The impact of co-morbidity burden on appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy and all-cause mortality: insight from Danish nationwide clinical registers

Assessment of ICD eligibility in non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy patients: a position statement by the Task Force of the Dutch Society of Cardiology

International guidelines recommend implantation of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) in non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) below 35% despite optimal medical therapy and a life expectancy of more than 1 year with good functional status. We propose refinement of these recommendations in patients with NICM, with careful consideration of additional risk parameters for both arrhythmic and non-arrhythmic death. These additional parameters include late gadolinium enhancement on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and genetic testing for high-risk genetic variants to further assess arrhythmic risk, and age, comorbidities and sex for assessment of non-arrhythmic mortality risk. Moreover, several risk modifiers should be taken into account, such as concomitant arrhythmias that may affect LVEF (atrial fibrillation, premature ventricular beats) and resynchronisation therapy. Even though currently no valid cut-off values have been established, the proposed approach provides a more careful consideration of risks that may result in withholding ICD implantation in patients with low arrhythmic risk and substantial non-arrhythmic mortality risk.

Reduced inferior wall longitudinal strain is associated with malignant arrhythmias in non-ischemic heart failure

BACKGROUND

Reduced systolic myocardial function in the inferior region of the left ventricle has been suggested to be associated with malignant arrhythmias. We tested this hypothesis in patients with non-ischemic heart failure.

METHODS

Patients with non-ischemic heart failure (left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] < 35%) were evaluated by 2D-speckle-tracking echocardiography. The regional longitudinal strain was calculated for each of the six left ventricular walls. The reduced regional function was defined as strain below the median. The outcome was a composite of sudden cardiac death, admission with sustained ventricular arrhythmia, resuscitated cardiac arrest, and appropriate therapy from a primary prophylactic implantable cardioverter defibrillator. Time-to-first-event analysis was performed using a Cox model.

RESULTS

From two centers, 401 patients were included (median age: 63 years, 72% male) with a median LVEF of 25% (interquartile range [IQR] 20;30), and a median inferior wall strain of -9.0% (-12.5; -5.4). During a median follow-up of 4.0 years, 52 outcomes occurred. After multivariate adjustment for clinical and electrocardiographic parameters, inferior wall strain was independently associated with the outcome (HR 2.50 [1.35; 4.62], p = .003). No independent association was found between the composite outcome and reduced strain in any of the other left ventricular walls, Global Longitudinal Strain (HR 1.66 [0.93; 2.98], p = .09), or LVEF (HR 1.33 [0.75; 2.33], p = .33).

CONCLUSIONS

Below median strain in the left ventricular inferior region was independently associated with a 2.5-fold increase in the risk of malignant arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death in patients with non-ischemic heart failure.

Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator for the Primary Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death among Patients With Cancer

Data are limited regarding the characteristics and outcomes of patients with cancer who are found eligible for primary defibrillator therapy. We performed a single-center retrospective analysis of patients with preexisting cancer diagnoses who become eligible for a primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) or cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) defibrillator. Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial-ICD (MADIT-ICD) benefit scores were calculated. The study included 75 cancer patients at a median age of 73 (interquartile range 64, 81) years at heart failure diagnosis. Active cancer was present in 51%. Overall, 55% of the cohort had coronary artery disease and 37% were CRT eligible. We found that 48%, 49%, and 3% of cohorts had low, intermediate, and high MADIT-ICD Benefit scores, respectively. Only 27% of patients underwent primary defibrillator implantation. Using multivariate analysis, indication for CRT and intermediate/high MADIT-ICD Benefit categories were found as independent predictors for implantation (odds ratio 8.42 p <0.001 and odds ratio 3.74 p = 0.040, respectively). During a median follow-up of 5.3 (interquartile range 4.5, 7.2) years, one patient (5%) with a defibrillator had appropriate shock therapy and 2 patients (10%) had bacteremia. Of 13 patients with CRT defibrillator-implants, one patient was admitted for heart failure exacerbation (8%). Using a time-varying covariate model, we did not observe statistically significant differences in the survival of patients with cancer implanted versus those not implanted with primary defibrillators (hazard ratio 0.521, p = 0.127). In conclusion, although primary defibrillator therapy is underutilized in patients with cancer, its relative benefit is limited because of competing risk of nonarrhythmic mortality. These findings highlight the need for personalized cardiologic and oncologic coevaluation.

Implantable defibrillator therapy and mortality in patients with non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy : An updated meta-analysis and effect on Dutch clinical practice by the Task Force of the Dutch Society of Cardiology

BACKGROUND

Primary prophylactic implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) in patients with non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (NICMP) remains controversial. This study sought to assess the benefit of ICD therapy with or without cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) in patients with NICMP. In addition, data were compared with real-world clinical data to perform a risk/benefit analysis.

METHODS

Relevant randomised clinical trials (RCTs) published in meta-analyses since DANISH, and in PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases from 2016 to 2020 were identified. The benefit of ICD therapy stratified by CRT use was assessed using random effects meta-analysis techniques.

RESULTS

Six RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. Among patients without CRT, ICD use was associated with a 24% reduction in mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-0.93; P = 0.008). In contrast, among patients with CRT, a CRT-defibrillator was not associated with reduced mortality (HR: 0.74, 95% CI 0.47-1.16; P = 0.19). For ICD therapy without CRT, absolute risk reduction at 3‑years follow-up was 3.7% yielding a number needed to treat of 27.

CONCLUSION

ICD use significantly improved survival among patients with NICMP who are not eligible for CRT. Considering CRT, the addition of defibrillator therapy was not significantly associated with mortality benefit compared with CRT pacemaker.

Targeted potassium levels to decrease arrhythmia burden in high risk patients with cardiovascular diseases (POTCAST): Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Low plasma potassium (p-K) is associated with increased risk of malignant arrhythmia and observational studies indicate protective effects of p-K in the upper reference level. However, randomized clinical studies are needed to document whether actively increasing p-K to high-normal levels is possible and safe and improves cardiovascular outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate if increased p-K reduces the risk of malignant arrhythmia and all-cause death in high-risk patients with a cardiovascular disease treated with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) for primary or secondary preventive causes. Secondly, to investigate whether high-normal p-K levels can be safely reached and maintained using already available medications and potassium-rich dietary guidance.

METHODS

This is a prospective, randomized, and open-labelled study enrolling patient at high-risk of malignant arrhythmias. According to sample size calculations, 1,000 patients will be randomized 1:1 to either an investigational regiment that aims to increase and maintain p-K at high-normal levels (4.5-5.0 mmol/L) or to usual standard of care and followed for an expected four years. The trial will run until a total of 291 events have occurred providing an α = 0.05 and 1-β = 0.80. The composite primary endpoint includes ventricular tachycardia >125 bpm lasting >30 seconds, any appropriate ICD-therapy, and all-cause mortality. At present, 739 patients have been randomized.

CONCLUSIONS

We present the rationale for the design of the POTCAST trial. The inclusion was initiated 2019 and is expected to be finished 2022. The study will show if easily available treatments to increase p-K may be a new treatment modality to protect against malignant arrythmias.

Influence of diabetes on mortality and ICD therapies in ICD recipients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 162,780 patients

Background

The influence of diabetes on the mortality and risk of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapies is still controversial, and a comprehensive assessment is lacking. We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to address this controversy.

Methods

We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases to collect relevant literature. Fixed and random effects models were used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) with 95% CIs.

Results

Thirty-six articles reporting on 162,780 ICD recipients were included in this analysis. Compared with nondiabetic ICD recipients, diabetic ICD recipients had higher all-cause mortality (HR = 1.45, 95% CI 1.36–1.55). The subgroup analysis showed that secondary prevention patients with diabetes may suffer a higher risk of all-cause mortality (HR = 1.89, 95% CI 1.56–2.28) (for subgroup analysis, P = 0.03). Cardiac mortality was also higher in ICD recipients with diabetes (HR = 1.68, 95% CI 1.35–2.08). However, diabetes had no significant effect on the risks of ICD therapies, including appropriate or inappropriate therapy, appropriate or inappropriate shock and appropriate anti-tachycardia pacing (ATP). Diabetes was associated with a decreased risk of inappropriate ATP (HR = 0.56, 95% CI 0.39–0.79).

Conclusion

Diabetes is associated with an increased risk of mortality in ICD recipients, especially in the secondary prevention patients, but does not significantly influence the risks of ICD therapies, indicating that the increased mortality of ICD recipients with diabetes may not be caused by arrhythmias. The survival benefits of ICD treatment in diabetes patients are limited.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12933-022-01580-y.

Impact of Comorbidity Burden on Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices Outcomes

Background:

There is limited data on the impact of comorbidity burden on clinical outcomes of patients undergoing cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) implantation.

Objectives:

Our aim was to assess trends in CIED implantations and explore the relationship between comorbidity burden and outcomes in patients undergoing de novo implantations.

Methods:

Using the National Inpatient Sample database from 2000 to 2014, we identified adults ⩾18 years undergoing de novo CIED procedures. Comorbidity burden was assessed by Charlson comorbidity Index (CCI), and patients were classified into 4 categories based on their CCI scores (CCI = 0, CCI = 1, CCI = 2, CCI ⩾3). Annual implantation trends were evaluated. Logistic regression was conducted to measure the association between categorized comorbidity burden and outcomes.

Results:

A total of 3 103 796 de-novo CIED discharge records were identified from the NIS database. About 22.4% had a CCI score of 0, 28.2% had a CCI score of 1, 22% had a CCI score of 2, and 27.4 % had a CCI score ⩾3. Annual de-novo CIED implantations peaked in 2006 and declined steadily from 2010 to 2014. Compared to CCI 0, CCI ⩾3 was independently associated with increased odds of in-hospital mortality, bleeding, pericardial, and cardiac complications (all P < .05). Length of stay and hospital charges increased with increasing comorbidity burden.

Conclusions:

CCI is a significant predictor of adverse outcomes after CIED implantation. Therefore, comorbidity burden needs to be considered in the decision-making process for CIED implant candidates.

The Impact of Charlson Comorbidity Index on De Novo Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Procedural Outcomes in the United States

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the utility of Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) as a measure of comorbidity burden to predict procedural outcomes after de novo cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation.

METHODS

All de novo CIED implantations in the United States National Inpatient Sample between 2015 and 2018 were retrospectively analyzed, stratified by CCI score (0=no comorbidity burden, 1=mild, 2=moderate, ≥3=severe). Multivariable logistic regression models were performed to examine the association between unit CCI score (scale) and in-hospital outcomes (major adverse cerebrovascular and cardiovascular events [MACCE]: composite of all-cause mortality, acute ischemic stroke, thoracic and cardiac complications, and device-related complications; and MACCE individual components).

RESULTS

Of 474,475 CIED procedures, the distribution of CCI score was as follows: CCI=0 (17.7%), CCI=1 (21.8%), CCI=2 (18.7%), and CCI=3+ (41.8%). Charlson comorbidity index score was associated with increased odds ratios of MACCE (1.10; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.11), all-cause mortality (1.23; 95% CI, 1.21 to 1.25), and acute stroke (1.45; 95% CI, 1.44 to 1.46). This finding was consistent across all CIED groups except the cardiac resynchronization therapy groups in which CCI was not associated with increased risk of mortality. A higher CCI score was not associated with increased odds of procedural (thoracic and cardiac) and device-related complications.

CONCLUSION

In a nationwide cohort of CIED procedures, higher comorbidity burden as measured by CCI score was associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality and acute ischemic stroke, but not procedure-related (thoracic and cardiac) or device-related complications. Objective assessment of comorbidity burden is important to risk-stratify patients undergoing CIED implantation for better prognostication of their in-hospital survival.

Usefulness of the MAGGIC Score in Predicting the Competing Risk of Non-Sudden Death in Heart Failure Patients Receiving an Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator: A Sub-Analysis of the OBSERVO-ICD Registry

The role of prognostic risk scores in predicting the competing risk of non-sudden death in heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) receiving an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is unclear. To this goal, we evaluated the accuracy and usefulness of the Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure (MAGGIC) score. The present analysis included 1089 HFrEF ICD recipients enrolled in the OBSERVO-ICD registry (NCT02735811). During a median follow-up of 36 months (1st-3rd IQR 25-48 months), 193 patients (17.7%) experienced at least one appropriate ICD therapy, and 133 patients died (12.2%) without experiencing any ICD therapy. The frequency of patients receiving ICD therapies was stable around 17-19% across increasing tertiles of 3-year MAGGIC probability of death, whereas non-sudden mortality increased (6.4% to 9.8% to 20.8%, p < 0.0001). Accuracy of MAGGIC score was 0.60 (95% CI, 0.56-0.64) for the overall outcome, 0.53 (95% CI, 0.49-0.57) for ICD therapies and 0.65 (95% CI, 0.60-0.70) for non-sudden death. In patients with higher 3-year MAGGIC probability of death, the increase in the competing risk of non-sudden death during follow-up was greater than that of receiving an appropriate ICD therapy. Results were unaffected when analysis was limited to ICD shocks only. The MAGGIC risk score proved accurate and useful in predicting the competing risk of non-sudden death in HFrEF ICD recipients. Estimation of mortality risk should be taken into greater consideration at the time of ICD implantation.

One-year mortality after implantable defibrillator implantation: do risk stratification models help improving clinical practice?

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to assess the available mortality risk stratification models for implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator (CRT-D) patients.

METHODS

We conducted a review of mortality risk stratification models and tested their ability to improve prediction of 1-year survival after implant in a database of patients who received a remotely controlled ICD/CRT-D device during routine care and included in the independent Home Monitoring Expert Alliance registry.

RESULTS

We identified ten predicting models published in peer-reviewed journals between 2000 and 2021 (Parkash, PACE, MADIT, aCCI, CHA2DS2-VASc quartiles, CIDS, FADES, Sjoblom, AAACC, and MADIT-ICD non-arrhythmic mortality score) that could be tested in our database as based on common demographic, clinical, echocardiographic, electrocardiographic, and laboratory variables. Our cohort included 1,911 patients with left ventricular dysfunction (median age 71, 18.3% female) from sites not using any risk stratification score for systematic patient screening. Patients received an ICD (53.8%) or CRT-D (46.2%) between 2011 and 2017, after standard physician evaluation. There were 56 deaths within 1-year post-implant, with an all-cause mortality rate of 2.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.3-3.8%). Four predicting models (Parkash, MADIT, AAACC, and MADIT-ICD non-arrhythmic mortality score) were significantly associated with increased risk of 1-year mortality with hazard ratios ranging from 3.75 (CI, 1.31-10.7) to 6.53 (CI 1.52-28.0, p ≤ 0.014 for all four). Positive predictive values of 1-year mortality were below 25% for all models.

CONCLUSION

In our analysis, the models we tested conferred modest incremental predicting power to ordinary screening methods.

The cost of non-response to cardiac resynchronization therapy: characterizing heart failure events following cardiac resynchronization therapy

AIMS

The aim of this study is to quantify healthcare resource utilization among non-responders to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT-NR) by heart failure (HF) events and influence of comorbidities.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The ADVANCE CRT registry (2013-2015) prospectively identified responders/CRT-NRs 6 months post-implant using the clinical composite score. Heart failure event rates and associated cost, both overall and separated for inpatient hospitalizations, office visits, emergency room visits, and observational stays, were quantified. Costs of events were imputed from payments for similar real-world encounters in subjects with CRT-D/P devices in the MarketScan™ commercial and Medicare Supplemental insurance claims databases. Effects of patient demographics and comorbidities on event rates and cost were evaluated. Of 879 US patients (age 69 ± 11 years, 29% female, ischaemic disease 52%), 310 (35%) were CRT-NR. Among CRT-NRs vs. responders, more patients developed HF (41% vs. 11%, P < 0.001), HF event rate was higher (67.0 ± 21.7 vs. 11.4 ± 3.7/100 pt-year, P < 0.001), and HF readmission within 30 days was more common [hazard ratio 7.06, 95% confidence interval (2.1-43.7)]. Inpatient hospitalization was the most common and most expensive event type in CRT-NR. Comorbid HF was increased by diabetes, hypertension, and pulmonary disorders. Over 2 years, compared to CRT responders, each CRT-NR resulted in excess cost of $6388 ($3859-$10 483) to Medicare (P = 0.015) or $10 197 ($6161-$17 394) to private insurances (P = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

Healthcare expenditures associated with contemporary CRT non-response management are among the highest for any HF patient group. This illustrates an unmet need for interventions to improve HF outcomes and reduce costs among some CRT recipients.

Out of Hospital Sudden Death in a Rural Population: Low Rates of ICD Underutilization Among Decedents

BACKGROUND

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) reduce mortality in patients at risk for life-threatening arrhythmias. Implantation of ICDs in rural or economically disadvantaged populations is suspected to be low. This study examined Out of Hospital Premature Natural Death (OHPND) and electronic medical record (EMR) data to identify rates of non-implantation of ICDs among decedents in eastern North Carolina.

METHODS

OHPND cases in 2016 were identified using mortality data and matched with EMRs. Those meeting criteria for ICD implantation based on chart review were adjudicated by two electrophysiologists to determine whether they qualified for implantation. Comorbidity burden was established using Charlson's Comorbidity Index (CCI).

RESULTS

Out of 1316 OHPND cases, 967 (73.4%) had EMR records. Chart review identified 70 (7.2%) potential ICD candidates with a LVEF ≤35 of which 5 (7.1%) did not meet criteria because LVEF subsequently improved. Of the remaining 65 patients, 32 (49.2%) already received an ICD, and 33 patients (50.7%) met criteria but had not received one. Reasons for non-implantation included: limited life expectancy secondary to comorbidities, principally chronic kidney disease (CKD) (N = 11, 17%), physician non-adherence to guidelines (N = 9, 14%), loss to follow-up (N = 7, 11%), patient refusal (N = 5, 8%), and death before commencing medical therapy (N = 1, 2%). Among our cohort of 967 individuals who died unexpectedly, nine (0.9%) patients may have avoided death with an ICD.

CONCLUSION

This study using decedent data shows low rates of ICD-underutilization in a rural population and emphasizes the role of advanced comorbidities such as CKD in ICD-underutilization.

Reassessment of clinical variables in cardiac resynchronization defibrillator patients at the time of first replacement: Death after replacement of CRT (DARC) score

Introduction

Cardiac resynchronization defibrillator (CRT‐D) as primary prevention is known to reduce mortality. At the time of replacement, higher age and comorbidities may attenuate the benefit of implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator (ICD) therapy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the progression of comorbidities after implantation and their association with mortality following CRT‐D generator replacement. In addition, a risk score was developed to identify patients at high risk for mortality after replacement.

Methods and Results

We identified patients implanted with a primary prevention CRT‐D (n = 648) who subsequently underwent elective generator replacement (n = 218) from two prospective ICD registries. The cohort consisted of 218 patients (median age: 70 years, male gender: 73%, mean left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF]: 36 ± 11% at replacement). Median follow‐up after the replacement was 4.2 years during which 64 patients (29%) died and 11 patients (5%) received appropriate ICD shocks. An increase in comorbidities was observed in 77 patients (35%). The 5‐year mortality rate was 41% in patients with ≥2 comorbidities at the time of replacement. A risk score incorporating age, gender, LVEF, atrial fibrillation, anemia, chronic kidney disease, and history of appropriate ICD shocks at time of replacement accurately predicted 5‐year mortality (C‐statistic 0.829). Patients with a risk score of greater than 2.5 had excess mortality at 5‐year postreplacement compared with patients with a risk score less than 1.5 (57% vs. 6%; p < .001).

Conclusion

A simple risk score accurately predicts 5‐year mortality after replacement in CRT‐D patients, as patients with a risk score of greater than 2.5 are at high risk of dying despite ICD protection.

Frequency, predictors and prognostic impact of implantable cardioverter defibrillator shocks in a primary prevention population with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction

AIMS

The role of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) in primary prevention real-world population is debated. We sought to evaluate the incidence, predictors and prognostic impact of ICD shocks in consecutive heart failure patients implanted for primary prevention at our tertiary institution.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We retrospectively selected a sample of 497 patients (mean age 64.8 years, 82.1% men, average left ventricular ejection fraction, LVEF, 27.1%). At long-term follow-up (median time 70.4 months), total mortality was 40.8%, and 16.5% of patients had received at least one appropriate shock (3.12%/year). Inappropriate shock [odds ratio (OR) 1.93, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.08-3.47; P = 0.027] and length of follow-up (1 year, OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.01; P = 0.0031) were associated with the occurrence of appropriate shock, whereas atrial fibrillation (OR 2.65, 95% CI 1.55-4.51, P < 0.001), length of follow-up (1-year OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.01, P < 0.001) and appropriate shock (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.08-3.47, P = 0.027) were associated with the occurrence of inappropriate shock. Neither appropriate nor inappropriate shock independently increased mortality risk, whereas older age (hazard ratio 1.05; 95% CI 1.04-1.07; P < 0.001), atrial fibrillation (hazard ratio 2.25; 95% CI 1.67-3.02; P < 0.001) and lower LVEF (hazard ratio 0.97; 95% CI 0.94-0.99; P = 0.004) did.

CONCLUSION

Incidence of shocks in real-world primary prevention ICD recipients might be lower than expected, and the association between ICD shocks and prolongation of survival is not as clear-cut as might be perceived. Further investigations from larger real-world samples are warranted.

Application of the heart failure meta-score to predict prognosis in patients with cardiac resynchronization defibrillators

BACKGROUND

The Heart Failure (HF) Meta-score may be useful in predicting prognosis in patients with primary prevention cardiac resynchronization defibrillators (CRT-D) considering the competing risk of appropriate defibrillator shock versus mortality.

METHODS

Data from 648 consecutive patients from two centers were used for the evaluation of the performance of the HF Meta-score. The primary endpoint was mortality and the secondary endpoint was time to first appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shock or death without prior appropriate ICD shock. Fine-Gray model was used for competing risk regression analysis.

RESULTS

In the entire cohort, 237 patients died over a median follow-up of 5.2 years. Five-year cumulative incidence of mortality ranged from 12% to 53%, for quintiles 1 through 5 of the HF Meta-score, respectively (log-rank P < 0.001). Compared with the lowest quintile, mortality risk was higher in the highest quintile (HR 6.9; 95%CI 3.7-12.8). The HF Meta-score had excellent calibration, accuracy, and good discrimination in predicting mortality (C-statistic 0.76 at 1-year and 0.71 at 5-year). The risk of death without appropriate ICD shock was higher in risk quintile 5 compared to quintile 1 (sub HR 5.8; 95%CI 3.1-11.0, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrated a good ability of the HF Meta-score to predict survival in HF patients treated with CRT-D as primary prevention. The HF Meta-score proved to be useful in identifying a subgroup with a significantly poor prognosis despite a CRT-D.

Temporal Incidence of Appropriate and Inappropriate Therapy and Mortality in Secondary Prevention ICD Patients by Cardiac Diagnosis

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to estimate the temporal development in rates and incidences of appropriate and inappropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy and shocks by cardiac diagnosis in a real-world population of patients with secondary prevention ICDs.

BACKGROUND

Data on cardiac diagnoses and temporal development of ICD therapies in patients with secondary prevention ICDs are limited.

METHODS

Patients (N = 4,587) with a secondary prevention ICD were identified from the Danish Pacemaker and ICD Register (January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2016) and linked to nationwide administrative registers. The outcome of appropriate and inappropriate ICD therapy and all-cause mortality were analyzed by annual event rates, cumulative incidence plots, and Cox regression models.

RESULTS

During a mean follow-up of 3.6 ± 2.4 years, 1,362 patients (30%) experienced appropriate ICD therapy (16.8% shocks), and 350 patients (7.6%) experienced inappropriate ICD therapy (4.6% shocks). From 2007 to 2016, there was a significant temporal reduction in both appropriate and inappropriate ICD therapy from 28.2 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 21.6 to 37.0) to 7.9 (95% CI: 6.8 to 9.1) and 10.0 (95% CI: 6.4 to 15.5) to 1.0 (95% CI: 0.7 to 1.5) per 100 person-years (p for trends <0.001). Multivariate Cox regression analyses showed that arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy was associated with the highest probability of appropriate ICD therapy (hazard ratio: 2.45; 95% CI: 1.77 to 3.39; p < 0.0001), whereas patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy had the lowest probability (hazard ratio: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.93; p = 0.0196) when compared to patients with ischemic heart disease.

CONCLUSIONS

In this nationwide real-life cohort of patients with secondary prevention ICDs, we observed a significant temporal decline in delivered appropriate and inappropriate shocks and ICD therapies in the last decade. A large proportion of patients still experienced ICD therapy but with significant differences by cardiac diagnosis.

Effect of physical and psychocognitive function and perceived health status on 12-month adverse cardiac events among implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients

BACKGROUND

Post-implant recovery in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) is often compromised because of reduced physical and psycho-cognitive function and poor health perception, leading to short event-free survival.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effects of psychocognitive function, health perception, and ICD-related factors on 12-month cardiac events among ICD patients.

METHODS

Using a prospective study design, ICD patients underwent baseline assessment and were followed for 12 months to assess cardiac events.

RESULTS

Cardiac events occurred in 14 patients (18.9%) (N = 74: age, 58 years; primary ICDs, 45.9%). Time after ICD implant (odds ratio [OR] = 1.002; p = .028) and executive function (OR = 1.021; p = .027) were significant predictors of 12-month cardiac events, while other physical and psychological indices were not.

CONCLUSIONS

Reduced executive function and longer time after implant predicted the events. Healthcare professionals need to assess executive function and provide treatment and support to improve executive function.

Protected risk stratification with the wearable cardioverter-defibrillator: results from the WEARIT-II-EUROPE registry

Background

The prospective WEARIT-II-EUROPE registry aimed to assess the value of the wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) prior to potential ICD implantation in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction considered at risk of sudden arrhythmic death.

Methods and results

781 patients (77% men; mean age 59.3 ± 13.4 years) with heart failure and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were consecutively enrolled. All patients received a WCD. Follow-up time for all patients was 12 months. Mean baseline LVEF was 26.9%. Mean WCD wearing time was 75 ± 47.7 days, mean daily WCD use 20.3 ± 4.6 h. WCD shocks terminated 13 VT/VF events in ten patients (1.3%). Two patients died during WCD prescription of non-arrhythmic cause. Mean LVEF increased from 26.9 to 36.3% at the end of WCD prescription (p < 0.01). After WCD use, ICDs were implanted in only 289 patients (37%). Forty patients (5.1%) died during follow-up. Five patients (1.7%) died with ICDs implanted, 33 patients (7%) had no ICD (no information on ICD in two patients). The majority of patients (75%) with the follow-up of 12 months after WCD prescription died from heart failure (15 patients) and non-cardiac death (15 patients). Only three patients (7%) died suddenly. In seven patients, the cause of death remained unknown.

Conclusions

Mortality after WCD prescription was mainly driven by heart failure and non-cardiovascular death. In patients with HFrEF and a potential risk of sudden arrhythmic death, WCD protected observation of LVEF progression and appraisal of competing risks of potential non-arrhythmic death may enable improved selection for beneficial ICD implantation.

Graphic abstract

Physiological monitoring in the complex multi-morbid heart failure patient - Introduction

Repeated physiological monitoring of comorbidities in heart failure (HF) is pivotal. This document introduces the main challenges related to physiological monitoring in the complex multimorbid HF patient, arising during an ESC consensus meeting on this topic.

Highlights in heart failure

Heart failure (HF) remains a major cause of mortality, morbidity, and poor quality of life. It is an area of active research. This article is aimed to give an update on recent advances in all aspects of this syndrome. Major changes occurred in drug treatment of HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Sacubitril/valsartan is indicated as a substitute to ACEi/ARBs after PARADIGM-HF (hazard ratio [HR], 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 0.87 for sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril for the primary endpoint and Wei, Lin and Weissfeld HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.71-0.89 for recurrent events). Its initiation was then shown as safe and potentially useful in recent studies in patients hospitalized for acute HF. More recently, dapagliflozin and prevention of adverse-outcomes in DAPA-HF trial showed the beneficial effects of the sodium-glucose transporter type 2 inhibitor dapaglifozin vs. placebo, added to optimal standard therapy [HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.85;0.74; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.85 for the primary endpoint]. Trials with other SGLT 2 inhibitors and in other patients, such as those with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) or with recent decompensation, are ongoing. Multiple studies showed the unfavourable prognostic significance of abnormalities in serum potassium levels. Potassium lowering agents may allow initiation and titration of mineralocorticoid antagonists in a larger proportion of patients. Meta-analyses suggest better outcomes with ferric carboxymaltose in patients with iron deficiency. Drugs effective in HFrEF may be useful also in HF with mid-range ejection fraction. Better diagnosis and phenotype characterization seem warranted in HF with preserved ejection fraction. These and other burning aspects of HF research are summarized and reviewed in this article.

Internal Versus External Electrical Cardioversion of Atrial Arrhythmia in Patients With Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator: A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Atrial arrhythmias are common in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). External shocks and internal cardioversion through commanded ICD shock for electrical cardioversion are used for rhythm-control. However, there is a paucity of data on efficacy of external versus internal cardioversion and on the risk of lead and device malfunction. We hypothesized that external cardioversion is noninferior to internal cardioversion for safety, and superior for successful restoration of sinus rhythm.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with ICD undergoing elective cardioversion for atrial arrhythmias at 13 centers were randomized in 1:1 fashion to either internal or external cardioversion. The primary safety end point was a composite of surrogate events of lead or device malfunction. Conversion of atrial arrhythmia to sinus rhythm was the primary efficacy end point. Myocardial damage was studied by measuring troponin release in both groups.

RESULTS

N=230 patients were randomized. Shock efficacy was 93% in the external cardioversion group and 65% in the internal cardioversion group (P<0.001). Clinically relevant adverse events caused by external or internal cardioversion were not observed. Three cases of pre-existing silent lead malfunction were unmasked by internal shock, resulting in lead failure. Troponin release did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first randomized trial on external vs internal cardioversion in patients with ICDs. External cardioversion was superior for the restoration of sinus rhythm. The unmasking of silent lead malfunction in the internal cardioversion group suggests that an internal shock attempt may be reasonable in selected ICD patients presenting for electrical cardioversion.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03247738.

Duration of Heart Failure and Effect of Defibrillator Implantation in Patients With Nonischemic Systolic Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

Patients with nonischemic systolic heart failure (HF) have increased risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) and death from progressive pump failure. Whether the risk of SCD changes over time is unknown. We seek here to investigate the relation between duration of HF, mode of death, and effect of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We examined the risk of all-cause death and SCD according to the duration of HF among patients with nonischemic systolic HF enrolled in the DANISH (Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of ICDs in Patients with Non-ischemic Systolic Heart Failure on Mortality). In all, 1116 patients were included. Patients were divided according to quartiles of HF duration (≤8, 9≤18, 19≤65, and ≥66 months). Patients with the longest duration of HF were older, more often men, had more comorbidity, and more often received a cardiac resynchronization therapy device. Doubling of HF duration was an independent predictor of both all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.27; 95% CI, 1.17-1.38; P<0.0001), and SCD (HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.11-1.50; P=0.0007). The proportion of deaths caused by SCD was not different between HF quartiles (P=0.91), and the effect of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation on all-cause mortality was not modified by the duration of HF (P=0.59).

CONCLUSIONS

Duration of HF predicted both all-cause mortality and risk of SCD independently of other risk indicators. However, the proportion of death caused by SCD did not change with longer duration of HF, and the effect of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator was not modified by the duration of HF.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00542945.

Association between the Charlson comorbidity index and outcomes after implantable cardioverter defibrillator generator replacement

BACKGROUND

Recipients of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) generator replacement with multiple medical comorbidities may be at higher risk of adverse outcomes that attenuate the benefit of ICD replacement. The aim of this investigation was to study the association between the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) and outcomes after ICD generator replacement.

METHODS

All patients undergoing first ICD generator replacement at Mayo Clinic, Rochester and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston between 2001 and 2011 were identified. Outcomes included: (a) all-cause mortality, (b) appropriate ICD therapy, and (c) death prior to appropriate therapy. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed to assess association between CCI and outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified 1421 patients with mean age of 69.6 ± 12.1 years, 81% male and median (range) CCI of 3 (0-18). During a mean follow-up of 3.9 ± 3 years, 52% of patients died, 30.6% experienced an appropriate therapy, and 23.6% died without experiencing an appropriate therapy. In multivariable analysis, higher CCI score was associated with increased all-cause mortality (Hazard ratio, HR 1.10 [1.06-1.13] per 1 point increase in CCI, P < .001), death without prior appropriate therapy (HR 1.11 [1.07-1.15], P < .0001), but not associated with appropriate therapy (HR 1.01 [0.97-1.05], P = .53). Patients with CCI ≥5 had an annual risk of death of 12.2% compared to 8.7% annual rate of appropriate therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

CCI is predictive of mortality following ICD generator replacement. The benefit of ICD replacement in patients with CCI score ≥5 should be investigated in prospective studies.

Importance of beta-blocker dose in prevention of ventricular tachyarrhythmias, heart failure hospitalizations, and death in primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients: a Danish nationwide cohort study

Aims

There is a paucity of studies investigating a dose-dependent association between beta-blocker therapy and risk of outcome. In a nationwide cohort of primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) patients, we aimed to investigate the dose-dependent association between beta-blocker therapy and risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VT/VF), heart failure (HF) hospitalizations, and death.

Methods and results

Information on ICD implantation, endpoints, comorbidities, beta-blocker usage, type, and dose were obtained through Danish nationwide registers. The two major beta-blockers carvedilol and metoprolol were examined in three dose levels; low (metoprolol ≤ 25 mg; carvedilol ≤ 12.5 mg), intermediate (metoprolol 26-199 mg; carvedilol 12.6-49.9 mg), and high (metoprolol ≥ 200 mg; carvedilol ≥ 50 mg). Time to events was investigated utilizing multivariate Cox models with beta-blocker as a time-dependent variable. From 2007 to 2012, 2935 first-time ICD devices were implanted. During follow-up, 399 patients experienced VT/VF, 728 HF hospitalizations and 361 died. As compared with patients not on beta-blockers, low, intermediate, and high dose had significantly reduced risk of HF hospitalizations {hazard ratio (HR) = 0.68 [0.54-0.87], P = 0.002; HR = 0.53 [0.42-0.66], P < 0.001; HR = 0.43 [0.34-0.54], P < 0.001} and death (HR = 0.47 [0.35-0.64], P < 0.001; HR = 0.29 [0.22-0.39], P = 0.001; HR = 0.24 [0.18-0.33], P < 0.001). For the endpoint of VT/VF, only intermediate and high dose beta-blocker was associated with significantly reduced risk (HR = 0.58 [0.43-0.79], P < 0.001; HR = 0.53 [0.39-0.72], P < 0.001). No significant difference was found between comparable doses of carvedilol and metoprolol on any endpoint (P = 0.06-0.94).

Conclusion

In primary prevention ICD patients, beta-blocker therapy was associated with significantly reduced risk of all endpoints, as compared with patients not on beta-blocker, with the suggestion of a dose-dependent effect. No detectable difference was found between comparable doses of carvedilol and metoprolol.

[Continuation of ICD treatment at the time of device exchange without adequate treatment?]

INTRODUCTION

Due to improved treatment of heart failure, patients are older and have more comorbidities at the time of an elective device exchange. This leads to higher rates of complications and represents an opportunity for re-evaluation of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) treatment.

OBJECTIVE

This article reviews the current literature regarding the indications for continued ICD therapy and device exchange in patients who have never received adequate treatment through the ICD.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients with primarily prophylactic indications, who have not received adequate treatment and have shown significant improvement in the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) >35%, have a significantly lower risk of ventricular arrythmia (VA) after device exchange. Although further ventricular events can occur in these patients, the continuation of ICD treatment should be individually discussed in cases of high age and increased comorbidities. In female patients with a non-ischemic cardiac myopathy and an almost normalized LVEF, mostly during cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), a discontinuation of ICD treatment or downgrading to CRT with pacemaker (CRT-P) treatment should be discussed.

CONCLUSION

At the time of an elective device exchange for primarily prophylactic indications, the possibility to discontinue ICD treatment can be discussed with patients who have not experienced adequate treatment. Additional factors, such as LVEF, age, sex and comorbidities of the patient should be taken into consideration in order to make an individualized decision. As prospective randomized studies are lacking, it is not possible to give generally valid recommendations.

Incidence of appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy and mortality after implantable cardioverter-defibrillator generator replacement: results from a real-world nationwide cohort

Aims

The safety of omitting implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) generator replacement in patients with no prior appropriate therapy, comorbid conditions, and advanced age is unclear. The aim was to investigate incidence of appropriate ICD therapy after generator replacement.

Methods and results

We identified patients implanted with a primary prevention ICD (n = 4630) from 2007 to 2016, who subsequently underwent an elective ICD generator replacement (n = 670) from the Danish Pacemaker and ICD Register. The data were linked to other databases and evaluated the outcomes of appropriate therapy and death. Predictors of ICD therapy were identified using multivariate Cox regression analyses. A total of 670 patients underwent elective ICD generator replacement. Of these, 197 (29.4%) patients had experienced appropriate therapy in their 1st generator period. During follow-up of 2.0 ± 1.6 years, 95 (14.2%) patients experienced appropriate therapy. Predictors of appropriate therapy in 2nd generator period was low initial left ventricular ejection fraction (≤25%) [hazard ratio (HR) 1.87, confidence interval (CI) 1.13–1.95] and appropriate therapy in 1st generator period (HR 3.95, CI 2.57–6.06). For patients with appropriate therapy in 1st generator period, 4-year incidence of appropriate therapy was 50.6% vs. 16.4% in those without (P < 0.001). Among patients >80 years with no prior appropriate therapy 8.8% of patients experienced appropriate therapy after replacement. Comorbidity burden and advanced age were associated with reduced device utilization after replacement and a high competing risk of death without preceding appropriate therapy.

Conclusion

A significant residual risk of appropriate therapy in the 2nd generator was present even among patients with advanced age and with a full prior generator period without any appropriate ICD events.

Sacubitril/valsartan: from a large clinical trial to clinical practice

: The Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor Antagonist and Neprilysin Inhibitor with Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure Trial (PARADIGM-HF) has shown a reduction in the risk of death and heart failure hospitalizations with sacubitril/valsartan, compared with enalapril, in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. Guidelines now recommend the substitution of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or AT1 blockers with sacubitril/valsartan in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. The aim of this review is to discuss factors that may have an impact on the implementation of these guidelines into clinical practice. The main limitation is that, based on the inclusion criteria of PARADIGM-HF, sacubitril/valsartan is not indicated in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction, although they may be the majority of the patients with heart failure. The trial enrolled ambulatory patients and thus start of sacubitril/valsartan is not indicated in those hospitalized for heart failure. A drug's tolerability may be limited by hypotension with, however, a lower rate of renal dysfunction, compared with enalapril. The cost of the new treatment is also an issue. Similarly to what occurred when other neurohormonal antagonists have been introduced in clinical practice, increased awareness of poor heart failure outcomes and better patients' management programs may be of utmost importance for the implementation of this new agent.

Driving following defibrillator implantation: development and pilot results from a nationwide questionnaire

BACKGROUND

Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation is associated with driving restrictions which may have profound effects on the patient's life. However, there is limited patient-reported data on the information given about driving restrictions, the adherence to the restrictions, the incidence of arrhythmic symptoms while driving, and the driving restrictions' effect on ICD patients' daily life and quality of life factors. A specific questionnaire was designed to investigate these objectives, intended for use in a nationwide ICD cohort.

METHODS

The conceptual framework based on literature review and expert opinion was refined in qualitative semi-structured focus group interviews with ten ICD patients. Content validity was pursued through pre-testing, including expert review and 28 cognitive interviews with patients at all ICD implanting centres in Denmark. Finally, the Danish Pacemaker and ICD registry was used to randomly select 50 ICD patients with a first-time implantation between January 1, 2013 and November 30, 2016 for pilot testing, followed by a test-retest on 25 respondents. Test-retest agreement was assessed using kappa statistics or intraclass correlation coefficients.

RESULTS

The pilot test achieved a response rate of 78%, whereof the majority were web-based (69%). Only 49% stated they had been informed about any driving restrictions after ICD implantation, whereas the number was 75% after appropriate ICD shock. Among respondents, 95% had resumed private driving, ranging from 1 to 90 days after ICD implantation. In those informed of a significant (≥ 1 month) driving ban, 55% stated the driving restrictions had impeded with daily life, especially due to limitations in maintaining employment or getting to/from work and 25% admitted they had knowingly been driving during the restricted period. There were six episodes of dizziness or palpitations not necessitating stopping the vehicle. Test-retest demonstrated good agreement of questionnaire items, with 69% of Kappa coefficients above 0.60.

CONCLUSIONS

We have developed a comprehensive questionnaire on ICD patients' perspective on driving. Pre-testing and pilot testing demonstrated good content validity, feasible data collection methods, and a robust response rate. Thus, we believe the final questionnaire, distributed to almost 4000 ICD patients, will capture essential evidence to help inform driving guidelines in this population.

Type 2 diabetes is independently associated with all-cause mortality secondary to ventricular tachyarrhythmias

OBJECTIVES

The study sought to assess the prognostic impact of type 2 diabetes in patients presenting with ventricular tachyarrhythmias on admission.

BACKGROUND

Data regarding the prognostic outcome of diabetics presenting with ventricular tachyarrhythmias is limited.

METHODS

A large retrospective registry was used including all consecutive patients presenting with ventricular tachycardia (VT) and fibrillation (VF) on admission from 2002 to 2016. Patients with type 2 diabetes (diabetics) were compared to non-diabetics applying multivariable Cox regression models and propensity-score matching for evaluation of the primary prognostic endpoint of long-term all-cause mortality at 2 years. Secondary prognostic endpoints were cardiac death at 24 h, in-hospital death at index, all-cause mortality at 30 days, all-cause mortality in patients surviving index hospitalization at 2 years (i.e. "after discharge") and rehospitalization due to recurrent ventricular tachyarrhythmias at 2 years.

RESULTS

In 2411 unmatched high-risk patients with ventricular tachyarrhythmias, diabetes was present in 25% compared to non-diabetics (75%). Rates of VT (57% vs. 56%) and VF (43% vs. 44%) were comparable in both groups. Multivariable Cox regression models revealed diabetics associated with the primary endpoint of long-term all-cause mortality at 2 years (HR = 1.513; p = 0.001), which was still proven after propensity score matching (46% vs. 33%, log rank p = 0.001; HR = 1.525; p = 0.001). The rates of secondary endpoints were higher for in-hospital death at index, all-cause mortality at 30 days, as well as after discharge, but not for cardiac death at 24 h or rehospitalization due to recurrent ventricular tachyarrhythmias.

CONCLUSION

Presence of type 2 diabetes is independently associated with an increase of all-cause mortality in patients presenting with ventricular tachyarrhythmias on admission.

Determinants of outcomes following outpatient placement of implantable cardioverter defibrillators in a Medicare Advantage population

BACKGROUND

Recipients of ICD are likely to have several risk factors that could interfere with successful use of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs).

HYPOTHESIS

Age, sex, and factors indicated in claims are associated with one-year mortality and complications after ICD placement.

METHODS

Adult Medicare Advantage patients who underwent outpatient ICD implantation from January 2014 to September 2015 were included. Age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), prior year hospitalization and emergency department (ED) visit, diabetes, heart failure, ischemic heart disease, and indicators of the need for pacing were evaluated as risk factors. Mortality and device-related complications (lead and nonlead) were assessed at one-year post-procedure using Kaplan-Meier and Cox Proportional Hazard analysis.

RESULTS

Among 8450 patients who underwent implantation, 1-year event-free survival was 80.1%, based on an overall composite measure of complications and mortality. Adjusted survival analysis showed that age ≥ 65, male sex, incremental increase in CCI, heart failure, prior year hospitalization, ED visit, and prior year pacing procedure were significant predictors of mortality. Age ≥ 65, male sex, and prior year hospitalization were significant predictors of a composite measure of device-related complications. CCI and prior hospitalization were significant predictors of a composite measure of any adverse outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest most patients in an older population do not experience adverse outcomes in the year following ICD implantation. The risk of mortality may be greater in men, patients over the age of 65, and patients with greater general morbidity, heart failure, or a history of a pacing procedure.

Prevalence and prognostic impact of non-cardiac co-morbidities in heart failure outpatients with preserved and reduced ejection fraction: a community-based study

AIM

To assess adverse outcomes attributable to non-cardiac co-morbidities and to compare their effects by left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) group [LVEF <50% (heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, HFrEF), LVEF ≥50% (heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, HFpEF)] in a contemporary, unselected chronic heart failure population.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This community-based cohort enrolled patients from October 2009 to December 2013. Adjusted hazard ratio (HR) and the population attributable fraction (PAF) were used to compare the contribution of 15 non-cardiac co-morbidities to adverse outcome. Overall, 2314 patients (mean age 77 ±10 years, 57% men) were recruited [n = 941 (41%) HFrEF, n = 1373 (59%) HFpEF]. Non-cardiac co-morbidity rates were similarly high, except for obesity and hypertension which were more prevalent in HFpEF. At a median follow-up of 31 (interquartile range 16-41) months, 472 (20%) patients died. Adjusted mortality rates were not significantly different between the HFrEF and HFpEF groups. After adjustment, an increasing number of non-cardiac co-morbidities was associated with a higher risk for all-cause mortality [HR 1.25; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.10-1.26; P < 0.001], all-cause hospitalization (HR 1.17; 95% CI 1.12-1.23; P < 0.001), heart failure hospitalization (HR 1.28; 95% CI 1.19-1.38; P < 0.001), non-cardiovascular hospitalization (HR 1.16; 95% CI 1.11-1.22; P < 0.001). The co-morbidities contributing to high PAF were: anaemia, chronic kidney disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus, and peripheral artery disease. These findings were similar for HFrEF and HFpEF. Interaction analysis yielded similar results.

CONCLUSIONS

In a contemporary community population with chronic heart failure, non-cardiac co-morbidities confer a similar contribution to outcomes in HFrEF and HFpEF. These observations suggest that quality improvement initiatives aimed at optimizing co-morbidities may be similarly effective in HFrEF and HFpEF.

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction and diabetes

AIM

There is limited information on the outcomes after primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation in patients with heart failure (HF) and diabetes. This analysis evaluates the effectiveness of a strategy of ICD plus medical therapy vs. medical therapy alone among patients with HF and diabetes.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A patient-level combined-analysis was conducted from a combined dataset that included four primary prevention ICD trials of patients with HF or severely reduced ejection fractions: Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial I (MADIT I), MADIT II, Defibrillators in Non-Ischemic Cardiomyopathy Treatment Evaluation (DEFINITE), and Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Trial (SCD-HeFT). In total, 3359 patients were included in the analysis. The primary outcome of interest was all-cause death. Compared with patients without diabetes (n = 2363), patients with diabetes (n = 996) were older and had a higher burden of cardiovascular risk factors. During a median follow-up of 2.6 years, 437 patients without diabetes died (178 with ICD vs. 259 without) and 280 patients with diabetes died (128 with ICD vs. 152 without). ICDs were associated with a reduced risk of all-cause mortality among patients without diabetes [hazard ratio (HR) 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46-0.67] but not among patients with diabetes (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.7-1.12; interaction P = 0.015).

CONCLUSION

Among patients with HF and diabetes, primary prevention ICD in combination with medical therapy vs. medical therapy alone was not significantly associated with a reduced risk of all-cause death. Further studies are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of ICDs among patients with diabetes.

Cancer diagnosis in patients with heart failure: epidemiology, clinical implications and gaps in knowledge

Cancer and heart failure (HF) are common medical conditions with a steadily rising prevalence in industrialized countries, particularly in the elderly, and they both potentially carry a poor prognosis. A new diagnosis of malignancy in subjects with pre-existing HF is not infrequent, and challenges HF specialists as well as oncologists with complex questions relating to both HF and cancer management. An increased incidence of cancer in patients with established HF has also been suggested. This review paper summarizes the epidemiology and the prognostic implications of cancer occurrence in HF, the impact of pre-existing HF on cancer treatment decisions and the impact of cancer on HF therapeutic options, while providing some practical suggestions regarding patient care and highlighting gaps in knowledge.

Atrioventricular junction ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with cardiac resynchronization therapy: positive impact on ventricular arrhythmias, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapies and hospitalizations

AIMS

We sought to determine whether atrioventricular junction ablation (AVJA) in patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) and with permanent atrial fibrillation (AF) has a positive impact on ICD shocks and hospitalizations compared with rate-slowing drugs.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This is a pooled analysis of data from 179 international centres participating in two randomized trials and one prospective observational research. The co-primary endpoints were all-cause ICD shocks and all-cause hospitalizations. Out of 3358 CRT-ICD patients (2720 male, 66.6 years), 2694 (80%) were in sinus rhythm (SR) and 664 (20%) had permanent AF-262 (8%) treated with AVJA (AF + AVJA) and 402 (12%) treated with rate-slowing drugs (AF + Drugs). Median follow-up was 18 months. The mean (95% confidence intervals) annual rate of all-cause ICD shocks per 100 patient years was 8.0 (5.3-11.9) in AF + AVJA, 43.6 (37.7-50.4) in AF + Drugs, and 34.4 (32.5-36.5) in SR patients, resulting in incidence rate ratio (IRR) reductions of 0.18 (0.10-0.32) for AF + AVJA vs. AF + Drugs (P < 0.001) and 0.48 (0.35-0.66) for AF + AVJA vs. SR (P < 0.001). These reductions were driven by significant reductions in both appropriate ICD shocks [IRR 0.23 (0.13-0.40), P < 0.001, vs. AF + Drugs] and inappropriate ICD shocks [IRR 0.09 (0.04-0.21), P < 0.001, vs. AF + Drugs]. Annual rate of all-cause hospitalizations was significantly lower in AF + AVJA vs. AF + Drugs [IRR 0.57 (0.41-0.79), P < 0.001] and SR [IRR 0.85 (073-0.98), P = 0.027].

CONCLUSION

In AF patients treated with CRT, AVJA results in a lower incidence and burden of all-cause, appropriate and inappropriate ICD shocks, as well as to fewer all-cause and heart failure hospitalizations.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT00147290, NCT00617175, NCT01007474.