N Engl J Med December 2012 PMID 23131066

Reduction in inappropriate therapy and mortality through ICD programming.

Arthur J Moss, Claudio Schuger, Christopher A Beck, Mary W Brown, David S Cannom, James P Daubert, N A Mark Estes, Henry Greenberg, W Jackson Hall, David T Huang, Josef Kautzner, Helmut Klein, Scott McNitt, Brian Olshansky, Morio Shoda

Full text PDF Download social card

Mentions

Peak: 1 in Feb 2019

across 5 sources since Feb 2019

Extended reach

4,891

potential audience

Total likes

Video views

872

Mentions per month

Feb 2019 – Aug 2025

Where it's discussed

News15 articles
Facebook12 posts
Blogs4 articles
YouTube3 videos
X / Twitter2 posts

AI synopsis

What people are saying

The discussions highlight the study's confirmation of improved ICD programming methods, mentioning trials like MADIT-RIT and PREPARE that showed reductions in inappropriate shocks. The tone and choice of words reflect a recognition of the research’s potential to impact clinical guidelines and patient outcomes, emphasizing its importance and relevance.

AgreementStrong agreement

Most discussions recognize the article's findings as significant, referencing well-known studies like MADIT-RIT and emphasizing the benefits of programming strategies in reducing inappropriate therapies.

InterestHigh interest

The discussions show high interest, with posters referencing specific trial names and implications, indicating engagement with the research details.

EngagementModerate engagement

While some users discuss the technical aspects and clinical implications, the overall engagement appears thoughtful but not deeply personal or transformative.

ImpactHigh impact

Participants believe the publication could influence clinical practices broadly, using words like 'significant', 'reductions', and 'crucial' to highlight its importance.

Abstract in brief

The study found that programming implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) with high-rate or delayed therapy settings significantly reduced inappropriate shocks and pacing, leading to lower mortality rates compared to conventional programming.
Over an average follow-up of 14 years, both high-rate and delayed programming approaches showed hazard ratios of about 0.21 to 0.56 for inappropriate therapy and 0.45 to 0.56 for overall death, indicating substantial benefits.
There were no notable differences in procedure-related adverse events between the different programming strategies, suggesting these methods are both effective and safe.

Read the full abstract