2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2018.06.046
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator use in catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia: A systematic review

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

2
59
0
2

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 90 publications
(63 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
2
59
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…All ventricular ectopy extinguished as the heart rate fell below 100 bpm (E) to avoid implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) placement which is associated with a high burden of complications. 10 This is in accordance with patients falling into the Class I category of the 2013 Heart Rhythm Society Consensus Statement on CPVT. 11…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 79%
“…All ventricular ectopy extinguished as the heart rate fell below 100 bpm (E) to avoid implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) placement which is associated with a high burden of complications. 10 This is in accordance with patients falling into the Class I category of the 2013 Heart Rhythm Society Consensus Statement on CPVT. 11…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 79%
“…The 2013 guidelines recommended (Class I) that a patient with CPVT has an ICD implanted if the patient has survived a cardiac arrest or if a patient has syncope/documented sustained VT despite optimal medical management and/or left cardiac sympathetic denervation (Al-Khatib et al 2018). A recent meta-analysis reviewed 53 studies containing 1429 CPVT patients, 35% of whom had an ICD implanted (Roston et al 2018a). During follow-up, 40% of patients received at least one appropriate shock, 21% of patients received at least one inappropriate shock, and electrical storm (three or more sustained episodes of ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation, or appropriate shocks from an ICD within 24 hours) occurred in 20% of patients.…”
Section: Implantable Cardiac Defibrillatormentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The effectiveness of the shocks was also assessed. Some 99% of shocks for ventricular tachycardia failed despite being appropriate whereas 94% of shocks for ventricular fibrillation were successful (Roston et al 2018a). Thus, the efficacy of ICD shocks in CPVT appears dependent on the arrhythmia mechanism -effective for ventricular fibrillation but ineffective for VT. (Miyake et al 2013) A recent multicenter study of 136 CPVT patients who presented with cardiac arrest showed no survival benefit associated with ICD implant (van der Werf et al 2019).…”
Section: Implantable Cardiac Defibrillatormentioning
confidence: 99%
“…ICDs have been shown to rescue patients with CPVT from cardiac arrest. About 47% of patients received an ICD for primary prevention, and during follow-up 40% had an appropriate shock as published by a study in 2018 [20]. The survival of undiagnosed CPVT patients with ICDs who presented with cardiac arrest was not improved [21].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%