Electrical storm in patients with prophylactic defibrillator implantation

Little is known about the prevalence of electrical storm, baseline characteristics and mortality implications of patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillator in primary prevention versus those patients without electrical storm. We sought to assess the prevalence, baseline risk profile and su...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Archivos de cardiología de México 2016-01, Vol.86 (1), p.26-34
Main Authors: Rodríguez-Mañero, Moisés, González-Cambeiro, Cristina, Moreno-Arribas, Jose, Expósito-García, Víctor, Sánchez-Gómez, Juan Miguel, González-Torres, Luis, Arce-León, Álvaro, Arguedas-Jiménez, Hugo, Gaztañaga, Larraitz, Salvador-Montañés, Oscar, Iglesias-Bravo, Jose Antonio, Huerta, Ana Andrés La, Fernández-Armenta, Juan, Arias, Miguel Ángel, Martínez-Sande, Luis
Format: Article
Language:Spanish
Subjects:
Aged
Arrhythmias, Cardiac - epidemiology
Arrhythmias, Cardiac - prevention & control
Defibrillators, Implantable
Electrophysiological Phenomena
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Prevalence
Retrospective Studies
Tachycardia, Ventricular - therapy
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Little is known about the prevalence of electrical storm, baseline characteristics and mortality implications of patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillator in primary prevention versus those patients without electrical storm. We sought to assess the prevalence, baseline risk profile and survival significance of electrical storm in patients with implantable defibrillator for primary prevention. Retrospective multicenter study performed in 15 Spanish hospitals. Consecutives patients referred for desfibrillator implantation, with or without left ventricular lead (at least those performed in 2010 and 2011), were included. Over all 1,174 patients, 34 (2,9%) presented an electrical storm, mainly due to ventricular tachycardia (82.4%). There were no significant baseline differences between groups, with similar punctuation in the mortality risk scores (SHOCKED, MADIT and FADES). A clear trigger was identified in 47% of the events. During the study period (38±21 months), long-term total mortality (58.8% versus 14.4%, p
ISSN:1405-9940
DOI:10.1016/j.acmx.2015.04.008