CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Six-month versus 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy after implantation of drug-eluting stents: the Efficacy of Xience/Promus Versus Cypher to Reduce Late Loss After Stenting (EXCELLENT) randomized, multicenter study Third-Generation Balloon and Self-Expandable Valves for Aortic Stenosis in Large and Extra-Large Aortic Annuli From the TAVR-LARGE Registry Noninvasive Nuclear SPECT Myocardial Blood Flow Quantitation to Guide Management for Coronary Artery Disease Aortic Valve Stenosis Treatment Disparities in the Underserved JACC Council Perspectives Meta-Analysis of Effectiveness and Safety of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-to-Intermediate Surgical Risk Cohort Clopidogrel or ticagrelor in acute coronary syndrome patients treated with newer-generation drug-eluting stents: CHANGE DAPT Transcatheter versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Prior Cardiac Surgery in the Randomized PARTNER 2A Trial Impact of Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation on Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease: Subgroup Analysis From ULTIMATE Trial Relationship Between Hospital Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement Volume and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Outcomes Optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stent implantation: a randomized, controlled trial.

Clinical TrialJune 2018

JOURNAL:JACC Clin Electrophysiol. Article Link

Improving the Use of Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators Therapy With Validated Patient-Centric Risk Estimates

WC Levy, AS Hellkamp, DB Mark et al. Keywords: heart failure; ICD; non-sudden death; prognosis; proportional risk; regression analysis; risk prediction model; sudden death

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES - The authors previously developed the Seattle Proportional Risk Model (SPRM) in systolic heart failure patients without implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs)to predict the proportion of deaths that were sudden. They subsequently validated the SPRM in 2 observational ICD data sets. The objectives in the present study were to determine whether this validated model could improve identification of clinically important variations in the expected magnitude of ICD survival benefit by using a pivotal randomized trial of primary prevention ICD therapy.


BACKGROUND - Recent data show that <50% of nominally eligible subjects receive guideline- recommended primary prevention ICDs.

METHODS - In the SCD-HeFT (Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Trial), a placebo-controlled ICD trial in 2,521 patients with an ejection fraction ≤35% and symptomatic heart failure, we tested the use of patient-level SPRM-predicted probability of sudden death (relative to that of non-sudden death) as a summary measurement of the potential for ICD benefit. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate variations in the relationship between patient-level SPRM predictions and ICD benefit.

RESULTS - Relative to use of mortality predictions with the Seattle Heart Failure Model, the SPRM was much better at partitioning treatment benefit from ICD therapy (effect size was 2- to 3.6-fold larger for the ICD×SPRM interaction). ICD benefit varied significantly across SPRM-predicted risk quartiles: for all-cause mortality, a +10% increase with ICD therapy in the first quartile (highest risk of death, lowest proportion of sudden death) to a decrease of 66% in the fourth quartile (lowest risk of death, highest proportion of sudden death; p = 0.0013); for sudden death mortality, a 19% reduction in SPRM quartile 1 to 95% reduction in SPRM quartile 4 (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS - In symptomatic systolic heart failure patients with a Class I recommendation for primary prevention ICD therapy, the SPRM offers a useful patient-centric tool for guiding shared decision making.