January 01, 2011
1 min read

Survival after CRT-D, ICD implantation comparable outside vs. inside clinical trial setting

Saxon L. Circulation. 2010;doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.110.960633.

You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive an email when new content is published.

Click Here to Manage Email Alerts

We were unable to process your request. Please try again later. If you continue to have this issue please contact customerservice@slackinc.com.

Patients treated with implantable cardioverter defibrillators and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators in a naturalistic practice had a favorable survival rate compared with patients from clinical trials, according to new data published in Circulation.

Researchers compared the outcomes of patients in device clinic settings (total n=124,450; ICD and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators [CRT-D], n=116,222; CRT-D only, n=8,228) with those who regularly transmitted remote data from the device an average of four times monthly (n=69,556). Mean patient age was 67 ± 13 years, and device implantation was followed for an average of 28 ± 17 months.

Overall, 1- and 5-year survival rates were 92% and 68% in the ICD implantation arm, and 88% and 54% in the CRT-D device arm, with a survival rate for patients with CRT-only of 82% at 1 year and 48% at 5 years.

For patients treated with ICD and CRT-D who received remote follow-up on the network, 1- and 5-year survival rates were higher vs. those treated with ICD and CRT-D who received device follow-up in device clinics only (ICD HR=0.56; CRT-D HR=0.45; P<.0001).

“This is the largest report to date on survival after device implantation and finds that survival benefits observed over shorter follow-up intervals in clinical trials are maintained,” the researchers wrote in their study. “This information is particularly important because there are upfront risks and costs associated with device implantation.”

Twitter Follow CardiologyToday.com on Twitter.