A Comparison of the Quality of Life of Patients With an Entirely Subcutaneous Implantable Defibrillator System Versus a Transvenous System (from the EFFORTLESS S-ICD Quality of Life Substudy)
Language English Country United States Media print-electronic
Document type Comparative Study, Journal Article, Observational Study
PubMed
27353211
DOI
10.1016/j.amjcard.2016.05.047
PII: S0002-9149(16)30950-X
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- MeSH
- Activities of Daily Living MeSH
- Defibrillators, Implantable * MeSH
- Adult MeSH
- Ventricular Fibrillation complications therapy MeSH
- Prosthesis Implantation methods MeSH
- Tachycardia, Ventricular complications therapy MeSH
- Quality of Life * MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Multivariate Analysis MeSH
- Death, Sudden, Cardiac etiology prevention & control MeSH
- Prospective Studies MeSH
- Registries * MeSH
- Aged MeSH
- Check Tag
- Adult MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Male MeSH
- Aged MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Observational Study MeSH
- Comparative Study MeSH
The first clinical results from the Evaluation of Factors Impacting Clinical Outcome and Cost Effectiveness of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (EFFORTLESS S-ICD) Registry on the entirely S-ICD system are promising, but the impact of the S-ICD system on patients' quality of life (QoL) is not known. We evaluated the QoL of patients with an S-ICD against an unrelated cohort with a transvenous (TV)-ICD system during 6 months of follow-up. Consecutively implanted patients with an S-ICD system were matched with patients with a TV-ICD system on a priori selected variables including baseline QoL. QoL was measured with the Short-Form Health Survey at baseline, 3, and 6 months after implant and compared using multivariable modeling with repeated measures. Patients with an S-ICD (n = 167) versus a TV-ICD system (n = 167) did not differ significantly on physical (p = 0.8157) and mental QoL scores (p = 0.9080) across baseline, 3, and 6 months after implantation in adjusted analyses. The evolution in physical (p = 0.0503) and mental scores (p = 0.3772) during follow-up was similar for both cohorts, as indicated by the nonsignificant interaction effect for ICD system by time. Both patients with an S-ICD system and a TV-ICD system experienced significant improvements in physical and mental QoL between time of implant and 3 months (both p's <0.0001) and between time of implant and 6 months (both p's <0.0001) but not between 3 and 6 months (both p's >0.05). In conclusion, these first results show that the QoL of patients with an S-ICD versus TV-ICD system is similar and that patients with either system experience improvements in QoL on the short term.
Boston Scientific Corporation St Paul Minnesota
Cardiology Department Russels Hall Hospital Dudley United Kingdom
Department of Cardiology Homnolka Hospital Prague Czech Republic
Department of Cardiology Odense University Hospital Odense Denmark
Department of Cardiology St Antonius Ziekenhuis Nieuwegein the Netherlands
Department of Cardiology Thorax Center Erasmus Medical Center Rotterdam the Netherlands
Department of Cardiology Thorax Center Twente Medisch Spectrum Twente Enschede the Netherlands
Department of Cardiology University Medical Center Utrecht the Netherlands
References provided by Crossref.org
