Role of wearable and automatic external defibrillators in improving survival in patients at risk for sudden cardiac death

Byron K. Lee, MD, MAS Electrophysiology and Arrhythmia Service, University of California, San Francisco, Division of Cardiology, 500 Parnassus Avenue, Box 1354, MU 429, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA. .
Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine 10/2009; 11(5):360-5. DOI: 10.1007/s11936-009-0036-2
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Cardiac arrest is a vexing public health problem. Fortunately, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) have been proven to decrease overall mortality in several populations at high risk for cardiac arrest. However, it is still unclear how to treat patients who have an elevated risk of cardiac arrest but are not in one of the identified high-risk groups proven to benefit from an ICD. It also is uncertain how to manage high-risk patients who have an accepted indication for an ICD but are unable or unwilling to have an ICD. In these clinical situations, the wearable defibrillator and automatic external defibrillator are options that should be considered. Both devices have been shown in small series to be highly effective at restoring sinus rhythm in patients with a ventricular tachyarrhythmia. However, there is still a lack of large-scale trials proving that these devices should be employed routinely in specific high-risk patient populations.

2 Reads
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: It is now more than 50 years since the time when clinical monitoring of individuals in the home and community settings was first envisioned. Until recently, technologies to enable such vision were lacking. However, wearable sensors and systems developed over the past decade have provided the tools to finally implement and deploy technology with the capabilities required by researchers in the field of patients' home monitoring. As discussed, potential applications of these technologies include the early diagnosis of diseases such as congestive heart failure, the prevention of chronic conditions such as diabetes, improved clinical management of neurodegenerative conditions such as Parkinson's disease, and the ability to promptly respond to emergency situations such as seizures in patients with epilepsy and cardiac arrest in subjects undergoing cardiovascular monitoring. Current research efforts are now focused on the development of more complex systems for home monitoring of individuals with a variety of preclinical and clinical conditions. Recent research on the clinical assessment of wearable technology promises to deliver methodologies that are expected to lead to clinical adoption within the next five to ten years. In particular, combining home robots and wearable technology is likely to be a key step toward achieving the goal of effectively monitoring patients in the home. These efforts to merge home robots and wearable technology are expected to enable a new generation of complex systems with the ability to monitor subjects' status, facilitate the administration of interventions, and provide an invaluable tool to respond to emergency situations.
    IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine 07/2010; 29(3):25-36. DOI:10.1109/MEMB.2010.936554 · 26.30 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: Extensive efforts have been made in both academia and industry in the research and development of smart wearable systems (SWS) for health monitoring (HM). Primarily influenced by skyrocketing healthcare costs and supported by recent technological advances in micro- and nanotechnologies, miniaturisation of sensors, and smart fabrics, the continuous advances in SWS will progressively change the landscape of healthcare by allowing individual management and continuous monitoring of a patient's health status. Consisting of various components and devices, ranging from sensors and actuators to multimedia devices, these systems support complex healthcare applications and enable low-cost wearable, non-invasive alternatives for continuous 24-h monitoring of health, activity, mobility, and mental status, both indoors and outdoors. Our objective has been to examine the current research in wearable to serve as references for researchers and provide perspectives for future research. Methods: Herein, we review the current research and development of and the challenges facing SWS for HM, focusing on multi-parameter physiological sensor systems and activity and mobility measurement system designs that reliably measure mobility or vital signs and integrate real-time decision support processing for disease prevention, symptom detection, and diagnosis. For this literature review, we have chosen specific selection criteria to include papers in which wearable systems or devices are covered. Results: We describe the state of the art in SWS and provide a survey of recent implementations of wearable health-care systems. We describe current issues, challenges, and prospects of SWS. Conclusion: We conclude by identifying the future challenges facing SWS for HM.
    Artificial intelligence in medicine 10/2012; 56(3). DOI:10.1016/j.artmed.2012.09.003 · 2.02 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Implantation of implantable cardioverter defibrillator for prevention of sudden cardiac death is deferred for 90 days after coronary revascularization, but mortality may be highest early after cardiac procedures in patients with ventricular dysfunction. We determined mortality risk in postrevascularization patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% and compared survival with those discharged with a wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD). Methods and results: Hospital survivors after surgical (coronary artery bypass graft surgery) or percutaneous (percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI]) revascularization with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% were included from Cleveland Clinic and national WCD registries. Kaplan-Meier, Cox proportional hazards, propensity score-matched survival, and hazard function analyses were performed. Early mortality hazard was higher among 4149 patients discharged without a defibrillator compared with 809 with WCDs (90-day mortality post-coronary artery bypass graft surgery 7% versus 3%, P=0.03; post-PCI 10% versus 2%, P<0.0001). WCD use was associated with adjusted lower risks of long-term mortality in the total cohort (39%, P<0.0001) and both post-coronary artery bypass graft surgery (38%, P=0.048) and post-PCI (57%, P<0.0001) cohorts (mean follow-up, 3.2 years). In propensity-matched analyses, WCD use remained associated with lower mortality (58% post-coronary artery bypass graft surgery, P=0.002; 67% post-PCI, P<0.0001). Mortality differences were not attributable solely to therapies for ventricular arrhythmia. Only 1.3% of the WCD group had a documented appropriate therapy. Conclusions: Patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% have higher early compared to late mortality after coronary revascularization, particularly after PCI. As early hazard seemed less marked in WCD users, prospective studies in this high-risk population are indicated to confirm whether WCD use as a bridge to left ventricular ejection fraction improvement or implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation can improve outcomes after coronary revascularization.
    Circulation Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology 12/2012; 6(1). DOI:10.1161/CIRCEP.112.973552 · 4.51 Impact Factor
Show more