Drugs, Surgery, Cardioverter Defibrillator: A Decision Based on the Clinical Problem.

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Title:	Drugs, Surgery, Cardioverter Defibrillator: A Decision Based on the Clinical Problem.
Authors:	Capucci, Alessandro¹, Boriani, Giuseppe¹
Source:	Pacing & Clinical Electrophysiology. Mar1993, Vol. 16 Issue 3, p519-526. 8p.
Subjects:	Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, Implanted cardiovascular instruments, Drugs, Surgery, Myocardial depressants, Ventricular fibrillation, Cardiac arrest
Abstract:	These three therapeutic options are the basis of sudden cardiac death prevention: antiarrhythmic drugs, surgery, and automatic implantable cardioverter defibrillator. Each of these treatments has specific favorable and unfavorable indications. Antiarrhythmic drugs are mainly limited by the low therapeutic profile, proarrhythmic effects, complex pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, possible negative inotropic effects, and the possible change of the organic substratum. Arrhythmia surgery may be limited by the need of a highly trained center, by a relatively high perioperative mortality (up to 15%), and by limited electrophysiological and clinical indications. The implantable cardioverter defibrillator is an expensive tool with a theoretically wide range of clinical indications, with already proven efficacy in converting ventricular fibrillation to sinus rhythm but with unproven efficacy on prolonging survival because of a lack of controlled trials (which, we must admit, is also true for drugs and surgery). The results of the ongoing multicenter trials on this item will clarify this clinical point. The choice among these different therapeutic options is mainly based on hemodynamic status (ejection fraction), feasibility of a surgical treatment, and the electrophysiological characteristics of the ventricular arrhythmia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
	Copyright of Pacing & Clinical Electrophysiology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database:	Engineering Source

Description
Abstract:	These three therapeutic options are the basis of sudden cardiac death prevention: antiarrhythmic drugs, surgery, and automatic implantable cardioverter defibrillator. Each of these treatments has specific favorable and unfavorable indications. Antiarrhythmic drugs are mainly limited by the low therapeutic profile, proarrhythmic effects, complex pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, possible negative inotropic effects, and the possible change of the organic substratum. Arrhythmia surgery may be limited by the need of a highly trained center, by a relatively high perioperative mortality (up to 15%), and by limited electrophysiological and clinical indications. The implantable cardioverter defibrillator is an expensive tool with a theoretically wide range of clinical indications, with already proven efficacy in converting ventricular fibrillation to sinus rhythm but with unproven efficacy on prolonging survival because of a lack of controlled trials (which, we must admit, is also true for drugs and surgery). The results of the ongoing multicenter trials on this item will clarify this clinical point. The choice among these different therapeutic options is mainly based on hemodynamic status (ejection fraction), feasibility of a surgical treatment, and the electrophysiological characteristics of the ventricular arrhythmia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:	01478389
DOI:	10.1111/j.1540-8159.1993.tb01619.x