What Has Been the Impact on Clinical Practice of Recently Published Postevent ICD Trials?

  • D. S. Cannom
Conference paper


The American electrophysiology community has a 15-year history of active support of the implantable cardioverter defìbrillator (ICD) [1–5]. While there have been debates about the nature and extent of the impact of the ICD, few have doubted that the device saves lives. This is in contrast to the European and Far Eastern electro physiology communities, where the ICD implantation rate is a fraction of what it is in the United States [6]. The recently completed postevent clinical trials have vindicated the early support of the ICD and have led to a dramatic and ongoing increase in ICD utilization in the United States [7–9]. The anticipated completion of a series of pre-event trials will further broaden the appeal of the ICD.


Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial Antiarrhythmic Versus Implantable Defibrillator Good Samaritan Hospital Cardiac Arrest Study 
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.
    Mirowski M, Reid PR, Winkle RA et al (1983) Mortality in patients with implanted automatic defìbrillators. Ann Intern Med 98:585–588PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Winkle RA, Mead RH, Ruder MA et al (1989) Long term outcome with the automatic implantable cardioverter defìbrillator. J Am Coll Cardiol 13:1353–1361PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kelly PA, Cannom DS, Garan H et al (1988) The automatic implantable cardioverter-defìbrillator: efficacy, complications, and survival in patients with malignant ventricular arrhythmias. J Am Coll Cardiol 11:1278–1286PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Newman D, Suave MJ, Herre J et al (1992) Survival after implantation of a cardioverter defìbrillator. Am J Cardiol 69:899–903PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Powell AC, Fuchs TE, Finkelstein DM et al (1993) Influence of implantable cardioverter defibrillators and long-term prognosis of survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Circulation 88:1083–1092PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Higgins SL (1999) Impact of the Multicenter Automatic Defìbrillator Implantation Trial (MADIT) on ICD indication trends. Am J Cardiol II 83:79D–82DCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Connolly SJ, Gent M, Roberts RS et al, on behalf of the CIDS Co-Investigators (1993) Canadian Implantable Defìbrillator study (CIDS): Study design and organization. Am J Cardiol 72:103F–108FPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Siebels J, Cappato R, Ruppel R, and the CASH Investigators (1993) Preliminary results of the Cardiac Arrest Study Hamburg (CASH). Am J Cardiol 72:109F–113FPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    The Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) Investigators (1997) A comparison of antiarrhythmic drug therapy with implantable defibrillators in patients resuscitated from near-fatal sustained ventricular arrhythmias. N Engl J Med 337:1576–1583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lown B, Wolf M (1971) Approaches to sudden death from coronary heart disease. Circulation 44:130–142PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    The Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial (CAST) Investigators (1989) Preliminary report: effect of encainide and flecainide on mortality in a randomized trial of arrhythmia suppression after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 321:406–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Prystowsky EN (1988) Electrophysiologic-electropharmacologic testing in patients with ventricular arrhythmias. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 11:225–251PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cox JL (1989) Patient selection criteria and results of surgery for refractory ischemic ventricular tachycardia. Circulation 79[suppl]:163–177Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mitchell LB (1997) Clinical trials of antiarrhythmic drugs in patients with sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias. Curr Opin Cardiol 12:33–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cannom DS, Prystowsky EN (1999) Modern management of ventricular arrhythmias-detection, drugs and devices. JAMA 281:172–179PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cannom DS (1998) Implantable cardioverter defìbrillator trials: what have we learned? J Card Arrhythm Index (in press)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gregoratos G, Cheitlin MD, Conill A et al (1998) ACC/AHA guidelines for implantation of cardiac pacemakers and antiarrhythmia devices: A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines (Committee on Pacemaker Implantation). J Am Coll Cardiol 31:1175–1209PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. S. Cannom
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of CardiologyGood Samaritan HospitalLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations