Time to rethink ICD indications in non-ishaemic cardiomyopathy? Evidence from a meta-analysis across therapeutic eras
Abstract
Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) reduce sudden cardiac death (SCD) in non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (NICM), but most evidence predates comprehensive guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT). We quantified the relative and absolute survival benefit of primary-prevention ICDs in NICM across therapeutic eras and explored how contemporary GDMT modifies absolute benefit. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL through March 2025 and included randomized controlled trials comparing prophylactic ICD implantation vs control in NICM with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35%. Three trials (DEFINITE, SCD-HeFT NICM subgroup, and DANISH) contributed to the quantitative synthesis. ICD therapy reduced all-cause mortality (pooled hazard ratio (HR) 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66-0.95) and SCD (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.28-0.70). Five-year absolute risk reduction (ARR) was 5.9% (NNT 17) in SCD-HeFT NICM and 4.4% (NNT 23) in DANISH. Under a full-GDMT scenario parameterized from pharmacological randomized controlled trials, projected baseline risk was ∼11%, yielding ARR 2.31% (NNT 43). All contemporary 'GDMT-era' absolute benefit estimates are scenario-based modelling outputs. No randomized trial has evaluated ICDs on top of full modern GDMT in NICM; therefore, these results represent illustrative ranges rather than empirical estimates.
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Comparative effectiveness of GLP-1 receptor agonists on glycaemic control, body weight, and lipid profile for type 2 diabetes: systematic review and network meta-analysis
- Adverse effects of cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitors on renal and arrhythmia events: meta-analysis of randomized trials
- Benefits and harms of drug treatment for type 2 diabetes: systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
- Comparative effectiveness and safety of statins as a class and of specific statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: A systematic review, meta‐analysis, and network meta‐analysis of randomized trials with 94,283 participants
- Screen time increases overweight and obesity risk among adolescents: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis
- Exposure to WHO AWaRe antibiotics and isolation of multi-drug resistant bacteria: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.