Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator indication in prevention of sudden cardiac death in difficult clinical situations: A French expert position paper.
Arrhythmias
Choix thérapeutiques
Mort subite
Prévention
S-ICD
Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator
Sudden cardiac death
Transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator
Journal
Archives of cardiovascular diseases
ISSN: 1875-2128
Titre abrégé: Arch Cardiovasc Dis
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101465655
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
May 2020
May 2020
Historique:
received:
31
01
2020
accepted:
09
03
2020
pubmed:
27
4
2020
medline:
28
8
2020
entrez:
27
4
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The introduction of a new technology always raises questions about its place compared with the reference technology. The use of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator to prevent sudden cardiac death is now a widely proven technique, with a clear statement of its indication in the guidelines. More recently, a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator has been introduced, and appears to be an attractive technique as it removes the need to implant a lead inside the right ventricle to treat the patient, which should dramatically decrease the risk of complications over time. Currently, only one model of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator is available on the market; its indications are the same as for transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillators, except for patients who need stimulation because of conduction disorders or ventricular tachycardias that can potentially be treated effectively by antitachycardia pacing. The different technical characteristics of transvenous versus subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillators therefore raise the question of which to choose in different clinical settings. The experts who participated in the preparation of this manuscript had three meetings, organized by the company Boston Scientific. Each expert prepared the draft of a section corresponding to a clinical situation. The choice between transvenous versus subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator was then voted on by all the experts. The results of the votes are presented in this manuscript, as it seemed important to us to show the disparities of opinion that can exist in certain situations. The votes were cast independently and anonymously.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32334981
pii: S1875-2136(20)30091-7
doi: 10.1016/j.acvd.2020.03.011
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Practice Guideline
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
359-366Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.. All rights reserved.