Subanalyses of secondary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator trials: Antiarrhythmics versus implantable defibrillators (AVID), Canadian Implantable Defibrillator Study (CIDS), and Cardiac Arrest Study Hamburg (CASH)

Current Opinion in Cardiology

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 26-30

  Oscar, Oseroff ^a,b   Enrique, Retyk ^a   Andres, Bochoeyer ^a  

^a Castex Hospital   (Argentina)

^b NONE   (Argentina)

Author keywords

Death; Defibrillation; Heart arrest; Meta analysis; Sudden; Survival; Tachyarrhythmias

Indexed keywords

AMIODARONE; ANTIARRHYTHMIC AGENT; BETA ADRENERGIC RECEPTOR BLOCKING AGENT; METOPROLOL; PROPAFENONE; SOTALOL;

CLINICAL TRIAL; CONGESTIVE HEART FAILURE; DEFIBRILLATOR; DIABETES MELLITUS; FOLLOW UP; HEART ARREST; HEART ATRIUM FIBRILLATION; HEART EJECTION FRACTION; HEART ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY; HEART INFARCTION; HEART MUSCLE REVASCULARIZATION; HEART VENTRICLE ARRHYTHMIA; HEART VENTRICLE TACHYCARDIA; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HUMAN; HYPOTENSION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; META ANALYSIS; MORTALITY; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECURRENCE RISK; REVIEW; RISK REDUCTION; SEX RATIO; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; SURVIVAL RATE; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; EVALUATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SUDDEN DEATH;

ANTI-ARRHYTHMIA AGENTS; DEATH, SUDDEN, CARDIAC; DEFIBRILLATORS, IMPLANTABLE; EVALUATION STUDIES; HEART FAILURE, CONGESTIVE; HUMANS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS;

EID: 2542484940     PISSN: 02684705     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00001573-200401000-00007     Document Type: Review

References (23)

1. Myerburg R, Kessler KM, Castellanos A. Sudden cardiac death: epidemiology, transient risk, and intervention assessment. Ann Intern Med 1993; 119:1187-1197.
2. Uretsky B, Thygesen K, Armstrong P, et al. Acute coronary findings at autopsy in heart failure patients with sudden death: results from the Assessment of Treatment with Lisinopril and Survival (ATLAS) Trial. Circulation 2000; 102:611-616.
3. Mirowski M, Reid PK, Mower MM, et al. Termination of malignant ventricular arrhythmia with an implanted automatic defibrillator in human begins. N Engl J Med 1980; 303:322-324.
4. The Antiarrhythmics versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) Investigators. A comparison of antiarrhythmic-drug therapy with implantable defibrillators in patients resuscitated from near-fatal ventricular arrhythmias. N Engl J Med 1997; 337:1576-1583.
5. Connolly S, Gent M, Roberts R, et al. Canadian Implantable Defibrillator Study (CIDS). A randomized trial of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator against amiodarone. Circulation 2000; 101:1297-1302.
6. Kuck KH, Cappato R, Siebels J, et al., for the CASH Investigators. Randomized comparison of antiarrhythmic drug therapy with implantable defibrillators in patients resuscitated from cardiac arrest. The Cardiac Arrest Study Hamburg (CASH). Circulation 2000; 102:748-754.
7. Siebels J, Kuck KH. CASH Investigators. Implantable cardioverter defibrillator compared with antiarrhythmic drug treatment in cardiac arrest survivors (the Cardiac Arrest Study, Hamburg). Am Heart J 1994; 127:1139-1144.
8. Connolly S, Hallstrom A. Cappato R, on behalf of the Investigators of the AVID, CASH and CIDS studies. Meta-analysis of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator secondary prevention trials. Eur Heart J 2000; 21:2071-2078.
9. Lee D, Green L, Liu P, et al. Effectiveness of implantable defibrillators for preventing arrhythmic events and death: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003; 41:1573-1582. This meta-analysis compared the effectiveness of the ICD and medical strategies for secondary prevention as well as for primary prevention of arrhythmic events. All published data from January 1966 to April 2002 were collected from different databases. Secondary prevention trials exhibited a significant decrease in all-cause mortality (RR 0.75; P < 0.001), Primary prevention trials demonstrated more variable effect on all-cause mortality (RR 0.66, P < 0.05) related to the variability in the incidence of arrhythmic death and underlying cardiac substrate between individual studies.
10. Domanski MJ, Sakseena S, Epstein AE, et al., AVID Investigators. Relative effectiveness of the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and antiarrhythmic drugs in patients with varying degrees of left ventricular dysfunction who have survived malignant ventricular arrhythmias. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999; 34:1090-1095.
11. Sheldon R, Connolly S, Krahn A, et al. CIDS Investigators. Identification of patients most likely to benefit from implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy. Circulation 2000; 101:1660-1664.
12. Domanski MJ, Epstein A, Hallstrom A, et al. Survival of antiarrhythmic or implantable cardioverter defibrillator treated patients with varying degrees of left ventricular dysfunction who survived malignant ventricular arrhythmias. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2002; 13:580-583. In this substudy, survival within each quintile of left ventricular EF was estimated separately for patients treated with ICD or antiarrhythmic drugs. There were larger differences in survival across quintiles of EF in the antiarrhythmics group than in the ICD group. Mortality was not statistically associated with EF in ICD patients. This reflects the superiority of the ICD compared with antiarrhythmic drugs regardless of the EF level.
13. Smith G, Masoudi F, Vaccarino V, et al. Outcomes in heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction: mortality, readmission, and functional decline. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003; 41:1510-1518. Over more than 400 consecutive hospitalizations for heart failure, patients with preserved EF showed a 6-month mortality that was very high (13[ref]). The risks of readmission, disability, and symptoms were comparable to those of patients with depressed EF.
14. Steinberg J, Beckman K, Greene H, et al. Follow-up of patients with unexplained syncope and inducible ventricular tachyarrhythmias: analysis of the AVID Registry and an AVID substudy. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2001; 12:996-1001.
15. Exner DV, Reiffel JA, Epstein A, et al., for the AVID Investigators. Beta-blocker use and survival in patients with ventricular tachycardia: the Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999; 34:325-333.
16. Hallstrom A, McAnulty J, Wilkoff B, et al. Patients at lower risk of arrhythmia recurrence: a subgroup in whom implantable defibrillators may not offer benefit. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001; 37:1093-1099.
17. Raitt M, Klein R, Wyse G, et al. Comparison of arrhythmia recurrence in patient presenting with ventricular fibrillation versus ventricular tachycardia in the Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) Trial. Am J Cardiol 2003; 91:812-816. This AVID substudy suggests that there are important differences in clinical characteristics, as well as arrhythmia recurrence rate, of patients presenting with VF versus VT.
18. Pinski S, Yao Q, Epstein A, et al. Determinants of outcome in patients with sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias: The Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) Study Registry. Am Heart J 2000; 139:804-813.
19. Cook J, Rizo-Patron C, Curtis A, et al. Effect of surgical revascularization in patients with coronary artery disease and ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation in the Antiarrhythmic Versus Implantable Defibrillation (AVID) Registry. Am Heart J 2002; 143:821-826. This paper evaluated the magnitude of benefit attributed to revascularization after the index arrhythmia in the AVID Registry. Patients who underwent revascularization had a better survival rate than those who did not (hazard ratio = 0.67, P = 0.002). This finding highlights the role of transient ischemia in provoking ventricular arrhythmias. However, the benefit of ICD remains the same independent of revascularization status.
20. Brodsky M, Mitchell B, Halperin B, et al. Prognostic value of baseline electrophysiology studies in patients with sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias: The Antiarrhythmic Versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) Trial. Am Heart J 2002; 144:478-484. The authors noted that information derived from electrophysiology studies in the AVID trial did not predict death or recurrent ventricular tachyarrhythmias.
21. 58 Kim SG, Hallstrom A, Love JC, et al. Comparison of clinical characteristics and frequency of implantable defibrillator use between randomized patients in the Antiarrhythmics vs. Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) Trial and nonrandomized registry patients. Am J Cardiol 1997; 80:454-457.
22. Gradaus R, Block M, Brachmann J, et al., on behalf of the German EURID Registry. Mortality, morbidity, and complications in 3.344 patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators: results from the German ICD Registry EURID. PACE 2003; 26:1511-1518. An elegant presentation from routine medical care in 62 German hospitals shows that mortality, morbidity, and complications data on 3344 patients treated with ICD are comparable to those from large secondary prevention trials.
23. Goldberger JJ. Over AVID subgroup analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001; 38:1586.