EHRA Expert Consensus Statement on the management of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in patients nearing end of life or requesting withdrawal of therapy

Luigi Padeletti(University of Florence), Davíð O. Arnar(Reykjavík University), Lorenzo Boncinelli(University of Florence), J. Brachman(AZ Sint-Jan), A. John Camm(St George's, University of London), Jean‐Claude Daubert(Université Rennes 2), Shireen Kassam(Université Rennes 2), Luc Deliëns(Vrije Universiteit Brussel), M. Glikson(Sheba Medical Center), David L. Hayes(Mayo Clinic in Arizona), Carsten W. Israel(Goethe University Frankfurt), Rachel Lampert(Yale University), T. Lobban(Heart Rhythm Society), Pekka Raatikainen(Oulu University Hospital), Gene P. Siegal(Ono Academic College), Panagiotis Vardas(University Hospital of Heraklion), Reviewers:(University Hospital Münster), Paulus Kirchhof(Heidelberg University), Ruediger Becker(Heidelberg University), Francisco G. Cosío(University Medical Center Utrecht), Peter Loh(Glasgow Royal Infirmary), Stuart M. Cobbe(University of Cambridge), Andrew A. Grace(University of Cambridge), John Morgan(Southampton General Hospital)
EP Europace
July 30, 2010
Cited by 380Open Access
Full Text

Abstract

The purpose of this Consensus Statement is to focus on implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) deactivation in patients with irreversible or terminal illness. This statement summarizes the opinions of the Task Force members, convened by the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) and the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), based on ethical and legal principles, as well as their own clinical, scientific, and technical experience. It is directed to all healthcare professionals who treat patients with implanted ICDs, nearing end of life, in order to improve the patient dying process. This statement is not intended to recommend or promote device deactivation. Rather, the ultimate judgement regarding this procedure must be made by the patient (or in special conditions by his/her legal representative) after careful communication about the deactivation's consequences, respecting his/her autonomy and clarifying that he/she has a legal and ethical right to refuse it. Obviously, the physician asked to deactivate the ICD and the industry representative asked to assist can conscientiously object to and refuse to perform device deactivation.


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis