{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: Two-Year Outcomes of Primary Prophylactic Use of Defibrillators for Ischemic and Non-Ischemic Cardiomyopathy - Propensity Score-Matched Analysis From the Nippon Storm Study.
{Author}: Kondo Y;Noda T;Takanashi Y;Sasaki S;Sato Y;Nitta T;Aizwa Y;Ohe T;Kurita T;
{Journal}: Circ J
{Volume}: 88
{Issue}: 7
{Year}: 2024 06 25
{Factor}: 3.35
{DOI}: 10.1253/circj.CJ-23-0613
{Abstract}: In 2016, the DANISH study reported negative results regarding the efficacy of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) in patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). In this study we determined the efficacy of using ICDs for primary prophylaxis in patients with NICM.
We selected 1,274 patients with underlying cardiac disease who were enrolled in the Nippon Storm Study. We analyzed the data of 451 patients with LVEF ≤35% due to NICM or ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) who underwent ICD implantation for primary prophylaxis (men, 78%; age, 65±12 years; LVEF, 25±6.4%; cardiac resynchronization therapy, 73%; ICM, 33%). After propensity score matching, we compared the baseline covariates between groups: NICM (132 patients) and ICM (132 patients). The 2-year appropriate ICD therapy risks were 27.7% and 12.2% in the NICM and ICM groups, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.390 [95% confidence interval, 0.218-0.701]; P=0.002).
This subanalysis of propensity score-matched patients from the Nippon Storm Study revealed that the risk of appropriate ICD therapy was significantly higher in patients with NICM than in those with ICM.