Multiple clinical trials support the use of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) for prevention of sudden cardiac death in patients with heart failure (HF). Unfortunately, several complicating issues have arisen from the universal use of ICDs in HF patients. An estimated 20% to 35% of HF patients who receive an ICD for primary prevention will experience an appropriate shock within 1 to 3 years of implant, and one-third of patients will experience an inappropriate shock. An ICD shock is associated with a 2- to 5-fold increase in mortality, with the most common cause being progressive HF. The median time from initial ICD shock to death ranges from 168 to 294 days depending on HF etiology and the appropriateness of the ICD therapy. Despite this prognosis, current guidelines do not provide a clear stepwise approach to managing these high-risk patients. An ICD shock increases HF event risk and should trigger a thorough evaluation to determine the etiology of the shock and guide subsequent therapeutic interventions. Several combinations of pharmacologic and device-based interventions such as adding amiodarone to baseline beta-blocker therapy, adjusting ICD sensitivity, and employing antitachycardia pacing may reduce future appropriate and inappropriate shocks. Aggressive HF surveillance and management is required after an ICD shock, as the risk of sudden cardiac death is transformed to an increased HF event risk.
In elderly patients enrolled in the MIRACLE and MIRACLE-ICD trials, CRT resulted in significant improvements in NYHA class and LVEF, regardless of age. These data suggest that the full age range of patients with appropriate indications for implantation can benefit from CRT.
This article reviews the appropriate evaluation and management of cardiac arrhythmias in the pregnant patient. Any treatment strategy in this patient population has the inherent potential to adversely affect the health of the unborn child. As such, there is no room for empiric therapy in these patients. Adequate arrhythmia documentation is paramount, preferably by noninvasive means. The decision to treat should be based on symptom severity and the risk to both mother and fetus posed by potentially recurring arrhythmia episodes throughout the pregnancy. Minimal symptoms in the setting of a structurally normal heart call for a conservative approach. Less is better. If pharmacologic therapy is justified, drugs with historically demonstrated safety profiles in pregnancy should be tried first. The safety profiles of virtually all drugs used to treat cardiac arrhythmias during human pregnancy are based solely on an accumulation of past clinical experience. Newer antiarrhythmics therefore carry a largely unknown risk. Most inherent rhythm disorders manifest long before a woman reaches childbearing age. Women with previously diagnosed arrhythmias frequently experience a recurrence or worsening of their arrhythmia during the pregnancy. Counseling of these individuals and perhaps preemptive treatment by means such as arrhythmia ablation prior to a planned pregnancy would seem optimal.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.