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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chen, Chao-Feng, Jin, Chao-Lun, Liu, Mei-Jun, Xu, Yi-Zhou
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