Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Other Primary Prevention Trials—What Is Clinically And Economically Necessary?

  • Published:
Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There are a number of important primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) trials underway which will help define the role of the ICD in high risk patients. High risk is defined by low ejection fraction, although a number of electrical markers (e.g., the signal averaged ECG and invasive electrophysiologic test) are also under evaluation. The trials currently underway (including SCD-HEFT, MADIT II, and the CABG-PATCH substudy) are analyzing patients with either coronary or idiopathic cardiomyopathy who have an EF of 35% or under. Patients are randomized to either ICD therapy or no antiarrhythmic drug therapy. Maximal congestive heart failure therapy with ACE inhibitors and beta blockers is used in both arms of each trial. At the conclusion of these trials we should have a better understanding of which group of presumably high risk patients, if any, will benefit from the ICD.

Another group of high risk patients that is being encountered more frequently: those who have a high risk diagnosis. These patients are present in such small numbers that a large randomized trial is impossible. As many of these patients are receiving ICDs, a national registry of firing rates will be helpful.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. The Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) Investigators. A comparison of antiarrhythmic drug therapy with implantable defibrillators in patients resuscitated from near-fatal sustained ventricular arrhythmias. N Engl J Med 1997;337:1576–1583.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Connolly SJ, Gent M, Roberts RS, et al. Canadian implantable defibrillator study (CIDS): Study design and organization. Am J Cardiol 1993;72:103F.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Siebels J, Cappato R, Ruppel R, et al. ICD versus drugs in cardiac arrest survivors: Preliminary results of the cardiac arrest study Hamburg (CASH). PACE 1993;16:552.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Moss AJ, Hall WJ, Cannom DS, et al, for the Multicenter Automatic De~brillator Implantation Trial Investigators. Improved survival with an implanted defibrillator in patients with coronary disease at high risk for ventricular arrhythmia. N Engl J Med 1996;335:1933–1940.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bigger JT, for the CABG-Patch Trial Investigators. Prophylactic use of implanted cardiac defibrillators in patients at high risk for ventricular arrhythmias after coronary artery bypass graft surgery. N Engl J Med 1997;337:1569–1575.

    Google Scholar 

  6. The Multicenter Postinfarction Research Group. Risk stratification and survival after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1983;309:331–336.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Volpi A, DeVita C, Franzosi G, et al. Determinants of 6-month mortality in survivors of myocardial infarction after thrombolysis. Results of the GISSI-2 data base. Circulation 1993;88:416–429.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Domanski MJ, Zipes DP, Schron E. Treatment of sudden cardiac death. Current understandings from randomized trials and future research direction. Circulation 1997;95: 2694–2699.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Chadda K, Goldstein S, Byington R, Curb JD. Effect of propranolol after acute myocardial infarction in patients with congestive heart failure. Circulation 1986;73(3):503–510.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Packer M, Bristow MR, Cohn JN, et al., for the U.S. Carvedilol Heart Failure Study Group. The effect of carvedilol on morbidity and mortality in patients with chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med 1996;334:1349–1355.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Pfeffer MA, Braunwald E, Moye LA, et al. Effect of captopril on mortality and morbidity in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after myocardial infarction: Results of the survival and ventricular enlargement trial. N Engl J Med 1992;327:669–677.

    Google Scholar 

  12. The CONSENSUS Trial Study Group. Effects of enalapril on mortality in severe congestive heart failure: Results of the Cooperative North Scandinavian Enalapril Survival Study (CONSENSUS). N Engl J Med 1987;316:1429–1435.

    Google Scholar 

  13. The Studies of Left Ventricular Dysfunction Investigators. Effect of enalapril on survival in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction and congestive heart failure. N Engl J Med 1991;325:293–302.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kober L, Trop-Pederson C, Carlsen JE, et al., for the Trandolapril Cardiac Evaluation (TRACE) Study Group. A clinical trial of the ACE inhibitor trandolapril in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1995;333:1670–1676.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study Group. Randomised trial of cholesterol lowering in 444 patients with coronary heart disease: The Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S). Lancet 1994;344:1383–1389.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Shepherd J, Cobbe SM, Ford I, et al., for the West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study Group. Prevention of coronary heart disease with pravastatin in men with hypercholesterolemia. N Engl J Med 1995;333:1301–1307.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Wilber DJ, Kall JG, Copp DE, et al. What can we expect from prophylactic implantable cardioverter defibrillators? Am J Cardiol 1997;80(5B):20F-27F.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Lown B, Wolf M. Approaches to sudden death from coronary heart disease. Circulation 1971;44:130.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Lie KL, Wellens HJJ, Downar E, Durrer D. Observations on patients with primary ventricular fibrillation complicating acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 1975;52:755.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Bigger JT, Weld FM. Analysis of prognostic significance of ventricular arrhythmias after myocardial infarction: Shortcomings of Lown grading system. Br Heart J 1981;45:717.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Bigger JT, Fleiss JL, Kleiger R, et al. The relationships among ventricular arrhythmias, left ventricular dysfunction, and mortality in the 2 years after myocardial infarction. Circulation 1984;69:250–258.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Breithardt G, Schwarzmaier M, Borggrefe M, et al. Prognostic signi~cance of late ventricular potentials after acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J 1983;4:487–495.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Denniss AR, Richards DA, Cody DV, et al. Prognostic significance of ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation induced at programmed stimulation and delayed potentials detected on the signal-averaged electrocardiograms of survivors of acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 1986;74: 731–745.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Gomes JA, Winters SL, Stewart D, et al. A new noninvasive index to predict sustained ventricular tachycardia and sudden death in the first year after myocardial infarction: Based on signal-averaged electrocardiogram, radionuclide ejection fraction and Holter monitoring. J Am Coll Cardiol 1987;10: 349–357.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kuchar DL, ThorburnCW, Sammel NL. Prediction of serious arrhythmic events after myocardial infarction: Signal-averaged electrocardiogram,Holter monitoring and radionuclide ventriculography. J Am Coll Cardiol 1987;9:531–538.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Buxton AE, Fisher JD, Josephson ME, et al, and the MUSTT Investigators. Prevention of sudden death in patients with coronary artery disease: The Multicenter Unsustained Tachycardia Trial (MUSTT). Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases 1993;36(3):215–226.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and the North American Society of Pacing and Electrophysiology. Heart rate variability. Standards of measurement, physiological interpretation and clinical use. Circulation 1996;93: 1043–1065.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Katz A, Liberty IF, Porath A, Ovsyscher I, Prystowsky EN. Simple bed side test of one minute heart rate variability during deep breathing predicts mortality after myocardial infraction. Circulation 1996;94(8):I-27.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Kleiger RE, Miller JP, Bigger JT Jr, Moss AJ and the Multicenter Post-Infarction Research Group. Decreased heart rate variability and its association with increased mortality after acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 1987;59: 256–262.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Raeder E, Rosenbaum DS, Bhasin R, Cohen RJ. Alternating morphology of the QRST complex preceding sudden death. N Engl J Med 1992;326:272–273.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Day CP, McComb JM, Campbell RWF. QT dispersion: An indication of arrhythmia risk in patients with long QT intervals. Br Heart J 1990;63:342–344.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Buja G, Miorelli M, Turrini P, Melacini P, Nava A. Comparison of QT dispersion in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy between patients with and without ventricular arrhythmias and sudden death. Am J Cardiol 1993;72:973–977.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Schwartz PJ, LaRovere MT. ATRAMI: A mark in the quest for the prognostic value of autonomic markers. Autonomic tone and reflexes after myocardial infarction (Editorial). Eur Heart J 1998;19:1593–1595.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Bardy GH, Lee KL, Mark DB, et al. SCD-HeFT: Prevention of sudden cardiac death in patients with congestive heart failure. In: Singh, S, R Woosely R, ed. Clinical Trials (In Press).

  35. Julian DG, Camm AJ, Frangin G, et al. Randomised trial of effect of amiodarone on mortality in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after recent myocardial infarction: EMIAT. Lancet 1997;349:667–674.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Cairns JA, Connolly SJ, Roberts R, et al. Randomised trial of outcome after myocardial infarction in patients with frequent or repetitive ventricular premature depolarisations: CAMIAT. Lancet 1997;349:675–682.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Moss AJ, Cannom DS, Daubert JP, et al, for the MADIT II Investigators. Multicenter automatic defibrillator implantation trial II (MADIT II): Design and clinical protocol. (Submitted for publication), 1998.

  38. Curtis AB, Cannom DS, Bigger JT, et al. Baseline characteristics of patients in the coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) patch trial. Am Heart J 1997:139(5pt1):787–798.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Saxon LA, Demarco T, Chatterjee K, for the Vigor-CHF Investigators. The magnitude of sympahoneural activation in advanced heart failure is altered with crhonic biventricular pacing. PACE 1998;12(4):914.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Bakker P, Chin K, DeJong N, et al. Biventricular pacing improves functional capacity in patients with end-stage congestive heart failure. PACE 1995;18:825.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Gras D, Leclercq C, Cazeau S, et al. Biventricular synchronization for heart failure. Archives des maladies du coeur et des vaisseaux 1998;91:154.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Gras D, Mabo, Luttikhuis O, et al. Chronic atrio-biventricular pacing in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy: Preliminary results of INSYNC trial. Archives des maladies du coeur et des vaisseaux 1998;91:154.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Cazeau S, Ritter P, Lazarus A, et al. Multisite pacing for end-stage heart failure: Early experience. PACE 1996;?: 1748–1757.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Blanc J, Etienne Y, Gilard M, et al. Results of permanent left ventricular based pacing in patients with severe heart failure. Archives des maladies du coeur et des vaisseaux 1998;91:153.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Auricchio A, Stellbrink C, Block M, et al. Clinical and objective improvements in severe congestive herat failure patients using univentricular or biventricular pacing: Preliminary results of a randomized prospective study. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998;31:31A.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Good Samaritan Hospital, Los Angeles, California

    David S. Cannom

Authors
  1. David S. Cannom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cannom, D.S. Other Primary Prevention Trials—What Is Clinically And Economically Necessary?. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 4 (Suppl 1), 109–115 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009842918121

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009842918121

Search

Navigation