Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in patients with CKD: a propensity-matched mortality analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Benefits of transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) in prevention of sudden cardiac death among the general population are proven. However, the benefit of ICDs remains unclear in CKD. A propensity-matched analysis was conducted to examine the survival benefits of ICDs placed for primary prevention in those with CKD not on dialysis (eGFR<60 ml/min per 1.73 m(2)).

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: The Cleveland Clinic CKD registry was utilized to identify individuals who had an echocardiogram at the institution (between 2001 and October 2011). A propensity score of the likelihood of receiving an ICD was developed with the following variables: demographics, comorbid conditions, use of cardioprotective medications, eGFR, left ventricular ejection fraction, and ventricular arrhythmia. One-to-one greedy matching was used with 0.1 caliper width to match patients with and without an ICD. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to examine survival of matched patients with and without an ICD.

RESULTS: This study included 1053 ICD patients and 9435 potential controls. Of 1053 ICD patients (60%), 631 were matched to the control group. During a median follow-up of 2.9 years (25th and 75th percentiles, 1.5, 4.7), 578 patients died. After adjusting for covariates, the hazard of mortality among propensity-matched patients was 0.69 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.59 to 0.82) for the ICD group compared with the non-ICD group. A significant interaction was found between ICDs and eGFR (P=0.04). Presence of an ICD was associated with a lower risk of death among those with eGFRs of 45-59 ml/min per 1.73 m(2) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.77) and 30-44 ml/min per 1.73 m(2) (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.85), but not among those with eGFRs<30 ml/min per 1.73 m(2) (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.35).

CONCLUSIONS: Transvenous ICDs placed for primary prevention are associated with a survival benefit in those with stage 3 CKD, but not in those with stage 4 CKD.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app