Cargando…
Efficacy, safety, and in-hospital outcomes of subcutaneous versus transvenous implantable defibrillator therapy: A meta-analysis and systematic review
BACKGROUND: Lead-related complication is an important drawback of trans-venous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (TV-ICD). The subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) was developed to overcome ICD lead associated complications; however, whether the S-ICD confers enhanced clinical benefits compared with TV-IC...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer Health
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6531055/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31083185 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000015490 |
_version_ | 1783420742605471744 |
---|---|
author | Chen, Chao-Feng Jin, Chao-Lun Liu, Mei-Jun Xu, Yi-Zhou |
author_facet | Chen, Chao-Feng Jin, Chao-Lun Liu, Mei-Jun Xu, Yi-Zhou |
author_sort | Chen, Chao-Feng |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Lead-related complication is an important drawback of trans-venous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (TV-ICD). The subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) was developed to overcome ICD lead associated complications; however, whether the S-ICD confers enhanced clinical benefits compared with TV-ICD remains unclear. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess TV-ICD and S-ICD for safety, efficacy, and in-hospital outcomes in the prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in patients not requiring pacing. METHODS: The Medline, PubMed, EmBase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies comparing TV-ICD and S-ICD. RESULTS: A total of 9 eligible studies, including 5 propensity-matched case–control, 3 retrospective, and 1 cross-sectional studies were identified, assessing 7361 patients in all. Pool analyses demonstrated that SICD were associated with lower lead-related complication rates [odds ratio (OR) = 0.13; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.05–0.33; I(2) = 0%], and S-ICD was more beneficial in terms of reducing ICD shocks [OR = 0.48; 95% CI 0.32–0.72, I(2) = 4%]. In addition, the patients administered S-ICD tend to have shorter length of hospital stay after implantation (SMD = −0.06; 95% CI −0.11 to 0.00, I(2) = 0%) and reduce total complication rates (OR = 0.72; 95% CI 0.50–1.03; I(2) = 18%), non-decreased quality of life (QoL). Moreover, both devices appeared to perform equally well with respect to infection rate and death. CONCLUSIONS: Available overall data suggested that S-ICD is associated with reducing lead-related complications, ICD shocks. In addition, S-ICD has tendency to shorten hospitalization and reduce total complications, although the difference is no significant. Equivalent death rate, infection, and QoL were found between 2 groups. Therefore, S-ICD could be considered an alternative approach to TV-ICD in appropriate patients for SCD prevention. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6531055 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Wolters Kluwer Health |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65310552019-06-25 Efficacy, safety, and in-hospital outcomes of subcutaneous versus transvenous implantable defibrillator therapy: A meta-analysis and systematic review Chen, Chao-Feng Jin, Chao-Lun Liu, Mei-Jun Xu, Yi-Zhou Medicine (Baltimore) Research Article BACKGROUND: Lead-related complication is an important drawback of trans-venous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (TV-ICD). The subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) was developed to overcome ICD lead associated complications; however, whether the S-ICD confers enhanced clinical benefits compared with TV-ICD remains unclear. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess TV-ICD and S-ICD for safety, efficacy, and in-hospital outcomes in the prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in patients not requiring pacing. METHODS: The Medline, PubMed, EmBase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies comparing TV-ICD and S-ICD. RESULTS: A total of 9 eligible studies, including 5 propensity-matched case–control, 3 retrospective, and 1 cross-sectional studies were identified, assessing 7361 patients in all. Pool analyses demonstrated that SICD were associated with lower lead-related complication rates [odds ratio (OR) = 0.13; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.05–0.33; I(2) = 0%], and S-ICD was more beneficial in terms of reducing ICD shocks [OR = 0.48; 95% CI 0.32–0.72, I(2) = 4%]. In addition, the patients administered S-ICD tend to have shorter length of hospital stay after implantation (SMD = −0.06; 95% CI −0.11 to 0.00, I(2) = 0%) and reduce total complication rates (OR = 0.72; 95% CI 0.50–1.03; I(2) = 18%), non-decreased quality of life (QoL). Moreover, both devices appeared to perform equally well with respect to infection rate and death. CONCLUSIONS: Available overall data suggested that S-ICD is associated with reducing lead-related complications, ICD shocks. In addition, S-ICD has tendency to shorten hospitalization and reduce total complications, although the difference is no significant. Equivalent death rate, infection, and QoL were found between 2 groups. Therefore, S-ICD could be considered an alternative approach to TV-ICD in appropriate patients for SCD prevention. Wolters Kluwer Health 2019-05-13 /pmc/articles/PMC6531055/ /pubmed/31083185 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000015490 Text en Copyright © 2019 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
spellingShingle | Research Article Chen, Chao-Feng Jin, Chao-Lun Liu, Mei-Jun Xu, Yi-Zhou Efficacy, safety, and in-hospital outcomes of subcutaneous versus transvenous implantable defibrillator therapy: A meta-analysis and systematic review |
title | Efficacy, safety, and in-hospital outcomes of subcutaneous versus transvenous implantable defibrillator therapy: A meta-analysis and systematic review |
title_full | Efficacy, safety, and in-hospital outcomes of subcutaneous versus transvenous implantable defibrillator therapy: A meta-analysis and systematic review |
title_fullStr | Efficacy, safety, and in-hospital outcomes of subcutaneous versus transvenous implantable defibrillator therapy: A meta-analysis and systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Efficacy, safety, and in-hospital outcomes of subcutaneous versus transvenous implantable defibrillator therapy: A meta-analysis and systematic review |
title_short | Efficacy, safety, and in-hospital outcomes of subcutaneous versus transvenous implantable defibrillator therapy: A meta-analysis and systematic review |
title_sort | efficacy, safety, and in-hospital outcomes of subcutaneous versus transvenous implantable defibrillator therapy: a meta-analysis and systematic review |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6531055/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31083185 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000015490 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chenchaofeng efficacysafetyandinhospitaloutcomesofsubcutaneousversustransvenousimplantabledefibrillatortherapyametaanalysisandsystematicreview AT jinchaolun efficacysafetyandinhospitaloutcomesofsubcutaneousversustransvenousimplantabledefibrillatortherapyametaanalysisandsystematicreview AT liumeijun efficacysafetyandinhospitaloutcomesofsubcutaneousversustransvenousimplantabledefibrillatortherapyametaanalysisandsystematicreview AT xuyizhou efficacysafetyandinhospitaloutcomesofsubcutaneousversustransvenousimplantabledefibrillatortherapyametaanalysisandsystematicreview |