Till sidans topp

Sidansvarig: Webbredaktion
Sidan uppdaterades: 2012-09-11 15:12

Tipsa en vän
Utskriftsversion

Seattle Heart Failure and… - Göteborgs universitet Till startsida
Webbkarta
Till innehåll Läs mer om hur kakor används på gu.se

Kontaktformulär








 


OBS! Vill du ha svar, ange e-post eller telefonnummer!




Seattle Heart Failure and Proportional Risk Models Predict Benefit From Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators

Artikel i vetenskaplig tidskrift
Författare K. C. Bilchick
Y. F. Wang
A. Cheng
J. P. Curtis
K. Dharmarajan
G. J. Stukenborg
R. Shadman
I. Anand
L. H. Lund
U. Dahlstrom
U. Sartipy
A. Maggioni
Karl Swedberg
C. O'Conner
W. C. Levy
Publicerad i Journal of the American College of Cardiology
Volym 69
Nummer/häfte 21
Sidor 2606-2618
ISSN 0735-1097
Publiceringsår 2017
Publicerad vid Institutionen för medicin, avdelningen för molekylär och klinisk medicin
Sidor 2606-2618
Språk en
Länkar doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2017.03.568
Ämnesord heart failure, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, risk models, cardiac-resynchronization therapy, primary prevention, prophylactic, implantation, ejection fraction, survival, mortality, death, trial, metaanalysis, association, Cardiovascular System & Cardiology
Ämneskategorier Kardiologi

Sammanfattning

BACKGROUND Recent clinical trials highlight the need for better models to identify patients at higher risk of sudden death. OBJECTIVES The authors hypothesized that the Seattle Heart Failure Model (SHFM) for overall survival and the Seattle Proportional Risk Model (SPRM) for proportional risk of sudden death, including death from ventricular arrhythmias, would predict the survival benefit with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). METHODS Patients with primary prevention ICDs from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) were compared with control patients with heart failure (HF) without ICDs with respect to 5-year survival using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS Among 98,846 patients with HF (87,914 with ICDs and 10,932 without ICDs), the SHFM was strongly associated with all-cause mortality (p < 0.0001). The ICD-SPRM interaction was significant (p < 0.0001), such that SPRM quintile 5 patients had approximately twice the reduction in mortality with the ICD versus SPRM quintile 1 patients (adjusted hazard ratios [HR]: 0.602; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.537 to 0.675 vs. 0.793; 95% CI: 0.736 to 0.855, respectively). Among patients with SHFM-predicted annual mortality <= 5.7%, those with a SPRM-predicted risk of sudden death below the median had no reduction in mortality with the ICD (adjusted ICD HR: 0.921; 95% CI: 0.787 to 1.08; p = 0.31), whereas those with SPRM above the median derived the greatest benefit (adjusted HR: 0.599; 95% CI: 0.530 to 0.677; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS The SHFM predicted all-cause mortality in a large cohort with and without ICDs, and the SPRM discriminated and calibrated the potential ICD benefit. Together, the models identified patients less likely to derive a survival benefit from primary prevention ICDs. (J Am Coll Cardiol 2017;69:2606-18) (C) 2017 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

Sidansvarig: Webbredaktion|Sidan uppdaterades: 2012-09-11
Dela:

På Göteborgs universitet använder vi kakor (cookies) för att webbplatsen ska fungera på ett bra sätt för dig. Genom att surfa vidare godkänner du att vi använder kakor.  Vad är kakor?