Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29317975›Full record

ArticleCardiology research2017

Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators Implantation Without Defibrillation Threshold Testing: A Single Center Experience.

Bandar Al-Ghamdi, Azam Shafquat, Nadiah Alruwaili, Shisamma Emmanual, Mohamed Shoukri, Yaseen Mallawi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cardiology research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. S-ICD Implantation "Tips and Tricks".Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2023
    Review
  4. Real-Life Inter-Rater Variability of the PRAETORIAN Score Values.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Defibrillation testing during implantation of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: a necessary standard or becoming redundant?Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2020
    Review
  7. New Therapy, New Complications.JACC. Case reports · 2020
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Bandar Al-GhamdiHeart Center, King Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Centre, Zahrawi St, Al Maather, Riyadh 12713, Saudi Arabia.
Azam ShafquatHeart Center, King Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Centre, Zahrawi St, Al Maather, Riyadh 12713, Saudi Arabia.
Nadiah AlruwailiHeart Center, King Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Centre, Zahrawi St, Al Maather, Riyadh 12713, Saudi Arabia.
Shisamma EmmanualHeart Center, King Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Centre, Zahrawi St, Al Maather, Riyadh 12713, Saudi Arabia.
Mohamed ShoukriCell Biology Department, King Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Centre, Zahrawi St, Al Maather, Riyadh 12713, Saudi Arabia.
Yaseen MallawiHeart Center, King Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Centre, Zahrawi St, Al Maather, Riyadh 12713, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSubcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) system has been proven to be an effective therapy for prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in selected patients. Although the Shockless IMPLant Evaluation (SIMPLE) trial has shown that defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing is not necessary for transvenous ICD (TV-ICD) systems, it is still recommended for S-ICD systems. We aimed to study the efficacy and safety of S-ICD implantation without DFT in our Heart Center with the comparison of S-ICD patients' outcome to those with a single chamber TV-ICD without DFT in the same period.

methodsA retrospective analysis of patients underwent S-ICD without DFT from December 2014 to May 2016 with the comparison to single chamber TV-ICD patients implanted during the same period.

resultsThirty consecutive patients (23 males (76.7%); mean age 41 ± 13 years; mean left ventricular ejection fraction 30±12%) received a S-ICD for primary (25 patients, 83.3%) or secondary prevention (five patients, 16.7%) of SCD. During a mean follow-up of 710.6 ± 190 days, three patients received 38 appropriate ICD shocks (90.5%), and two patients received four inappropriate shocks (9.5%). There were two mortalities (6.7%): one cardiac and one non-cardiac. When compared to 30 consecutive who received a single chamber TV-ICD during the same period, there was no significant difference in mortality.

conclusionsImplantation of S-ICD using intermuscular approach without DFT seems to be safe and effective. Data from large S-ICD registries with long-term follow-up, and preferably randomized controlled studies, are needed to confirm this finding.

Indexed as

ComplicationsDefibrillation threshold testingShocksSubcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillatorsTransvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator

Identifiers

PMID29317975
PMCPMC5755664

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.