Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy and the Risk of Death in Primary Prevention Defibrillator Recipients.
CRT-D
guideline-directed medical therapy
heart failure
implantable cardioverter-defibrillator
mortality
Journal
JACC. Clinical electrophysiology
ISSN: 2405-5018
Titre abrégé: JACC Clin Electrophysiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101656995
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 2022
08 2022
Historique:
received:
18
03
2022
revised:
02
05
2022
accepted:
04
05
2022
entrez:
18
8
2022
pubmed:
19
8
2022
medline:
23
8
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Contemporary guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) confers a significant mortality benefit for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), as compared to GDMT prevalent at the time of landmark primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) trials. The impact of modern era GDMT on survival in this population is unknown. This study sought to investigate the impact of number of GDMT medications prescribed for HFrEF on all-cause mortality in recipients of primary prevention ICD. A cohort of 4,972 recipients with primary prevention ICD (n = 3,210) or cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D) (n = 1,762) was studied. The association of number of GDMT medications prescribed at the time of device implantation and all-cause mortality at 2 years post implantation was examined. In our primary prevention cohort, 5%, 20%, 52%, and 23% of patients were prescribed 0, 1, 2, or 3-4 GDMT medications, respectively. After risk adjustment for age, sex, ejection fraction, body mass index, the Elixhauser comorbidity score, the type of cardiomyopathy, and the year of device implantation, each additional GDMT conferred a reduction in the risk of death of 36% in recipients of ICD (HR: 0.64; P < 0.001) and 30% in recipients of CRT-D (HR: 0.70; P < 0.001). A higher number of prescribed GDMT medications is associated with an incremental 1-year survival in recipients of primary prevention ICD with or without CRT. Initiation of maximum number of tolerated GDMT medications should therefore be the goal for all patients with HFrEF. In the setting of robust GDMT, the risk versus benefit of a primary prevention ICD warrants re-examination in future studies.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Contemporary guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) confers a significant mortality benefit for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), as compared to GDMT prevalent at the time of landmark primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) trials. The impact of modern era GDMT on survival in this population is unknown.
OBJECTIVES
This study sought to investigate the impact of number of GDMT medications prescribed for HFrEF on all-cause mortality in recipients of primary prevention ICD.
METHODS
A cohort of 4,972 recipients with primary prevention ICD (n = 3,210) or cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D) (n = 1,762) was studied. The association of number of GDMT medications prescribed at the time of device implantation and all-cause mortality at 2 years post implantation was examined.
RESULTS
In our primary prevention cohort, 5%, 20%, 52%, and 23% of patients were prescribed 0, 1, 2, or 3-4 GDMT medications, respectively. After risk adjustment for age, sex, ejection fraction, body mass index, the Elixhauser comorbidity score, the type of cardiomyopathy, and the year of device implantation, each additional GDMT conferred a reduction in the risk of death of 36% in recipients of ICD (HR: 0.64; P < 0.001) and 30% in recipients of CRT-D (HR: 0.70; P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
A higher number of prescribed GDMT medications is associated with an incremental 1-year survival in recipients of primary prevention ICD with or without CRT. Initiation of maximum number of tolerated GDMT medications should therefore be the goal for all patients with HFrEF. In the setting of robust GDMT, the risk versus benefit of a primary prevention ICD warrants re-examination in future studies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35981790
pii: S2405-500X(22)00397-8
doi: 10.1016/j.jacep.2022.05.001
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1024-1030Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Saba has received research support from Boston Scientific and Abbott; and has performed advisory board work with Medtronic and Boston Scientific. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.