The ethics of unilateral implantable cardioverter defibrillators and cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator deactivation: patient perspectives.

AIMS: Decisions about deactivation of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are complicated. Unilateral do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders (against patient/family wishes) have been ethically justified in cases of medical futility. Unilateral deactivation of ICDs may be seen as a logical extension of a unilateral DNR order. However, the ethical implications of unilateral ICD deactivation have not been explored. METHODS AND RESULTS: Sixty patients who had an ICD or cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D) were interviewed at a quaternary medical centre outpatient electrophysiology practice. Survey questions addressed whether deactivation of defibrillator function was included in advanced directives, whether deactivation constitutes physician-assisted suicide, and whether unilateral deactivation can be ethically justified. Responses were elicited to scenarios in which defibrillation function was deactivated in different contexts (including patient request to deactivate, existing DNR, and unilateral deactivation). Only 15% of respondents had thought about device deactivation if they were to develop a serious illness from which they were not expected to recover. A majority (53%) had advance directives, but only one mentioned what to do with the device. However, a majority (78%) did not consider deactivation of an ICD shocking function against patients' wishes to be ethical or moral. CONCLUSION: Management of ICDs and CRT-Ds as patients near the end of their lives creates ethical dilemmas. Few patients consider device deactivation at end-of-life, although a large majority believes that unilateral deactivation is not ethical/moral, even in the setting of medical futility. Advance care planning for these patients should address device deactivation.

Cardiovascular implanted electronic devices in people towards the end of life, during cardiopulmonary resuscitation and after death: guidance from the Resuscitation Council (UK), British Cardiovascular Society and National Council for Palliative Care.

The Resuscitation Council (UK), the British Cardiovascular Society (including the British Heart Rhythm Society and the British Society for Heart Failure) and the National Council for Palliative Care recognise the importance of providing clear and consistent guidance on management of cardiovascular implanted electronic devices (CIEDs) towards the end of life, during cardiorespiratory arrest and after death. This document has been developed to provide guidance for the full range of healthcare professionals who may encounter people with CIEDs in the situations described and for healthcare managers and commissioners. The authors recognise that some patients and people close to patients may also wish to refer to this document. It is intended as an initial step to help to ensure that people who have CIEDs, or are considering implantation of one, receive explanation of and understand the practical implications and decisions that this entails; to promote a good standard of care and service provision for people in the UK with CIEDs in the circumstances described; to offer relevant ethical and legal guidance on this topic; to offer guidance on the delivery of services in relation to deactivation of CIEDs where appropriate; to offer guidance on whether any special measures are needed when a person with a CIED receives cardiopulmonary resuscitation; and to offer guidance on the actions needed when a person with a CIED dies.

Effective communication and ethical consent in decisions related to ICDs.

This Review examines recommendations and principles that promote good decision-making with regard to the insertion, deactivation, and potential malfunction of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). This guidance is important because ICDs are now used for primary and secondary prevention of arrhythmias in more than 20 diverse clinical populations, which accounts for the exponential increase in insertion rates over the past decade. Current guidelines require clinicians to provide personalized, culturally appropriate, and easy to understand information to patients on the benefits and harms of proposed treatment choices; however, obtaining valid informed consent for insertion and deactivation of ICDs is challenging. Initiating early conversations with patients and continuing this dialogue over time, implementation of localized care protocols, increased collaboration (particularly between cardiac and palliative care teams), and the provision of training for all health professionals involved in the care of these patients, can help to ensure that adequate informed consent is maintained throughout their care. In addition to providing information, health professionals should identify and address high levels of anxiety in patients and their next of kin and promote effective communication throughout decision making. In the future, use of standardized checklists or decision aids based on a clear understanding of the principles underlying key topics could support this process.

A literature review: Advance directives and patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this literature review is to describe the severity of and susceptibility for negative outcomes in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) who lack advanced directives. DATA SOURCES: A comprehensive review of literature was conducted with articles selected from CINAHL, Pubmed, Ovid, Medline, evidence-based medicine, evidence-based nursing, and the Web of Science from 1990 to the present. Key words such as ICD, randomized controlled trials, case studies, advanced directives, end-of-life, living will, health care proxy, and durable power of attorney were used to identify specific studies. CONCLUSIONS: Advanced directives are becoming an essential part of care for the ICD population. The recommendations in the literature suggest that clinicians should initiate end-of-life discussions with their patients when they are healthy. The patients' preferences should be discussed often in patient care in case they would like changes made to their advance directive as their condition changes. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Implementation of advanced directives in patients' medical care will need to be encouraged in the event of illness. Advanced practice nurses can provide clear explanations of patients' treatment choices in outpatient and inpatient settings.

[Cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillation capability: considerations on a not yet proven therapeutic superiority]. / Terapia di risincronizzazione cardiaca in combinazione con la funzione di cardioversione-defibrillazione: considerazioni su una superiorità terapeutica ancora da dimostrare.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has proven a very useful tool to treat heart failure (HF). In HF patients with severely depressed left ventricular dysfunction and ventricular dyssynchrony who remain symptomatic despite optimal medical therapy, the "reverse remodeling" induced by CRT leads to a significant improvement of survival and quality of life. The addition of the cardioversion-defibrillation function to CRT (CRT-D) is considered a further beneficial effect to reduce overall mortality secondary to a decrease in sudden death rate. Unfortunately, the amount of this additional benefit is still uncertain; in particular, how much the cardioversion-defibrillation function contributes to prolong patient survival remains to be elucidated. Such uncertainty leads to a different therapeutic approach to HF patients, i.e., an extended or restricted use of CRT-D devices. Even the most recent guidelines do not provide a clear answer to this question. The present review summarizes the current evidence regarding efficacy, effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of CRT and CRT-D, and suggests some practical solutions to the appropriate use of CRT-D on the basis of clinical, ethical and socio-economic considerations.

The potential role for automatic external defibrillators in palliative care units.

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) has received frequent attention by professionals and the public in recent times. Concerns regarding the potential harms for little chance of success have caused palliative care units (PCUs) doubts about initiating CPR. However, there appears to be a moral responsibility to offer CPR to some, carefully selected, patients. Automatic external defibrillators (AEDs) have been shown to significantly increase chances of survival following CPR and are simple to use, even for non-professionals. It is argued that AEDs may increase the moral imperative on PCUs to offer CPR to certain patients and provide the basis for a necessary debate on where the border between appropriate active treatment and a disturbance to the aim of a peaceful death rests.