The Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Minimalist

Sweeney, Michael O.

doi:10.1161/circulationaha.111.023887

Cited by 13 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 57 publications

(79 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Though occasional recalls of PM or ICD components often spur critics of device-based therapy in general, in some ways it is remarkable that these devices work as well as they do, for as long as is experienced by typical patients. 54 Indeed, it is because so often patients reach their end before their devices that the clinical, ethical, and legal challenges presented here come to be considered at all. We have argued here that any physician involved in the care of patients with PMs and ICDs are obligated to understand fundamental technical features of these devices, and the applicability of basic principles of patient autonomy and life-sustaining treatment to CIED management at the end-of-life or at patients’ request.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deactivation of Pacemakers and Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators

Kramer

Mitchell

Brock

2012

Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cardiac implantable electrical devices (CIEDs), including pacemakers (PMs) and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs), are the most effective treatment for life-threatening arrhythmias. Patients or their surrogates may request device deactivation to avoid prolongation of the dying process or in other settings, such as after device-related complications or with changes in their health care goals. Despite published guidelines outlining theoretical and practical aspects of this common clinical scenario, significant uncertainty remains for both patients and health care providers regarding the ethical and legal status of CIED deactivation. This review outlines the ethical and legal principles supporting CIED deactivation at patients’ request, centered upon patient autonomy and authority over their own medical treatment. The empirical literature describing stakeholder views and experiences surrounding CIED deactivation is described, along with lessons for future research and practice guidance surrounding the care of patients with CIEDs.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deactivation of Pacemakers and Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators

Kramer

Mitchell

Brock

2012

Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…18 Data from the ICD Registry demonstrate that a large percentage of patients without a clear indication for pacing nonetheless receive dual-chamber ICDs. There is considerable regional and hospital-level variation in this practice.…”

Section: Current Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

Implantable Cardioverter–Defibrillator Use in Older Adults

Kramer

Matlock

Buxton

et al. 2015

Circ: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…[22] In the case of obligatory pacing for symptomatic sinus node dysfunction, a dual-chamber strategy for minimal pacing at all chamber levels is recommended. [23]…”

Section: Use Of Single Chamber Vs Dual Chamber Icdmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cardiac Pacing and Defibrillation in Children and Young Adults

Singh

Batra

Balaji

2013

Indian Pacing and Electrophysiology Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The population of children and young adults requiring a cardiac pacing device has been consistently increasing. The current generation of devices are small with a longer battery life, programming capabilities that can cater to the demands of the young patients and ability to treat brady and tachyarrhythmias as well as heart failure. This has increased the scope and clinical indications of using these devices. As patients with congenital heart disease (CHD) comprise majority of these patients requiring devices, the knowledge of indications, pacing leads and devices, anatomical variations and the technical skills required are different than that required in the adult population. In this review we attempt to discuss these specific points in detail to improve the understanding of cardiac pacing in children and young adults.

show abstract

The Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Minimalist

Cited by 13 publications

References 57 publications

Deactivation of Pacemakers and Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators

Deactivation of Pacemakers and Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators

Implantable Cardioverter–Defibrillator Use in Older Adults

Cardiac Pacing and Defibrillation in Children and Young Adults

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About