查看文章

Background

There is evidence that implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator (ICD) for primary prevention in people with an ischaemic cardiomyopathy improves survival rate. The evidence supporting this intervention in people with non‐ischaemic cardiomyopathy is not as definitive, with the recently published DANISH trial finding no improvement in survival rate. A systematic review of all eligible studies was needed to evaluate the benefits and harms of using ICDs for primary prevention in people with non‐ischaemic cardiomyopathy.

Objectives

To evaluate the benefits and harms of using compared to not using ICD for primary prevention in people with non‐ischaemic cardiomyopathy receiving optimal medical therapy.