Subcutaneous versus transvenous implantable defibrillator: An updated meta-analysis
- PMID: 33212250
- DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2020.11.013
Subcutaneous versus transvenous implantable defibrillator: An updated meta-analysis
Abstract
Background: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) placement is a well-established therapy for prevention of sudden cardiac death. The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) was specifically designed to overcome some of the complications related to the transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (TV-ICD), such as lead complications and systemic infections. Evidence on the comparison of S-ICD vs TV-ICD are limited.
Objective: The purpose of this study was to conduct an updated meta-analysis comparing S-ICD vs TV-ICD.
Methods: Electronic databases were searched for studies directly comparing clinical outcomes and complications between S-ICD and TV-ICD. The primary outcome was the composite of clinically relevant complications (lead, pocket, major procedural complications; device-related infections) and inappropriate shocks. Secondary outcomes included death and the individual components of the primary outcome.
Results: Thirteen studies comprising 9073 patients were included in the analysis. Mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 40% ± 10%; 30% of patients were female; and 73% had an ICD implanted for primary prevention. There was no statistically significant difference in the risk of the primary outcome between S-ICD and TV-ICD (odds ratio [OR] 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53-1.19). Patients with S-ICD had lower risk of lead complications (OR 0.14; 95% CI 0.06-0.29; P <.00001) and major procedural complications (OR 0.18; 95% CI 0.06-0.57; P = .003) but higher risk of pocket complications (OR 2.18; 95% CI 1.30-3.66; P = .003) compared to those with TV-ICD. No significant differences were found for the other outcomes.
Conclusion: In patients with an indication for ICD without the need for pacing, TV-ICD and S-ICD are overall comparable in terms of the composite of clinically relevant device-related complications and inappropriate shock.
Keywords: Appropriate therapy; Complications; Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator; Inappropriate therapy; Subcutaneous; Transvenous.
Copyright © 2020 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
Subcutaneous Versus Transvenous Implantable Defibrillator Therapy: A Meta-Analysis of Case-Control Studies.JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2017 Dec 26;3(13):1475-1483. doi: 10.1016/j.jacep.2017.07.017. Epub 2017 Sep 27. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2017. PMID: 29759827
-
Long-Term Clinical Outcomes of Subcutaneous Versus Transvenous Implantable Defibrillator Therapy.J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016 Nov 8;68(19):2047-2055. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.08.044. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016. PMID: 27810043 Clinical Trial.
-
Subcutaneous versus transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillators in children and young adults: A meta-analysis.Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2022 Dec;45(12):1409-1414. doi: 10.1111/pace.14603. Epub 2022 Oct 27. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2022. PMID: 36214206
-
Propensity score matched comparison of subcutaneous and transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy in the SIMPLE and EFFORTLESS studies.Europace. 2018 Sep 1;20(FI2):f240-f248. doi: 10.1093/europace/euy083. Europace. 2018. PMID: 29771327
-
Comparative Assessment of Transvenous versus Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillator Therapy Outcomes: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Int J Cardiol. 2022 Feb 15;349:62-78. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2021.11.029. Epub 2021 Nov 19. Int J Cardiol. 2022. PMID: 34801615
Cited by
-
The ATLAS Randomised Clinical Trial: What do the Superiority Results Mean for Subcutaneous ICD Therapy and Sudden Cardiac Death Prevention as a Whole?Arrhythm Electrophysiol Rev. 2022 Apr;11:Suppl 1. doi: 10.15420/aer.2022.11.S1. Arrhythm Electrophysiol Rev. 2022. PMID: 36313240 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Comparison of Preoperative ECG Screening and Device-Based Vector Analysis in Patients Receiving a Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator.Medicina (Kaunas). 2023 Dec 16;59(12):2186. doi: 10.3390/medicina59122186. Medicina (Kaunas). 2023. PMID: 38138289 Free PMC article.
-
Measures to Prevent Infection in Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Replacements or Upgrades.Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2024 Jan 10;25(1):19. doi: 10.31083/j.rcm2501019. eCollection 2024 Jan. Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2024. PMID: 39077641 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Utilization of Subcutaneous Cardioverter-Defibrillator in Poland and Europe-Comparison of the Results of Multi-Center Registries.Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Jul 5;18(13):7178. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18137178. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021. PMID: 34281115 Free PMC article.
-
Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator: A Contemporary Overview.Life (Basel). 2023 Jul 28;13(8):1652. doi: 10.3390/life13081652. Life (Basel). 2023. PMID: 37629509 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical