Implantable cardioverter‐defibrillators in heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction and diabetes

Aim There is limited information on the outcomes after primary prevention implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator (ICD) implantation in patients with heart failure (HF) and diabetes. This analysis evaluates the effectiveness of a strategy of ICD plus medical therapy vs. medical therapy alone among pa...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:European journal of heart failure 2018-06, Vol.20 (6), p.1031-1038
Main Authors: Sharma, Abhinav, Al‐Khatib, Sana M., Ezekowitz, Justin A., Cooper, Lauren B., Fordyce, Christopher B., Michael Felker, G., Bardy, Gust H., Poole, Jeanne E., Thomas Bigger, J., Buxton, Alfred E., Moss, Arthur J., Friedman, Daniel J., Lee, Kerry L., Steinman, Richard, Dorian, Paul, Cappato, Riccardo, Kadish, Alan H., Kudenchuk, Peter J., Mark, Daniel B., Peterson, Eric D., Inoue, Lurdes Y.T., Sanders, Gillian D.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Comorbidity - trends
Comparative effectiveness
Competing risk
Death, Sudden, Cardiac - epidemiology
Death, Sudden, Cardiac - etiology
Death, Sudden, Cardiac - prevention & control
Defibrillators, Implantable
Diabetes
Diabetes Mellitus - epidemiology
Female
Heart failure
Heart Failure - epidemiology
Heart Failure - physiopathology
Heart Failure - therapy
Humans
Implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator
Incidence
Male
Middle Aged
Primary Prevention - methods
Stroke Volume - physiology
Survival Rate - trends
United States - epidemiology
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Aim There is limited information on the outcomes after primary prevention implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator (ICD) implantation in patients with heart failure (HF) and diabetes. This analysis evaluates the effectiveness of a strategy of ICD plus medical therapy vs. medical therapy alone among patients with HF and diabetes. Methods and results A patient‐level combined‐analysis was conducted from a combined dataset that included four primary prevention ICD trials of patients with HF or severely reduced ejection fractions: Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial I (MADIT I), MADIT II, Defibrillators in Non‐Ischemic Cardiomyopathy Treatment Evaluation (DEFINITE), and Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Trial (SCD‐HeFT). In total, 3359 patients were included in the analysis. The primary outcome of interest was all‐cause death. Compared with patients without diabetes (n = 2363), patients with diabetes (n = 996) were older and had a higher burden of cardiovascular risk factors. During a median follow‐up of 2.6 years, 437 patients without diabetes died (178 with ICD vs. 259 without) and 280 patients with diabetes died (128 with ICD vs. 152 without). ICDs were associated with a reduced risk of all‐cause mortality among patients without diabetes [hazard ratio (HR) 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46–0.67] but not among patients with diabetes (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.7–1.12; interaction P = 0.015). Conclusion Among patients with HF and diabetes, primary prevention ICD in combination with medical therapy vs. medical therapy alone was not significantly associated with a reduced risk of all‐cause death. Further studies are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of ICDs among patients with diabetes.
ISSN:1388-9842
1879-0844
DOI:10.1002/ejhf.1192