||Uncertainties identified in research recommendations
||Cochrane Heart Group
|Why is there uncertainty?
||Reliable up-to-date systematic reviews have revealed important continuing uncertainties about treatment effects
Implications for Research An adequately powered, well-designed trial, with participants that are on optimal pharmacological treatment, could be performed in settings where an ICD is not available, like in low-income countries, in order to settle the question of the real benefit of amiodarone for secondary prevention of SCD. We also feel that there is a need for more research on Chagas disease as a cause of SCD and the effectiveness of amiodarone in that setting.
References to reliable up-to-date systematic reviews:
Claro JC, Candia R, Rada G, Baraona F, Larrondo F, Letelier LM. Amiodarone versus other pharmacological interventions for prevention of sudden cardiac death. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2015, Issue 12. Art. No.: CD008093. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008093.pub2
|What is needed?
|Systematic reviews that need updating or extending
|Systematic reviews in preparation
|Ongoing controlled trials
||Nippon ICD Plus Pharmacologic Option Necessity (NIPPON Study)
[See web page]
|Which health conditions?
|What is person's age?
|Which types of treatments?
Incidence of f sudden cardiac death: change in symptoms, or change in management of symptoms (change in cardiovascular risk factors, incidence of ventricular arrhythmias syncope due to Ventricular Tachycardia/Ventricular Fibrillation, cardiac mortality, all-cause mortality); adverse effects or complications (pulmonary and thyroid events); patient satisfaction; health related quality of life; service related issues; and health related cost
||Publication date:10 Mar 2016
|Last reviewed date:10 Mar 2017
||Publication Type:Known Uncertainty
|The DUETs team endeavours to ensure that information is correct at the time of data entry