Sex differences in ICD benefit

Sex Differences in Outcomes of Patients with an Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator for the Secondary Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death

Background: In patients with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) for secondary prevention, sex differences may exist in clinical outcomes. We sought to investigate sex differences in appropriate ICD therapy, appropriate and inappropriate shock, and all-cause mortality in this patient population. Methods: A total of 257 patients who received an ICD for a secondary prevention indication in the University Medical Centre Groningen (UMCG) between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2018 were retrospectively included in a consecutive manner. Appropriate ICD therapy, comprising shock and antitachycardia pacing (ATP) for ventricular fibrillation (VF) or ventricular tachycardia (VT), was the primary outcome. Results: The patient population included 257 patients, of whom 45 (18%) were women and 212 (82%) were men. The median of the age was 64 (interquartile range (IQR) 53-72) years. During follow-up (median duration 6.2 (IQR 4.8-7.8) years), first appropriate device therapy took place in 10 (22%) patients for women and 85 (40%) patients for men. Female sex was negatively associated with the rate of appropriate ICD therapy, univariably (hazard ratio (HR) 0.48 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25-0.93]; p = 0.030) and multivariably (HR 0.44 [95% CI 0.20-0.95]; p = 0.036). Conclusions: Women with secondary prevention ICDs were less likely than men to receive appropriate ICD therapy.

Sex differences in the course of implantable cardioverter defibrillator concerns (Results from the Danish national DEFIB-WOMEN study)

OBJECTIVE

The implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is used to treat malignant ventricular arrhythmias. Since 33% of patients experience ICD-related concerns, we examined sex differences in ICD concerns and correlates of ICD concerns during 24 months of follow-up after implantation of an ICD.

METHODS

Patients from the DEFIB-WOMEN study (n = 1515; 81.6% male patients) completed questionnaires on ICD concerns, anxiety, depression, and Type D personality at five measure points (baseline, 3-, 6-, 12- and 24-months post-implantation).

RESULTS

Male patients scored on average 7.0 (6.8) points on ICD concerns at the time of implantation and female patients scored on average 10.5 (8.2) points. We found statistically significant sex differences in ICD concerns at all measurement points, with female patients scoring 2.77 points (8.7% of the maximum score of 32) higher than male patients. ICD concerns decreased in both sexes the first 6 months and then levelled out. For both sexes, ICD concerns at baseline were significantly correlated with ICD concerns at 24-months follow-up. Anxiety at baseline was correlated with ICD concerns in female patients, while depression at baseline and at least one experienced shock correlated with ICD concerns in male patients.

CONCLUSION

Female patients reported more ICD concerns at all measurement points compared to male patients, but for both sexes ICD concerns decreased in the first 6 months. ICD shock, anxiety, depression, and ICD concerns at baseline were correlates of ICD concerns at 24-months follow-up.

The Lancet women and cardiovascular disease Commission: reducing the global burden by 2030

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in women. Decades of grassroots campaigns have helped to raise awareness about the impact of cardiovascular disease in women, and positive changes affecting women and their health have gained momentum. Despite these efforts, there has been stagnation in the overall reduction of cardiovascular disease burden for women in the past decade. Cardiovascular disease in women remains understudied, under-recognised, underdiagnosed, and undertreated. This Commission summarises existing evidence and identifies knowledge gaps in research, prevention, treatment, and access to care for women. Recommendations from an international team of experts and leaders in the field have been generated with a clear focus to reduce the global burden of cardiovascular disease in women by 2030. This Commission represents the first effort of its kind to connect stakeholders, to ignite global awareness of sex-related and gender-related disparities in cardiovascular disease, and to provide a springboard for future research.

Clinical effectiveness of primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: results of the EU-CERT-ICD controlled multicentre cohort study

Aims

The EUropean Comparative Effectiveness Research to Assess the Use of Primary ProphylacTic Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators (EU-CERT-ICD), a prospective investigator-initiated, controlled cohort study, was conducted in 44 centres and 15 European countries. It aimed to assess current clinical effectiveness of primary prevention ICD therapy.

Methods and results

We recruited 2327 patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) or dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) and guideline indications for prophylactic ICD implantation. Primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. Clinical characteristics, medications, resting, and 12-lead Holter electrocardiograms (ECGs) were documented at enrolment baseline. Baseline and follow-up (FU) data from 2247 patients were analysable, 1516 patients before first ICD implantation (ICD group) and 731 patients without ICD serving as controls. Multivariable models and propensity scoring for adjustment were used to compare the two groups for mortality. During mean FU of 2.4 ± 1.1 years, 342 deaths occurred (6.3%/years annualized mortality, 5.6%/years in the ICD group vs. 9.2%/years in controls), favouring ICD treatment [unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.682, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.537–0.865, P = 0.0016]. Multivariable mortality predictors included age, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), New York Heart Association class <III, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Adjusted mortality associated with ICD vs. control was 27% lower (HR 0.731, 95% CI 0.569–0.938, P = 0.0140). Subgroup analyses indicated no ICD benefit in diabetics (adjusted HR = 0.945, P = 0.7797, P for interaction = 0.0887) or those aged ≥75 years (adjusted HR 1.063, P = 0.8206, P for interaction = 0.0902).

Conclusion

In contemporary ICM/DCM patients (LVEF ≤35%, narrow QRS), primary prophylactic ICD treatment was associated with a 27% lower mortality after adjustment. There appear to be patients with less survival advantage, such as older patients or diabetics.

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.

The effects of gender on electrical therapies for the heart: procedural considerations, results and complications: A report from the XII Congress of the Italian Association on Arrhythmology and Cardiostimulation (AIAC)

Use of cardiac implantable devices and catheter ablation is steadily increasing in Western countries following the positive results of clinical trials. Despite the advances in scientific knowledge, tools development, and techniques improvement we still have some grey area in the field of electrical therapies for the heart. In particular, several reports highlighted differences both in medical behaviour and procedural outcomes between female and male candidates. Women are referred later for catheter ablation of supraventricular arrhythmias, especially atrial fibrillation, leading to suboptimal results. On the opposite females present greater response to cardiac resynchronization, while the benefit of implantable defibrillator in primary prevention seems to be less pronounced. Differences on aetiology, clinical profile, and development of myocardial scarring are the more plausible causes. This review will discuss all these aspects together with gender-related differences in terms of acute/late complications. We will also provide useful hints on plausible mechanisms and practical procedural aspects.

Clinical Implications of Cluster Analysis-Based Classification of Acute Decompensated Heart Failure and Correlation with Bedside Hemodynamic Profiles

Background

Classification of acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) is based on subjective criteria that crudely capture disease heterogeneity. Improved phenotyping of the syndrome may help improve therapeutic strategies.

Objective

To derive cluster analysis-based groupings for patients hospitalized with ADHF, and compare their prognostic performance to hemodynamic classifications derived at the bedside.

Methods

We performed a cluster analysis on baseline clinical variables and PAC measurements of 172 ADHF patients from the ESCAPE trial. Employing regression techniques, we examined associations between clusters and clinically determined hemodynamic profiles (warm/cold/wet/dry). We assessed association with clinical outcomes using Cox proportional hazards models. Likelihood ratio tests were used to compare the prognostic value of cluster data to that of hemodynamic data.

Results

We identified four advanced HF clusters: 1) male Caucasians with ischemic cardiomyopathy, multiple comorbidities, lowest B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels; 2) females with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, few comorbidities, most favorable hemodynamics; 3) young African American males with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, most adverse hemodynamics, advanced disease; and 4) older Caucasians with ischemic cardiomyopathy, concomitant renal insufficiency, highest BNP levels. There was no association between clusters and bedside-derived hemodynamic profiles (p = 0.70). For all adverse clinical outcomes, Cluster 4 had the highest risk, and Cluster 2, the lowest. Compared to Cluster 4, Clusters 1–3 had 45–70% lower risk of all-cause mortality. Clusters were significantly associated with clinical outcomes, whereas hemodynamic profiles were not.

Conclusions

By clustering patients with similar objective variables, we identified four clinically relevant phenotypes of ADHF patients, with no discernable relationship to hemodynamic profiles, but distinct associations with adverse outcomes. Our analysis suggests that ADHF classification using simultaneous considerations of etiology, comorbid conditions, and biomarker levels, may be superior to bedside classifications.

Sex difference in appropriate shocks but not mortality during long-term follow-up in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators

AIMS

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) have been shown to improve survival, although a considerable number of patients never receive therapy. Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators are routinely implanted regardless of sex. There is continuing controversy whether major outcomes differ between men and women.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this retrospective single-centre study, 1151 consecutive patients (19% women) undergoing ICD implantation between 1998 and 2010 were followed for mortality and first appropriate ICD shock over 4.9 ± 2.7 years. Sex-related differences were investigated using multivariable Cox models adjusting for potential confounders. During follow-up, 318 patients died, a rate of 5.9% per year among men and 4.6% among women (uncorrected P = 0.08); 266 patients received a first appropriate ICD shock (6.3% per year among men vs. 3.6% among women, P = 0.002). After multivariate correction, independent predictors of all-cause mortality were age (hazard ratio, HR = 1.04 per year of age, 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.03-1.06], P < 0.001), left ventricular ejection fraction (HR = 0.98 per %, 95% CI [0.97-1.00], P = 0.025), renal function (HR = 0.99 per mL/min/1.73 m(2), 95% CI [0.99-1.00], P = 0.009), use of diuretics (HR = 1.81, 95% CI [1.29-2.54], P = 0.0023), peripheral arterial disease (HR = 2.21, 95% CI [1.62-3.00], P < 0.001), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR = 1.48, 95% CI [1.13-1.94], P = 0.029), but not sex. Female sex (HR = 0.51, 95% CI [0.33-0.81], P = 0.013), older age (HR = 0.98, 95% CI [0.97-0.99], P < 0.001), and primary prophylactic ICD indication (HR = 0.69, 95% CI [0.52-0.93], P = 0.043) were independent predictors for less appropriate shocks.

CONCLUSION

Women receive 50% less appropriate shocks than men having similar mortality in this large single-centre population. These data may pertain to individually improved selection of defibrillator candidates using risk factors, e.g. sex as demonstrated in this study.