Cargando…

Routine DFT testing in patients undergoing ICD implantation does not improve mortality: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing has been an integral part of implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator (ICD) implantation to confirm appropriate sensing of ventricular fibrillation and to establish an adequate safety margin for defibrillation. However, there is a lack of evidence regarding benef...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kannabhiran, Munish, Mustafa, Usman, Acharya, Madan, Telles, Nelson, Alexandria, Brackett, Reddy, Pratap, Dominic, Paari
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6288554/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30555603
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/joa3.12109
_version_ 1783379817414000640
author Kannabhiran, Munish
Mustafa, Usman
Acharya, Madan
Telles, Nelson
Alexandria, Brackett
Reddy, Pratap
Dominic, Paari
author_facet Kannabhiran, Munish
Mustafa, Usman
Acharya, Madan
Telles, Nelson
Alexandria, Brackett
Reddy, Pratap
Dominic, Paari
author_sort Kannabhiran, Munish
collection PubMed
description Defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing has been an integral part of implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator (ICD) implantation to confirm appropriate sensing of ventricular fibrillation and to establish an adequate safety margin for defibrillation. However, there is a lack of evidence regarding benefits of routine DFT testing. Therefore, we performed a meta‐analysis to assess its mortality benefit. We searched MEDLINE for studies comparing mortality outcomes in ICD recipients who underwent DFT testing to those who did not. For the second analysis, studies comparing outcomes in patients with high‐ vs low‐energy DFT were included. Odds ratio and standard errors were calculated, and inverse variance method in a random‐effect model was used to combine effect sizes. Fifteen studies with 10,975 subjects comparing outcomes in patients who underwent routine DFT testing during ICD implantation and those who did not were included. There was no difference in the group that did not undergo DFT testing with regards to all‐cause mortality (OR 0.935; CI 0.725‐1.207; P = 0.606), cardiac mortality (OR 0.709; CI 0.385‐1.307; P = 0.271), noncardiac mortality (OR 0.921; CI 0.701‐1.210; P = 0.554), and arrhythmic mortality (OR 1.152; CI 0.831‐1.596; P = 0.396). Percentage of successful appropriate first shocks among the two groups showed no difference. Five studies with 2278 subjects were included in the second analysis comparing patients with low DFT vs high DFT. Patients with high DFT had no significant increase in all‐cause mortality compared to patients with low DFT (OR 0.527; CI 0.034‐8.107; P = 0.646). Patients requiring higher DFT had no increased all‐cause mortality compared to patients with lower DFT. Routine DFT testing during ICD implantation does not confer any significant benefit.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6288554
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62885542018-12-14 Routine DFT testing in patients undergoing ICD implantation does not improve mortality: A systematic review and meta‐analysis Kannabhiran, Munish Mustafa, Usman Acharya, Madan Telles, Nelson Alexandria, Brackett Reddy, Pratap Dominic, Paari J Arrhythm Clinical Review Defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing has been an integral part of implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator (ICD) implantation to confirm appropriate sensing of ventricular fibrillation and to establish an adequate safety margin for defibrillation. However, there is a lack of evidence regarding benefits of routine DFT testing. Therefore, we performed a meta‐analysis to assess its mortality benefit. We searched MEDLINE for studies comparing mortality outcomes in ICD recipients who underwent DFT testing to those who did not. For the second analysis, studies comparing outcomes in patients with high‐ vs low‐energy DFT were included. Odds ratio and standard errors were calculated, and inverse variance method in a random‐effect model was used to combine effect sizes. Fifteen studies with 10,975 subjects comparing outcomes in patients who underwent routine DFT testing during ICD implantation and those who did not were included. There was no difference in the group that did not undergo DFT testing with regards to all‐cause mortality (OR 0.935; CI 0.725‐1.207; P = 0.606), cardiac mortality (OR 0.709; CI 0.385‐1.307; P = 0.271), noncardiac mortality (OR 0.921; CI 0.701‐1.210; P = 0.554), and arrhythmic mortality (OR 1.152; CI 0.831‐1.596; P = 0.396). Percentage of successful appropriate first shocks among the two groups showed no difference. Five studies with 2278 subjects were included in the second analysis comparing patients with low DFT vs high DFT. Patients with high DFT had no significant increase in all‐cause mortality compared to patients with low DFT (OR 0.527; CI 0.034‐8.107; P = 0.646). Patients requiring higher DFT had no increased all‐cause mortality compared to patients with lower DFT. Routine DFT testing during ICD implantation does not confer any significant benefit. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018-09-03 /pmc/articles/PMC6288554/ /pubmed/30555603 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/joa3.12109 Text en © 2018 The Authors. Journal of Arrhythmia published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of the Japanese Heart Rhythm Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Clinical Review
Kannabhiran, Munish
Mustafa, Usman
Acharya, Madan
Telles, Nelson
Alexandria, Brackett
Reddy, Pratap
Dominic, Paari
Routine DFT testing in patients undergoing ICD implantation does not improve mortality: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
title Routine DFT testing in patients undergoing ICD implantation does not improve mortality: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
title_full Routine DFT testing in patients undergoing ICD implantation does not improve mortality: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
title_fullStr Routine DFT testing in patients undergoing ICD implantation does not improve mortality: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
title_full_unstemmed Routine DFT testing in patients undergoing ICD implantation does not improve mortality: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
title_short Routine DFT testing in patients undergoing ICD implantation does not improve mortality: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
title_sort routine dft testing in patients undergoing icd implantation does not improve mortality: a systematic review and meta‐analysis
topic Clinical Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6288554/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30555603
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/joa3.12109
work_keys_str_mv AT kannabhiranmunish routinedfttestinginpatientsundergoingicdimplantationdoesnotimprovemortalityasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT mustafausman routinedfttestinginpatientsundergoingicdimplantationdoesnotimprovemortalityasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT acharyamadan routinedfttestinginpatientsundergoingicdimplantationdoesnotimprovemortalityasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT tellesnelson routinedfttestinginpatientsundergoingicdimplantationdoesnotimprovemortalityasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT alexandriabrackett routinedfttestinginpatientsundergoingicdimplantationdoesnotimprovemortalityasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT reddypratap routinedfttestinginpatientsundergoingicdimplantationdoesnotimprovemortalityasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT dominicpaari routinedfttestinginpatientsundergoingicdimplantationdoesnotimprovemortalityasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis