MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410620674 · doi:10.1093/europace/euaf085.087

Contemporary outcomes of implantable cardioverter defibrillator patients on amiodarone

2025· article· en· W4410620674 on OpenAlexaff
Nasser Alsolaia, A Assaedi, Calum J. Redpath, D Ramirez, Pablo B. Nery, Simon P. Hansom, Geetha Nair, Andrés Klein, David Birnie, Mehrdad Golian

Bibliographic record

VenueEP Europace · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImplantable cardioverter-defibrillatorAmiodaroneMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineDefibrillationIntensive care medicineMedical emergencyAtrial fibrillation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) frequently experience shocks due to arrhythmias. Current treatment options include ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation, clinical follow-up, and antiarrhythmic medications like amiodarone. However, outcomes for patients initiated on amiodarone with an ICD in place remain unclear. Purpose This study aims to evaluate the clinical outcomes of ICD patients who are treated with amiodarone for arrhythmia management. Methods We conducted a retrospective review of all patients who received a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) at our institution from January 1, 2007, to December 30, 2023. Patients who were on amiodarone and had documented VT were selected for analysis. Comorbidities and clinical outcomes, including arrhythmia recurrence and complications, were extracted from the electronic medical records (EMR). Results A total of 487 patients with ICD-capable devices were identified as having ventricular tachycardia (VT) and being treated with amiodarone. 287 patients had both one-year follow-up and a complete dataset (mean age 71±10, 294 male). 88 patients had cardiac resynchronization therapy capable device with an average ejection fraction of 20% ± 18%. Of these patients, 214 (58%) had ischemic heart disease, and 63 (17%) initiated amiodarone therapy due to VT storm. Furthermore, 92 patients (32%) underwent VT ablation (RF or radio-ablation). Average duration of amiodarone therapy was 56 months (range 1 – 244 months). 177 (61%) patients had recurrent VT requiring ATP or shock after amiodarone initiation. Beta-blockers were used by 335 patients, flecainide by 1, mexiletine by 5, and sotalol by 23. At the one-year follow-up, 85 (29%) patients had discontinued amiodarone. Conclusion Patients with ICDs initiated on amiodarone for VT management are likely to remain on the medication at the one-year mark, indicating limited discontinuation despite potential side effects and alternative treatment options. Further investigation is warranted to explore factors influencing long-term amiodarone use in this population.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.581
Threshold uncertainty score0.448

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEP EuropaceSame topicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studiesFrench-language works237,207