Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Clinical Implications of MADIT, AVID, CIDS, CABG Patch Trial and CASH: A North American Perspective

  • Published:
Cardiac Electrophysiology Review

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

References

  1. Moss AJ, Hall J, Cannom DS, Daubert JP, Higgins SL, Klein H, Levine JH, Saksena S, Waldo AL, Wilber D, Brown MW, Heo M. Improved survival with an implanted defibrillator inpatients with coronary disease at high risk for ventricular arrhythmia. N Engl J Med 1996;335:1933-1940.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Friedman PL, Stevenson WG. Unsustained ventricular tachycardia-to treat or not to treat. (Editorial). N Eng J Med 1996; Vol. 335(26).

  3. Buxton AE, Fisher JD, Josephson ME, et al. Prevention of sudden death in patients with coronary artery disease: The Multicenter Unsustained tachycardia Trial (MUSTT). Prog Cardiovasc Dis 1993;36:215-226.

    Google Scholar 

  4. The CABG Patch Trial Investigators and Coordinators. The Coronary Bypass Graft (CABG) Patch Trial. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 1993;36:97-114.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bigger JT. Status Report From The CABG-Patch Trial: Design, Interim Results, Implications For ICD Prophylaxis. NASPE Clinical Trials Session. New Orleans, LA 5/8/97.

  6. Wilber DJ, Olshansky B, Moran JF, Scanlon PJ. Electrophysiological testing and nonsustained ventricular tachycardia: use and limitations in patients with coronary artery disease and impaired ventricular function. Circulation 1990;82:350-358.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bhandari AK, Widerhorn J, Sager PT, Leon C, Hong R, Lotlewski A, Hackett J, Rahimtoola SH. Prognostic significance of programmed ventricular stimulation in patients surviving complicated acute myocardial infarction: a prospective study. Am Heart Journal 1992;124(1):87-96.

    Google Scholar 

  8. The AVID Investigators. Antiarrhythmics versus implantable defibrillators (AVID)-rationale, design, and methods. Am J Cardiol 1995;75:470-475.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Zipes DP. Antiarrhythmics vs. Implantable Defibrillator (AVID) Trial: Main Result. NASPE Clinical Trials Session, New Orleans, LA 5/8/97.

  10. Connolly SJ, Gent M, Roberts RS, Dorian P, Green MS, Klein GJ, Mitchell LB, Sheldon RS, Roy D. Canadian Implantable Defibrillator Study (CIDS): study design and organization. Am J Cardiol 1993;72:103F-108F.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Siebels J, Kuck K, and the CASH Investigators. Implantable cardioverter defibrillator compared with antiarrhythmic drug treatment in cardiac arrest survivors (the Cardiac Arrest Study Hamburg). Am Heart J 1994;127:1139-1144.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Massachusetts General Hospital, The Cardiac Unit and Cardiac Electrophysiology Laboratory, Boston, MA

    Jeremy N. Ruskin

Authors
  1. Jeremy N. Ruskin
    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

Ruskin, J.N. Clinical Implications of MADIT, AVID, CIDS, CABG Patch Trial and CASH: A North American Perspective. Card Electrophysiol Rev 2, 17–20 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009921902942

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009921902942

Keywords

Search

Navigation