Defibrillator exchange in the elderly

Abstract

Background: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy in elderly patients is controversial because survival benefits might be attenuated by nonarrhythmic causes of death. Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the outcome of septuagenarians and octogenarians after ICD generator exchange (GE). Methods: A total of 506 patients undergoing elective GE were analyzed to determine the incidence of ICD shocks and/or survival after GE. Patients were divided into a septuagenarian group (age 70–79 years) and an octogenarian group (age ≥80 years). The primary endpoint was death from any cause. Secondary endpoints were survival after appropriate ICD shock and death without experiencing ICD shocks after GE (“prior death”). Results: The association of the ICD with all-cause mortality and arrhythmic death was determined for septuagenarians and octogenarians. Comparing both groups, similar left ventricular ejection fraction (35.6% ± 11.2% vs 32.4% ± 8.9%) and baseline prevalence of New York Heart Association functional class III or IV heart failure (17.1% vs 14.7%) were found. During the entire follow-up period of the study, 42.5% of patients in the septuagenarian group died compared to 79% in the octogenarian group (P <.01). Prior death was significantly more frequent in both age groups than were appropriate ICD shocks. Predictors of mortality were common in both groups and included advanced heart failure, peripheral arterial disease, and renal failure. Conclusion: In clinical practice, decision-making for ICD GE among the elderly should be considered carefully for individual patients.

Keywords

• Generator exchange
• Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator
• Octogenarians
• Quality of life
• Septuagenarians