Forskning
Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Region Hovedstaden - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital
Udgivet

Editorial Commentary: When should the patient with an inherited cardiac disease have an ICD?

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftLederForskningpeer review

DOI

  1. Editorial commentary: Subclinical thyroid dysfunction and cardiovascular risk: Nothing to lose, everything to gain?

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. Change in body mass index from childhood onwards and risk of adult cardiovascular disease

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftReviewForskningpeer review

  3. An overview of current and emerging devices for percutaneous left atrial appendage closure

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftReviewForskningpeer review

  4. Current use of beta-blockers in patients with coronary artery disease

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftReviewForskningpeer review

  1. Diabetes and the Risk of Sudden Cardiac Death

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftReviewForskningpeer review

  2. Defibrillators for prevention from sudden cardiac death: is it that easy?-Authors' reply

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. Transethnic Genome-Wide Association Study Provides Insights in the Genetic Architecture and Heritability of Long QT Syndrome

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  4. Sudden cardiac death among persons with diabetes aged 1-49 years: a 10-year nationwide study of 14 294 deaths in Denmark

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Vis graf over relationer

The implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is often considered a routine intervention for an inherited heart rhythm disorder (IHRD) despite there being little to no randomized data for non-ischemic indications. Furthermore, existing IHRD studies often do not report adverse ICD outcomes, and observational data increasingly show that complications are under-recognized. Only recently have tools emerged to address the rational use of ICDs for specific forms of IHRD, although the acceptable risk of device complications remains unestablished. Here, we summarize the evidence of ICD benefit and harm in IHRD, highlight current knowledge gaps, and propose alternative and adjunctive options to the transvenous ICD.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftTrends in Cardiovascular Medicine
Vol/bind30
Udgave nummer7
Sider (fra-til)422-423
Antal sider2
ISSN1050-1738
DOI
StatusUdgivet - okt. 2020

Bibliografisk note

Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

ID: 59483929