Long-Term Follow-Up of DANISH (The Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of ICDs in Patients With Nonischemic Systolic Heart Failure on Mortality).

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

DANISH (The Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators [ICDs] in Patients With Nonischemic Systolic Heart Failure on Mortality) found that primary-prevention ICD implantation was not associated with an overall survival benefit in patients with nonischemic systolic heart failure during a median follow-up of 5.6 years, although there was a beneficial effect on all-cause mortality in patients ≤70 years. This study presents an additional 4 years of follow-up data from DANISH.

METHODS:

In DANISH, 556 patients with nonischemic systolic heart failure were randomized to receive an ICD and 560 to receive usual clinical care and followed until June 30, 2016. In this long-term follow-up study, patients were followed until May 18, 2020. Analyses were conducted for the overall population and according to age (≤70 and >70 years).

RESULTS:

During a median follow-up of 9.5 years (25th-75th percentile, 7.9-10.9 years), 208/556 patients (37%) in the ICD group and 226/560 patients (40%) in the control group died. Compared with the control group, the ICD group did not have significantly lower all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.89, [95% CI, 0.74-1.08]; P = 0.24). In patients ≤70 years (n = 829), all-cause mortality was lower in the ICD group than the control group (117/389 [30%] versus 158/440 [36%]; HR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.61-0.99]; P = 0.04), whereas in patients >70 years (n = 287), all-cause mortality was not significantly different between the ICD and control group (91/167 [54%] versus 68/120 [57%]; HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.67-1.28]; P = 0.75). Cardiovascular death showed similar trends (overall, 147/556 [26%] versus 164/560 [29%]; HR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.70-1.09]; P = 0.20; ≤70 years, 87/389 [22%] versus 122/440 [28%]; HR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.57-0.98]; P = 0.04; >70 years, 60/167 [36%] versus 42/120 [35%]; HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.65-1.45]; P = 0.91). The ICD group had a significantly lower incidence of sudden cardiovascular death in the overall population (35/556 [6%] versus 57/560 [10%]; HR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.40-0.92]; P = 0.02) and in patients ≤70 years (19/389 [5%] versus 49/440 [11%]; HR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.24-0.71]; P = 0.0008), but not in patients >70 years (16/167 [10%] versus 8/120 [7%]; HR, 1.34 [95% CI, 0.56-3.19]; P = 0.39).

CONCLUSIONS:

During a median follow-up of 9.5 years, ICD implantation did not provide an overall survival benefit in patients with nonischemic systolic heart failure. In patients ≤70 years, ICD implantation was associated with a lower incidence of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular death, and sudden cardiovascular death. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT00542945.

• Authors: Adelina Yafasova, Jawad H Butt, Marie B Elming, Jens C Nielsen, Jens Haarbo, Lars Videbæk, Line L Olesen, Flemming H Steffensen, Niels E Bruun, Hans Eiskjær, Axel Brandes, Anna M Thøgersen, Kenneth Egstrup, Finn Gustafsson, Christian Hassager, Jesper H Svendsen, Dan E Høfsten, Christian Torp-Pedersen, Steen Pehrson, Jens J Thune, Lars Køber
• Journal: Circulation (Circulation) Vol. 145 Issue 6 Pg. 427-436 (02 08 2022) ISSN: 1524-4539 [Electronic] United States
• PMID: 34882430 (Publication Type: Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't)

Topics

• Aged
• Defibrillators, Implantable (standards)
• Denmark
• Female
• Follow-Up Studies
• Heart Failure, Systolic (epidemiology, mortality)
• Humans
• Incidence
• Male
• Survival Analysis