Why the study?
Does an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) prevent death in patients with vasospastic angina and lethal ventricular arrhythmia?
Population
23 patients with vasospastic angina resuscitated from lethal ventricular arrhythmia
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
2.9 years (median 2.1 years)
Key result
Among patients with vasospastic angina and lethal ventricular arrhythmia, recurrent ventricular fibrillation or pulseless electrical activity occurred in 21.7% over a median 2.1 years.
Authors
Loading...
Captured external expert commentary on this paper, strongest first. Original sources are linked where available.
“The current guidelines are silent with respect to use of an ICD in patients with coronary artery vasospasm. Although the results of the report of Matsue et al. support the use of ICD therapy in patients with coronary artery vasospasm who have survived an episode of life-threatening VT/VF.”
May support ICD consideration in vasospastic angina with lethal arrhythmias; leaves open need for RCT confirmation before practice change.
Observational (n=23)
Yes
Does an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) prevent death in patients with vasospastic angina and lethal ventricular arrhythmia?
In patients with vasospastic angina and prior lethal ventricular arrhythmia, ICD implantation is appropriate due to a high recurrence rate (21.7%) of life-threatening arrhythmias.
Matsue et al. (2012) conducted an observational in Vasospastic angina (VSA) resuscitated from lethal ventricular arrhythmia (n=23). Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) was evaluated on Appropriate ICD therapy, sudden cardiac arrest, or death from all causes. Among patients with vasospastic angina and lethal ventricular arrhythmia, recurrent ventricular fibrillation or pulseless electrical activity occurred in 21.7% over a median 2.1 years.