Indian Pacing and Electrophysiology Journal (Jan 2015)

Under-Utilization of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators in Patients with Heart Failure - The Current State of Sudden Cardiac Death Prophylaxis

  • Jayasree Pillarisetti, MD,
  • Martin Emert, MD,
  • Mazda Biria, MD,
  • Rashaad Chotia, MD,
  • Rajeshwer Guda, MBBS,
  • Sudharani Bommana, M.Phil,
  • Rhea Pimentel, MD,
  • James Vacek, MD, MSc, FACC, FAHA,
  • Raghuveer Dendi, MD,
  • Loren Berenbom, MD,
  • Buddhadeb Dawn, MD, FAHA,
  • Dhanunjaya Lakkireddy, MD, FACC, FHRS

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0972-6292(16)30838-5
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 15, no. 1
pp. 20 – 29

Abstract

Read online

Background: Despite ACC/AHA guidelines indicating implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) as class I therapy for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in patients with EF≤35%, ICD utilization rates in real world practice have been low. Objective: To determine the rate of ICD implantation at a tertiary care academic center and to assess the reasons for under-utilization of the same. Methods: Review of a prospectively collected database which included all patients diagnosed with an EF≤35% was performed to assess the rate of ICD implantation and mortality. Reasons for non-implantation of ICD were then assessed from detailed chart review. Results: A total of 707 patients (age 69.4 ± 14.1 years) with mean EF of 26±7% were analyzed. Only 28% (200/707) of patients had ICDs implanted. Mortality was lower in the group with ICD (25% vs 37%, p=0.004). When patients who either died or were lost to follow-up prior to 2005 were excluded, ICD utilization rate was still low at 37.6%. The most common reason for non-implantation of ICD was physicians not discussing this option with their patients. Patient refusal was the second most common reason. Conclusions: ICD Implantation rates for primary prevention of SCD in patients with EF≤35% is low. Physician and patient education should be addressed to improve the utilization rates.

Keywords