New Evidence from the Secondary Endpoints of the MADIT II Study

  • S. L. Higgins
Conference paper


The landmark Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial II (MADIT II) demonstrated that the implantable defibrillator (ICD) improved survival in post-infarction patients with left ventricular ejection fractions of 30 or lower [1]. Despite rigorous scrutiny, the study has resulted in acceptance of this recommendation by numerous regulatory agencies, both in the United States and Europe. MADIT II has been heralded as one of the most important research studies in cardiology in the past 20 years.


Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Coronary Revascularization Implantable Defibrillator Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial Heart Rate Turbulence 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Moss AJ, Zareba W, Hall WJ et al (2002) Prophylactic implantation of a defibrillator in patients with myocardial infarction and reduced ejection fraction. N Engl J Med 346:877–883PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Daubert JP, Zareba W, Schuger CD et al, for the MADIT II Investigators (2003) Does EPS inducibility in MADIT II patients predict subsequent VT and/or VF events? PACE 26:960Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Reek S, Klein HU, Erdogan A et al, for the MADIT II Investigators (2003) Reproducibility of electrophysiological testing in patients with remote myocardial infarction and severe LV-dysfunction: MADIT II substudy. PACE 26:960Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Greenberg HM, Case RB, Brown MW et al, for the MADIT II Investigators (2003) Mechanisms of mortality in the multicenter automatic defibrillator implantation trial (MADIT-II). PACE 26:961Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Epstein A, Carlson M, Fogoros R et al (1996) Classification of death in antiarrhythmia trials. J Am Coll Cardiol 27:433–442PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brodine WN, Tung RT, Lee JK et al (2003) Beta blocker use and appropriate ICD therapy in the MADIT-II study. PACE 26:961Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wilber DJ, Klein HU, Zareba W et al (2003) Does time from coronary revascularization influence the survival benefit of prophylactic implantable defibrillators in patients with impaired ventricular function following myocardial infarction? PACE 26:972Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wilber DJ, Zareba W, Hall WJ et al (2003) Time-dependence of mortality risk and defibrillator benefit following myocardial infarction: lessons from the multicenter automatic defibrillator implantation trial II. PACE 26:961Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zareba W, Steinberg J, Moss AJ et al, for MADIT II investigators (2003) Signal-averaged ECG and outcome in MADIT II patients. PACE 26:943Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Buxton AE (2003) The clinical use of implantable cardioverter defibrillators: Where are we now? Where should we go? Ann Intern Med 138:512–514PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Berkowitsch A, Neumann T, Erdogan A et al (2003). Prognostic significance of heart rate turbulence and frequency of ventricular premature beats in MADIT II patients. PACE 26:1027Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Haigney MC, Zareba W, Gentlesk P et al (2003) QT variability and appropriate ICD therapy in MADIT-II patients. PACE 26:942Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Perkiomaki JS, Zareba W, Steinberg JS et al (2003) Relationship of heart rate variability and signal averaged electrocardiographic parameters to inducibility of ventricular tachyarrhythmias in postinfarction patients with reduced left ventricular function. PACE 26:1091CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. L. Higgins
    • 1
  1. 1.Regional Cardiac Arrhythmia CenterScripps Memorial HospitalLa JollaUSA

Personalised recommendations