The effect of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in patients with diabetes and non-ischaemic systolic heart failure. Issue 8 (28th April 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Rørth, Rasmus; Thune, Jens Jakob; Nielsen, Jens C; Haarbo, Jens; Videbæk, Lars; Korup, Eva; Signorovitch, James; Bruun, Niels E; Eiskjær, Hans; Hassager, Christian; Svendsen, Jesper Hastrup; Høfsten, Dan E; Torp-Pedersen, Christian; Pehrson, Steen; Køber, Lars; Kristensen, Søren L
• Is Part Of: Europace. Volume 21:Issue 8(2019)
• Page Start: 1203
• Page End: 1210
• Publication Date: 2019-04-28
• Subjects: Diabetes -- Non-ischaemic systolic heart failure -- Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator; Arrhythmia -- Treatment -- Periodicals; Cardiac pacing -- Periodicals; Catheter ablation -- Periodicals; Heart -- Physiology -- Periodicals; Electrophysiology -- Periodicals; 617.4120645
• DOI: 10.1093/europace/euz114
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1099-5129

Abstract

Abstract: Aims: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation reduce the risk of sudden cardiac death, but not all-cause death in patients with non-ischaemic systolic heart failure (HF). Whether co-existence of diabetes affects ICD treatment effects is unclear. Methods and results: We examined the effect of ICD implantation on risk of all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and sudden cardiac death (SCD) according to diabetes status at baseline in the Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of ICDs in Patients with Non-ischaemic Systolic Heart Failure on Mortality (DANISH) trial. Outcomes were analysed by use of cumulative incidence curves and Cox regressions models. Of the 1116 patients enrolled, 211 (19%) had diabetes at baseline. Patients with diabetes were more obese, had worse kidney function and more were in New York Heart Association Class III/IV. The risk of device infections and other complications in the ICD group was similar among patients with and without diabetes (6.1% vs. 4.6% P = 0.54). Irrespective of treatment group, diabetes was associated with higher risk of all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and SCD. The treatment effect of ICD in patients with diabetes vs. patients without diabetes was hazard ratio (HR) = 0.92 (0.57–1.50) vs. HR = 0.85 (0.63–1.13); P interaction = 0.60 for all-cause mortality, HR = 0.99 (0.58–1.70) vs. HR = 0.70 (0.48–1.01); P interaction = 0.25 for cardiovascular death, and HR = 0.81 (0.35–1.88) vs. HR = 0.40 (0.22–0.76); P interaction = 0.16 for sudden cardiac death. Conclusion: Among patients with non-ischaemic systolic HF, diabetes was associated with higher incidence of all-cause mortality, primarily driven by cardiovascular mortality including SCD. Treatment effect of ICD therapy was not significantly modified by diabetes which might be due to lack of power.