Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28862957›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2017

Mortality Implications of Appropriate Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Therapy in Secondary Prevention Patients: Contrasting Mortality in Primary Prevention Patients From a Prospective Population-Based Registry.

Fahad Almehmadi, Andreu Porta-Sánchez, Andrew C T Ha, Hadas D Fischer, Xuesong Wang, Peter C Austin, Douglas S Lee, Kumaraswamy Nanthakumar

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Incidence and risk factors for first and recurrent ICD shock therapy in patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2025
    Article
  5. Current uses and understanding of PET imaging in cardiac sarcoidosis.American journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Fahad AlmehmadiUniversity of Toronto, Canada.
Andreu Porta-SánchezPeter Munk Cardiac Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Andrew C T HaPeter Munk Cardiac Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Hadas D FischerInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES), Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Xuesong WangInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES), Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Peter C AustinInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES), Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Douglas S LeePeter Munk Cardiac Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada kumar.nanthakumar@uhn.ca dlee@uhn.ca.
Kumaraswamy NanthakumarPeter Munk Cardiac Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada kumar.nanthakumar@uhn.ca dlee@uhn.ca.
Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences · CAUniversity of Toronto · CAUniversity Health Network · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe sought to examine the mortality impact of appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy between patients who received ICD for primary versus secondary prevention purposes. METHODS AND

resultsFrom a prospective, population-based registry, we identified 7020 patients who underwent de novo ICD implantation between February 2007 and May 2012 in Ontario, Canada. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazard modeling to adjust for differences in baseline characteristics and analyzed the mortality impact of first appropriate ICD therapy (shock and antitachycardia pacing [ATP]) as a time-varying covariate. There were 1929 (27.5%) patients who received ICDs for secondary prevention purposes. The median follow-up period was 5.02 years. Compared with those with secondary prevention ICDs, patients with primary prevention ICDs had more medical comorbidities, and lower ejection fraction. Patients who experienced appropriate ICD shock or ATP had greater risk of death compared with those who did not, irrespective of implant indication. In the primary prevention group, the adjusted hazard ratios of death for appropriate shock and ATP were 2.00 (95% CI: 1.72-2.33) and 1.73 (95% CI: 1.52-1.97), respectively. In the secondary prevention group, the adjusted hazard ratios of death for appropriate ICD shock and ATP were 1.46 (95% CI: 1.20-1.77) and 1.38 (95% CI: 1.16-1.64), respectively.

conclusionsDespite having a more favorable clinical profile, occurrence of appropriate ICD shock or ATP in patients with secondary prevention ICDs was associated with similar magnitudes of mortality risk as those with primary prevention ICDs. A heightened degree of care is warranted for all patients who experience appropriate ICD shock or ATP therapy.

Indexed as

Defibrillators, ImplantableAgedArrhythmias, CardiacCause of DeathChi-Square DistributionComorbidityDeath, Sudden, CardiacElectric CountershockFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisOntarioPrimary PreventionProportional Hazards Modelscardiac arrhythmiadeathimplantable cardioverter‐defibrillatorsuddenventricular arrhythmiaventricular fibrillation

Identifiers

PMID28862957
PMCPMC5586459
OpenAlexW2746437843

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.