[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
May 27, 2013

Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Shocks: Epidemiology, Outcomes, and Therapeutic Approaches

Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Department of Medicine, Denver Health and Hospital Authority (Dr Borne), Veterans Affairs Eastern Colorado Healthcare System (Dr Varosy), and Colorado Cardiovascular Outcomes Research Consortium (Drs Varosy and Masoudi), Denver, and Department of Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora (Drs Borne, Varosy, and Masoudi).

JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173(10):859-865. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.428

Importance Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) have revolutionized the approach to the prevention of sudden cardiac death and are commonly used in a wide range of high-risk patients, including the large population of patients with severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction. The benefit of these devices derives from their therapies, including both antitachycardia pacing and high-energy shocks. However, although these therapies may be life saving, devices can also deliver inappropriate shocks.

Objective To review ICD therapies (shocks and antitachycardia pacing), their effects on health outcomes, and current methods to reduce these therapies.

Evidence Review We reviewed clinical evidence on ICD shocks and reference lists of retrieved articles. We also examined literature about the methods of reducing ICD therapy.

Findings Both appropriate and inappropriate ICD shocks are common and are associated with an adverse effect on health outcomes, quality of life, and mortality. Several methods are available to reduce the risk of inappropriate ICD therapies.

Conclusions and Relevance Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators reduce the risk of sudden cardiac death and prolong life in selected populations; however, many patients will receive an ICD shock, either appropriate or inappropriate. It is imperative that patients be counseled regarding this risk and adverse outcomes associated with shocks. Reduction of ICD shock should be individualized to ensure that patients receiving these devices experience the maximal benefits of therapy while minimizing the adverse consequences.