Skip to main content
Journal cover image

A comparison of antiarrhythmic-drug therapy with implantable defibrillators in patients resuscitated from near-fatal ventricular arrhythmias.

Publication ,  Journal Article
Antiarrhythmics versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) Investigators,
Published in: N Engl J Med
November 27, 1997

BACKGROUND: Patients who survive life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias are at risk for recurrent arrhythmias. They can be treated with either an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator or antiarrhythmic drugs, but the relative efficacy of these two treatment strategies is unknown. METHODS: To address this issue, we conducted a randomized comparison of these two treatment strategies in patients who had been resuscitated from near-fatal ventricular fibrillation or who had undergone cardioversion from sustained ventricular tachycardia. Patients with ventricular tachycardia also had either syncope or other serious cardiac symptoms, along with a left ventricular ejection fraction of 0.40 or less. One group of patients was treated with implantation of a cardioverter-defibrillator; the other received class III antiarrhythmic drugs, primarily amiodarone at empirically determined doses. Fifty-six clinical centers screened all patients who presented with ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation during a period of nearly four years. Of 1016 patients (45 percent of whom had ventricular fibrillation, and 55 percent ventricular tachycardia), 507 were randomly assigned to treatment with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators and 509 to antiarrhythmic-drug therapy. The primary end point was overall mortality. RESULTS: Follow-up was complete for 1013 patients (99.7 percent). Overall survival was greater with the implantable defibrillator, with unadjusted estimates of 89.3 percent, as compared with 82.3 percent in the antiarrhythmic-drug group at one year, 81.6 percent versus 74.7 percent at two years, and 75.4 percent versus 64.1 percent at three years (P<0.02). The corresponding reductions in mortality (with 95 percent confidence limits) with the implantable defibrillator were 39+/-20 percent, 27+/-21 percent, and 31+/-21 percent CONCLUSIONS: Among survivors of ventricular fibrillation or sustained ventricular tachycardia causing severe symptoms, the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator is superior to antiarrhythmic drugs for increasing overall survival.

Duke Scholars

Altmetric Attention Stats
Dimensions Citation Stats

Published In

N Engl J Med

DOI

ISSN

0028-4793

Publication Date

November 27, 1997

Volume

337

Issue

22

Start / End Page

1576 / 1583

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Ventricular Fibrillation
  • Tachycardia, Ventricular
  • Survival Analysis
  • Statistics, Nonparametric
  • Sotalol
  • Resuscitation
  • Middle Aged
  • Male
  • Humans
  • General & Internal Medicine
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Antiarrhythmics versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) Investigators, . (1997). A comparison of antiarrhythmic-drug therapy with implantable defibrillators in patients resuscitated from near-fatal ventricular arrhythmias. N Engl J Med, 337(22), 1576–1583. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199711273372202
Antiarrhythmics versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) Investigators, B. “A comparison of antiarrhythmic-drug therapy with implantable defibrillators in patients resuscitated from near-fatal ventricular arrhythmias.N Engl J Med 337, no. 22 (November 27, 1997): 1576–83. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199711273372202.
Antiarrhythmics versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) Investigators. A comparison of antiarrhythmic-drug therapy with implantable defibrillators in patients resuscitated from near-fatal ventricular arrhythmias. N Engl J Med. 1997 Nov 27;337(22):1576–83.
Antiarrhythmics versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) Investigators, B. “A comparison of antiarrhythmic-drug therapy with implantable defibrillators in patients resuscitated from near-fatal ventricular arrhythmias.N Engl J Med, vol. 337, no. 22, Nov. 1997, pp. 1576–83. Pubmed, doi:10.1056/NEJM199711273372202.
Antiarrhythmics versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) Investigators. A comparison of antiarrhythmic-drug therapy with implantable defibrillators in patients resuscitated from near-fatal ventricular arrhythmias. N Engl J Med. 1997 Nov 27;337(22):1576–1583.
Journal cover image

Published In

N Engl J Med

DOI

ISSN

0028-4793

Publication Date

November 27, 1997

Volume

337

Issue

22

Start / End Page

1576 / 1583

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Ventricular Fibrillation
  • Tachycardia, Ventricular
  • Survival Analysis
  • Statistics, Nonparametric
  • Sotalol
  • Resuscitation
  • Middle Aged
  • Male
  • Humans
  • General & Internal Medicine