Faculty Bibliography

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) have been demonstrated to improve survival for both primary and secondary prevention of sudden cardiac arrest. However, studies suggest that ICD therapy is underused in appropriate candidates. Sex and racial disparities in ICD use have been suggested. We sought to characterize the referral patterns of high-risk patients for the primary prophylaxis of sudden cardiac arrest at a tertiary academic medical center serving a diverse population in an urban US setting. Electronic hospital databases were retrospective reviewed for patients meeting criteria for prophylactic ICD implantation. We evaluated the association of gender, age, race, and primary language with the referral and subsequent implantation of an ICD. We identified 1,055 patients satisfying prophylactic ICD criteria: 600 men, mean age 62.6 years, 27.6% black, 19.3% white, 23.3% Hispanic, and 49.8% primary language of English. Of the 673 patients (63.7%) referred for ICD evaluation, 345 underwent implantation, 125 declined, and 203 had significant co-morbidities that precluded implantation. Gender, race, and primary language were not associated with referral for ICD or with decision to proceed with implantation. Patients of increased age were less likely to be referred for ICD and were more likely to refuse implantation. ICD therapy was not considered in 146 patients eligible for prophylactic implantation. In conclusion, referral rates for ICD consideration were higher at our institution than in previous reports. Nonetheless, 14% of appropriate patients were not considered. This argues for the importance of increased education for patients and referring physicians.

BACKGROUND: Nonvalvular atrial fibrillation is the most common arrhythmia. Patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation are at increased risk of stroke; therefore, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of different approaches to prevent this major complication. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted electronic database searches of phase III randomized controlled trials. The groups were novel oral anticoagulants, Watchman left atrial appendage occlusion device (DEVICE), and warfarin. Efficacy outcomes were stroke or systemic embolism, and all-cause mortality. Safety outcome was major bleeding and procedure-related complications. A subgroup analysis of the elderly population was done. We used random-effects model to compare pooled outcomes and tested for heterogeneity. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed for each outcome. Seven randomized controlled trials (n=73,978) were included. There was a significant difference favoring novel oral anticoagulants for systemic embolism (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.72-0.97; P=0.01), all-cause mortality (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.84-0.94; P<0.001), and safety outcomes (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.65-0.97; P=0.026) compared with warfarin. No difference was seen between DEVICE and warfarin for efficacy end points; however, DEVICE had more complications (OR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.14-3.01; P=0.012). In the elderly (6 randomized controlled trials, n=30,699), systemic embolism was favored with novel oral anticoagulants over warfarin (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.68-0.87; P