loading page

The mortality analysis of primary prevention patients receiving a cardiac resynchronization defibrillator (CRT-D) or implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) according to guideline indications in the Improve SCA Study.
  • +12
  • Chi Keong Ching,
  • Yu-Cheng Hsieh,
  • Yen-Bin Liu,
  • Diego Rodriguez,
  • Young-Hoon Kim,
  • Boyoung Joung,
  • Balbir Singh,
  • Dejia Huang,
  • Azlan Hussin,
  • Alexander Chasnoits,
  • Janet OBrien,
  • Jeffrey Cerkvenik,
  • Daniel Lexcen,
  • Brian Van Dorn ,
  • Shu Zhang
Chi Keong Ching
National Heart Centre Singapore

Corresponding Author:[email protected]

Author Profile
Yu-Cheng Hsieh
Cardiovascular center
Author Profile
Yen-Bin Liu
Cardiovascular Center and Division of Cardiology
Author Profile
Diego Rodriguez
Fundacion Cardioinfantil Instituto de Cardiologia
Author Profile
Young-Hoon Kim
Korea University Medical Centrer
Author Profile
Boyoung Joung
Yonsei Cardiovascular Center and Cardiovascular Research
Author Profile
Balbir Singh
Medanta The Medicity
Author Profile
Dejia Huang
West China Hospital of Medicine
Author Profile
Azlan Hussin
National Heart Institute
Author Profile
Alexander Chasnoits
Republican Scientific Practical Centre Cardiology
Author Profile
Janet OBrien
Medtronic Operational Headquarters
Author Profile
Jeffrey Cerkvenik
Author Profile
Daniel Lexcen
Medtronic plc
Author Profile
Brian Van Dorn
Medtronic Operational Headquarters
Author Profile
Shu Zhang
Fuwai hospital and cardiovascular institute, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Peking Union Medical College
Author Profile


Background: Despite a proven mortality benefit in primary prevention (PP) patients, the utilization of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillators (CRT-D) remains low in many geographies. Purpose: The objective of this analysis was to examine the mortality benefit in PP patients by guideline-indicated device type: implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D). Methods: Improve SCA was a prospective, non-randomized, non-blinded multicenter trial that enrolled patients from regions where ICD utilization is low. PP patient’s CRT-D or ICD eligibility was based upon the 2008 ACC/AHA/HRS and 2006 ESC guidelines. Mortality was assessed according to guideline-indicated device type comparing implanted and non-implanted patients. Cox proportional hazards methods were used, adjusting for known factors affecting mortality risk. Results: Among 2,618 PP patients followed for a mean of 20.8 ± 10.8 months, 1,073 were indicated for a CRT-D, and 1,545 were indicated for an ICD. PP CRT-D-indicated patients who received CRT-D therapy had a 58% risk reduction in mortality compared to those without implant (adjusted HR 0.42, 95% CI: 0.28-0.61, P<0.0001). PP patients with an ICD indication had a 43% risk reduction in mortality with an ICD implant compared with no implant (adjusted HR 0.57, 95% CI: 0.41-0.81, P=0.002). Conclusions: This analysis confirms the mortality benefit of adherence to guideline-indicated implantable defibrillation therapy for PP patients in geographies where ICD therapy was underutilized. These results affirm that medical practice should follow clinical guidelines when choosing therapy for PP patients who meet the respective defibrillator device implant indication.
07 Apr 2021Submitted to Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology
10 Apr 2021Submission Checks Completed
10 Apr 2021Assigned to Editor
22 Apr 2021Reviewer(s) Assigned
06 May 2021Review(s) Completed, Editorial Evaluation Pending
10 May 2021Editorial Decision: Revise Minor
10 Jun 20211st Revision Received
21 Jun 2021Submission Checks Completed
21 Jun 2021Assigned to Editor
21 Jun 2021Reviewer(s) Assigned
21 Jun 2021Review(s) Completed, Editorial Evaluation Pending
28 Jun 2021Editorial Decision: Accept
Aug 2021Published in Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology volume 32 issue 8 on pages 2285-2294. 10.1111/jce.15149