Antiarrhythmics versus Implantable Defribrillators
(AVID)
Objectives:
To evaluate if use of an implantable cardiac
defibrillator (ICD) results in reduction in total mortality, when compared with
conventional pharmacological therapy, in patients resuscitated from sudden
cardiac death who are otherwise at very high risk of mortality from arrhythmic
causes.
Background:
Sudden cardiac death is believed to account for a
substantial portion of deaths with evidence of cardiovascular disease. The
majority of sudden cardiac deaths are thought to be due to ventricular
fibrillation or tachycardia. Currently the most common approach to preventing
sudden cardiac death has been using drugs that suppress ventricular ectopy.
However, given the disappointing results of most pharmacologic approaches to
preventing sudden death, many investigators have turned to non-pharmacologic
approaches such as surgery (endocardial resection, stellate ganglionectomy) or
the implantation of devices that recognize VT or VF and deliver a shock. The
greatest interest has been generated by work on the implantable cardiac
defibrillator.
Subjects:
The study was designed in two phases. The pilot phase
enrolled 200 patients between June 194 and June 1994. Data collected during the
pilot phase cofirmed the trial was feasible. An additional 1,000 patients was
subsequently enrolled.
Design:
At approximately 28 clinical sites, patients with
ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation were screened. Patients
meeting the criteria were randomized to treatment with an ICD or treatment with
antiarrhythmic drug therapy. Patients were followed every 3 months for
assessment of secondary endpoints, to record therapies delivered by the ICD and
potential adverse effects of the ICD, and to assess compliance and potential
adverse symptoms in patients treated with anti arrhythmic drugs.
|
|
|
Study Website |
|
Study Documentation |
|
Data Distribution Agreement |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|