

                History
                : 12 May 2018
                : 09 July 2018
                : 10 July 2018
                Categories
                Article

                Cardiovascular Medicine
                implantable cardioverter defibrillator,subcutaneous,side effects,efficacy,safety,fda

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content365

                Cited by3

                Most referenced authors1,587