SAFETYLIT WEEKLY UPDATE

We compile citations and summaries of about 400 new articles every week.
RSS Feed

HELP: Tutorials | FAQ
CONTACT US: Contact info

Search Results

Journal Article

Citation

Curnis A, Mascioli G, Bontempi L, Cerini M, Bignotti T, Bonetti G, Dei Cas L. J. Cardiovasc. Med. (LWW) 2008; 9(12): 1241-1245.

Affiliation

Electrophysiology Laboratory, Department and Chair of Cardiology, Spedali Civili and University of Brescia, Italy. antonio.curnis@libero.it

Copyright

(Copyright © 2008, Lippincott Williams and Wilkins)

DOI

10.2459/JCM.0b013e3283108818

PMID

19001931

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implant indications have widened in recent years after the publication of the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial 2 and the Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Trial. On the contrary, guidelines on resumption of driving after ICD implant were published almost 10 years ago when the ICD implant rate was much lower and candidates were generally older. AIM OF THE STUDY: The overall objective of our study was to evaluate whether patients implanted with ICDs have higher risk than the general driving population. The specific aim of the study was to verify the rate of car accidents in patients implanted with an ICD, both for primary and secondary indication, and compare this with the rate of accidents in the general population. The primary end point of the study was the annual car accident rate; the secondary end point was to determine if there were subgroups of patients with a higher risk of car accidents. METHODS: All patients (612) followed up in our outpatient clinic were sent a questionnaire in which they were asked five questions regarding their driving habits before and after ICD implant and, specifically, whether they had been involved in a car accident after the implant. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-six patients (47%) responded to the questionnaire. Seventy-one patients had never driven; two patients were forbidden to drive for professional reasons (one bus and one truck driver). Two hundred thirteen (74.5% of all responding) patients (201 men, mean age 62 +/- 11 years) continued to drive after ICD implant. During the follow-up (1430 +/- 920 days) 11 patients had been involved in car accidents and, importantly 10 out of 11 were innocent bystanders. Thus, in 996 patient-years, 11 events happened, yielding an annual event rate of 1.1% per patient-years (and only 0.1% in which the driver could had been responsible). CONCLUSION: Car accidents are infrequent in patients implanted with an ICD, and - in any case - not more frequent than in the general population. The old guidelines need to be updated and specific restrictions on car driving in ICD patients need to be revised to reflect the current data.


Language: en

NEW SEARCH


All SafetyLit records are available for automatic download to Zotero & Mendeley
Print