What patient criteria was there for MADIT and what changed for MADIT II?
Proven VT with an EP procedure? Patients with previous cardiac arrest? EF >35%?
What did MADIT I and II demonstrate?
That ICDs are indicated for those with CAD.
What did the COMPANION study demonstrate?
(comparison of medical therapy, pacing and defibrillation in HF) showed that CRTP and CRTD significantly reduced mortality compared to medical therapy.
What did the DAVID study show?
Pacing ICD patients DDD@70bpm was associated with a higher mortality than pacing patients VVI@40bpm.
What did the CARE-HF study show?
CRT significantly reduces the risk of death in patients with a QRS duration >120ms and HF. Also improved symptoms.
What did MADIT-RIT demonstrate?
That prolonged intervals for detection improved outcomes/reduced shocks.
What did the AVID study show?
ICDs reduced all-cause mortality significantly compared to antiarrhythmic medication.
What did UKPACE show?
Pacing elderly patients DDD vs VVI for atrioventricular block. No statistically significant difference in mortality.
What did SCD-HeFT show?
ICD vs amiodarone. ICDs significantly reduced all-cause mortality for patients with HF and EF<35%.
What did MUSTT show?
(multicentre unsustained tachycardia trial) showed EP guided antiarrhythmic therapy WITH ICDs, but NOT antiarrhythmic drugs alone, reduces the risk of SCD in those with CAD. Inclusion criteria is MI, ETT within 6 months of the trial beginning, EF <40%, NSVT asymptomatic. Excludes with sustained VT/VF.
