Arrhythmias & electrophysiology
Wearable Defibrillator to Improve Accuracy in Selecting Candidates to Implantable Defibrillator: A Real-World Experience
Authors' conclusion
WCD may represent a cost-effective strategy to more accurately select candidates for the primary prevention ICD implant among high-risk patients with HFrEF.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) at high risk of arrhythmias, recruited in the acute phase
- Participants
- 41 patients
- Exposure
- Wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) vs early implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) during the guideline waiting period
- WCDn = 26
- Early ICDn = 15reference
- Outcome
- LVEF recovery
- Follow-up
- End of waiting period
Methodological detailsparallel cohort, consecutive patients
- Parallel cohort
- Consecutive patients
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
P = 0.84
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
Relevant ventricular arrhythmias · waiting period
P = 0.22
Average cost per patient · end of waiting period
difference −19.9
- Relevant ventricular arrhythmias — None of the patients with arrhythmias had subsequent left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) recovery
- 0
- Average cost per patient — Projected cost savings with WCD over 10 years
- −41.2%
Original publication
Wearable Defibrillator to Improve Accuracy in Selecting Candidates to Implantable Defibrillator: A Real-World Experience. ESC Heart Fail. Published 1 August 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →