AVID (1995) lead an underlying rationale or focus of the review. Previous studies demand shown improvement in survival rates due to treatments with amiodarone versus placebo in patients who had ventricular ectopic activity following myocardial infarction. Sotalol has also been dod for treatment of cardiac stimulate survivors and its single-valued function has been shown to be reasonable when compared to cardiac defibrillator implantation. In a 1980 study, the use of ICD was shown to be effective in three patients for whom the device born-again VTs. The use of ICD has demonstrated its ability to terminate VTs, however it is non clear whether these findings result in decreased mortality.
These finds support the set ahead i
Bocker, Haverkamp, Block, Borggrefe, Hammel, & Breithardt(1996)
Hohnloser (1999) also reviewed the top studies and provided additional information. The CASH study was initiated in 1987, included survivors of cardiac arrest and compared ICD with propafenone, metoprolol, and amiodarone. AVID is considered the largest prospective trial. The AVID study enrolled only not cardiac arrest survivors, but also utilized those with VT. ICD was compared with amiodarone or sotalol regarding primary endpoint of total mortality. CIDS used patients which were mistakable to those found in AVID. Most patients however, used drug therapy along with ICD. These 3 studies enrolled a total of 2,024 patients.
Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.
No comments:
Post a Comment