The SIDECAR project: S-IcD registry in European paediatriC and young Adult patients with congenital heaRt defects

Cardiac implantable electronic devices in pediatric and congenital populations

Pediatric patients and children and adults with congenital heart disease often will require implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) for management of a variety of cardiac rhythm pathologies. The safe and effective use of CIEDs in these patients requires an awareness of important differences between this special population and the adult populations for whom these devices were primarily developed and in whom they have been most thoroughly studied. These include issues of body size and growth, anticipated lifespan, anatomical issues related to implantation and the epidemiology of underlying rhythm issues. In this paper, we discuss these issues in the context of the current state of the art in pediatric and congenital heart disease patients with respect to implant and lead extraction strategies, physiological cardiac pacing and resynchronization, ICD indications and use of transvenous and subcutaneous devices, and the use of implantable monitoring devices.

Benefits and risks of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in children and young adults with congenital heart disease, primary electrical disease or paediatric cardiomyopathy†

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate the benefits and potential risks of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in paediatric and congenital heart disease (CHD) patients in the current era.

METHODS

All patients with CHD, paediatric cardiomyopathy or primary electrical disease, who underwent implantation of a defibrillator from 2001 to 2023, were examined. The occurrence of appropriate therapy, unplanned surgeries due to device complications, inappropriate shocks and associated risk factors were analysed.

RESULTS

A total of 214 patients were included, with 61% having CHD, 17% having paediatric cardiomyopathy and 22% having primary electrical disease. The most common diagnoses were transposition of the great arteries and tetralogy of Fallot (each 12%). The median age at implantation was 23 years (interquartile ranges 15-38), and the median follow-up was 5.7 years (95% confidence interval 4.9-7.3). A total of 196 patients met the criteria for outcome analysis, where appropriate therapy was observed in 41% (n = 80), occurring more often in patients with indications for secondary prevention than primary prevention (56% vs 26% at 5 years, P = 0.003). The cumulative incidence of inappropriate shocks was 13% (n = 26), with patients with CHD being more frequently affected. Unplanned surgeries were required in 36% (n = 71), predominantly due to lead-related issues in those with abdominal generator placement.

CONCLUSIONS

The high rate of appropriate therapies underscores the critical importance of risk assessment in ICD selection, particularly to mitigate lead failures and unnecessary shocks. However, defibrillator therapy has a relevant rate of unplanned surgeries, with abdominal generators and epicardial/extracardiac leads being risk factors.

Independent External Evaluation of Pediatric Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Risk Scores in Predicting Severe Ventricular Arrhythmias

BACKGROUND

Sudden cardiac death is the most common cause of death in childhood hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). Recently, 2 risk scores have been developed to estimate the 5-year risk of sudden cardiac death. We aimed to assess their respective performances in an independent cohort.

METHODS

All patients with HCM aged <18 years from a single center were retrospectively included between 2003 and 2023. HCM Risk-Kids and PRIMaCY risk scores were calculated at diagnosis and during follow-up. The primary composite outcome included sustained ventricular arrhythmia, appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy, aborted cardiac arrest, or sudden cardiac death.

RESULTS

A total of 100 primary prevention children were included (7.1±5.6 years, 59.0% males), with a mean follow-up of 8.6±5.5 years. Overall, 13 (13.0%) patients experienced the primary composite outcome. When only considering events during the 5 first years, Harrel C index was 0.52 (95% CI, 0.27-0.77) for HCM Risk-Kids (≥6%) and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.59-0.80) for PRIMaCY (>8.3%), with 1 patient potentially treated by ICD for every 25 ICDs implanted for HCM Risk-Kids and 1 for every 14 ICDs implanted for PRIMaCY. When risk scores were repeated and all primary outcomes during follow-up were considered, 12 of 13 (92.3%) events were correctly identified using both risk scores, with 1 patient potentially treated by ICD for every 5.6 ICDs implanted for HCM Risk-Kids and 1 for every 5.3 ICDs implanted for PRIMaCY. Among 44 (44.0%) patients implanted with an ICD, all primary prevention patients who had ≥1 appropriate ICD therapy during follow-up had an HCM Risk-Kids ≥6% and PRIMaCY >8.3% at implantation.

CONCLUSIONS

In this independent evaluation, our findings suggest imperfect discrimination between low and high-risk patients using the HCM Risk-Kids and PRIMaCY risk scores, with predicted risks tending to be overestimated compared with the actual observed events. The performance or risk scores was substantially improved by periodic reassessment during follow-up.

Device programing and SMART pass algorithm activation in subcutaneous implantable defibrillator patients: Data from a remote monitoring database

BACKGROUND

The programing of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (S-ICD) in clinical practice has been little studied, as the activation status of the SMART Pass filter, which was implemented to reduce inappropriate shocks.

PURPOSE

We assessed device programing during follow-up and the rate of detected arrhythmias in consecutive S-ICD recipients.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 670 S-ICD patients followed on the remote network at 17 Italian centers for a median of 31 months (25th-75th percentile: 16-51). The enhanced SMART Pass version, introduced in October 2022, was expected to reduce the unintentional deactivation rate.

RESULTS

At the latest remote data transmission, the median conditional zone cut-off was set to 210 bpm (25th-75th percentile: 200-220), the shock zone cutoff was 250 bpm (25th-75th percentile: 240-250), and the SMART Pass was enabled in 586 (87%) patients. During follow-up, 194 automatic deactivation events were reported in 118 (18%) patients. Shocks were delivered in 129 (19%) patients, and untreated arrhythmias were recorded in 136 (20%) patients. The rate of shocks was lower when SMART Pass was enabled -0.12/patient-year (95% CI: 0.10-0.14) versus 0.20 (95% CI: 0.15-0.26) (p = .002), as it was the rate of untreated arrhythmias -0.12/patient-year (95% CI: 0.11-0.14) versus 0.23 (95% CI: 0.18-0.30) (p = .001). The enhanced SMART Pass version was associated with a lower rate of deactivations -0.04/patient-year (95% CI: 0.02-0.05) versus 0.14 (95% CI: 0.12-0.16) (p < .001), and with a reduction in treated and untreated arrhythmias (Incidence rate ratios: 0.40 (95% CI: 0.28-0.53) and 0.40 (95% CI: 0.30-0.55), respectively (p < .001)).

CONCLUSIONS

Centers tend to program devices to detect high ventricular rates for arrhythmia detection, to minimize inappropriate shock occurrences. SMART Pass activation is associated with lower rates of detected and treated arrhythmias. The enhanced SMART Pass version seems associated with a lower deactivation rate and with a further decrease in treated arrhythmias.

Chronic phase subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator lead dislodgement in a patient with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy

The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) is often used in young patients such as arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) and Brugada syndrome due to long-term lead durability issues. Although S-ICD lead dislodgement is rare, we encountered such an incident in a young ARVC patient during the chronic phase following the two-incision technique. Remote monitoring system is useful for early diagnosis of electrode movement (Graphical abstract image). When S-ICD lead dislodgement occurs in active young patients, lead revision using the three-incision technique may be an option.

Implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy in paediatric patients for primary vs. secondary prevention

AIMS

The decisions about placing an ICD in a child are more difficult than in an adult due to longer expected lifespan and the complication risk. Young patients gain the most years from ICDs, despite higher risk of device-related complications. The secondary prevention ICD indication is clear, and device is implanted regardless of potential complications. For primary prevention, risk of sudden cardiac death and complications need to be evaluated. We aimed to compare outcomes for primary and secondary prevention ICDs.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Retrospective nationwide cohort study including paediatric patients identified from the Danish ICD registry with ICD implanted at an age ≤ 15 from 1982-21. Demographics, complications (composite of device-related infections or lead-failure requiring re-operation, mortality because of arrhythmia, or unknown cause), and mortality were retrieved from medical charts. Endpoint was appropriate therapy (shock or anti-tachycardia pacing for ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation). Of 72 receiving an ICD, the majority had channelopathies (n = 34) or structural heart diseases (n = 28). ICDs were implanted in 23 patients for primary prevention and 49 for secondary prevention, at median ages of 13.8 and 11.6 years (P-value 0.01), respectively. Median follow-up was 9.0 (interquartile ranges: 4.7-13.5) years. The 10-year cumulative incidence of first appropriate therapy was 70%, with complication and inappropriate therapy rates at 41% and 15%, respectively. No difference was observed between prevention groups for all outcomes. Six patients died during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

In children, two-thirds are secondary prevention ICDs. Children have higher appropriate therapy and complication rates than adults, while the inappropriate therapy rate was low.

Complications and inappropriate shocks in pediatric patients receiving a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrilator

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

There is limited evidence regarding the use of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (S-ICD) in pediatric patients. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of complications in these patients at our center, according to the type of ICD and patient size.

METHODS

We included all patients aged<18 years who received an S-ICD since 2016 at our center. As a control group, we also included contemporary patients (since 2014) who received a transvenous ICD (TV-ICD). The primary endpoint was a composite of complications and inappropriate shocks.

RESULTS

A total of 26 patients received an S-ICD (median age, 14 [5-17] years; body mass index [BMI], 20.2 kg/m2). Implantation was intermuscular in 23 patients (88%) and subserratus in the remainder. Two incisions were used in 24 patients (92%). In all patients, 2 zones were programmed: a conditional zone set at 230 (220-230) bpm, and a shock zone set at 250 bpm. Nineteen patients received a TV-ICD (median age, 11 [range, 5-16] years; BMI, 19.2 kg/m2, 79% single-chamber). Survival free from the primary endpoint at 5 years was 80% in the S-ICD group and 63% in the TV-ICD group (P=.54). Survival free from inappropriate shocks was similar (85% vs 89%, P=.86), while survival free from complications was higher in the S-ICD group (96% vs 57%, cloglog P=.016). There were no therapy failures in the S-ICD group, and no increased complication rates were observed in patients with BMI ≤20 kg/m2.

CONCLUSIONS

With contemporary implantation techniques and programming, S-ICD is a safe and effective therapy in pediatric patients. The number of inappropriate shocks is similar to TV-ICD, with fewer short- and mid-term complications.

New Guidelines of Pediatric Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices: What Is Changing in Clinical Practice?

Guidelines are important tools to guide the diagnosis and treatment of patients to improve the decision-making process of health professionals. They are periodically updated according to new evidence. Four new Guidelines in 2021, 2022 and 2023 referred to pediatric pacing and defibrillation. There are some relevant changes in permanent pacing. In patients with atrioventricular block, the heart rate limit in which pacemaker implantation is recommended was decreased to reduce too-early device implantation. However, it was underlined that the heart rate criterion is not absolute, as signs or symptoms of hemodynamically not tolerated bradycardia may even occur at higher rates. In sinus node dysfunction, symptomatic bradycardia is the most relevant recommendation for pacing. Physiological pacing is increasingly used and recommended when the amount of ventricular pacing is presumed to be high. New recommendations suggest that loop recorders may guide the management of inherited arrhythmia syndromes and may be useful for severe but not frequent palpitations. Regarding defibrillator implantation, the main changes are in primary prevention recommendations. In hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, pediatric risk calculators have been included in the Guidelines. In dilated cardiomyopathy, due to the rarity of sudden cardiac death in pediatric age, low ejection fraction criteria were demoted to class II. In long QT syndrome, new criteria included severely prolonged QTc with different limits according to genotype, and some specific mutations. In arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy, hemodynamically tolerated ventricular tachycardia and arrhythmic syncope were downgraded to class II recommendation. In conclusion, these new Guidelines aim to assess all aspects of cardiac implantable electronic devices and improve treatment strategies.

A cluster of inappropriate shocks in a pediatric S-ICD patient - how to troubleshoot?

We present the case of a 16-year-old male pediatric patient diagnosed with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM, identified as having a high risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD), who underwent a successful subcutaneous implantable cardiac defibrillator (S-ICD) implantation as a primary prevention measure in 2018. His past medical history included ADHD, Autism, and panic attacks. The patient experienced appropriate shocks that successfully terminated VF episodes. However, he also experienced multiple inappropriate shocks from the S-ICD, triggered by anxiety-induced tachycardia during panic episodes. Meticulous assessment of S-ICD tracings and electrocardiograms (ECGs) revealed the erroneous classification of sinus tachycardia as sustained ventricular tachycardia, leading to unwarranted therapeutic interventions. Clinical intervention involved reprogramming of the S-ICD, emphasizing the pivotal role of personalized device configuration in pediatric cases where fine margins matter. While literature on S-ICD use in pediatric populations remains limited, emerging registries underscore the efficacy and safety of S-ICDs in preventing sudden cardiac death while reducing complications associated with intravascular leads. This case underscores the critical nature of customized device programming in pediatric patients, underscoring S-ICDs as a practical defibrillation alternative that addresses distinct concerns within this cohort of patients.

ICD outcome in pediatric arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy

BACKGROUND

Arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy (ACM) is a very rare condition among pediatric patients. Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is the main complication and often requires ICD implantation. Aim of the study is the evaluation of the outcomes of ICD implanted ACM pediatric patients in terms of safety, efficacy and complications.

METHODS

All pediatric patients (<18 y.o.) diagnosed with ACM and who were implanted with ICD since 2009 in Our Institution were collected. Implantation was decided according to current recommendations/ guidelines, and outcome was recorded during follow-up.

RESULTS

Nineteen consecutive ACM patients were implanted with ICD. Subcutaneous ICDs (S-ICD) were implanted in 15 patients (79%) while transvenous ICDs (TV-ICD) in 4 patients (21%). Mean age at implantation was 14.3 ± 2.1 y.o. ICDs were implanted for secondary prevention in 4 (21%) patients, and for primary prevention in 15 (79%). During the follow-up (5.59 ± 3.4 years), appropriate ICD interventions were delivered in 4 (21%) patients for sustained VTs, [2 implanted in primary prevention (13%) and 2 in secondary prevention (50%)]. No defibrillation failures occurred. Inappropriate shocks occurred in 2 cases (10.5%). Device-related complications requiring device revision occurred in 3 (16%): lead dislodgement, surgical skin erosion and sensing defect.

CONCLUSIONS

In a pediatric ACM cohort, appropriate ICD therapies occurred in a minority of primary prevention patients and frequently in secondary prevention patients. The rate of inappropriate shocks and device-related complications were even more rare and mostly wound related. Therefore, ICD therapy in pediatric ACM is effective and safe.

Advancing the science of management of arrhythmic disease in children and adult congenital heart disease patients within the last 25 years

This review article reflects how publications in EP Europace have contributed to advancing the science of management of arrhythmic disease in children and adult patients with congenital heart disease within the last 25 years. A special focus is directed to congenital atrioventricular (AV) block, the use of pacemakers, cardiac resynchronization therapy devices, and implantable cardioverter defibrillators in the young with and without congenital heart disease, Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome, mapping and ablation technology, and understanding of cardiac genomics to untangle arrhythmic sudden death in the young.

Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators in Patients With Congenital Heart Disease

BACKGROUND

Very few data have been published on the use of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (S-ICDs) in patients with congenital heart disease (CHD).

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to analyze outcomes associated with S-ICDs in patients with CHD.

METHODS

This nationwide French cohort including all patients with an S-ICD was initiated in 2020 by the French Institute of Health and Medical Research. Characteristics at implantation and outcomes were analyzed in patients with CHD.

RESULTS

From October 12, 2012, to December 31, 2019, among 4,924 patients receiving an S-ICD implant in 150 centers, 101 (2.1%) had CHD. Tetralogy of Fallot, univentricular heart, and dextro-transposition of the great arteries represented almost one-half of the population. Patients with CHD were significantly younger (age 37.1 ± 15.4 years vs 50.1 ± 14.9 years; P < 0.001), more frequently female (37.6% vs 23.0%; P < 0.001), more likely to receive an S-ICD for secondary prevention (72.3% vs 35.9%; P < 0.001), and less likely to have severe systolic dysfunction of the systemic ventricle (28.1% vs 53.1%; P < 0.001). Over a mean follow-up period of 1.9 years, 16 (15.8%) patients with CHD received at least 1 appropriate shock, with all shocks successfully terminating the ventricular arrhythmia. The crude risk of appropriate S-ICD shock was twice as high in patients with CHD compared with non-CHD patients (annual incidences of 9.0% vs 4.4%; HR: 2.1; 95% CI: 1.3-3.4); however, this association was no longer significant after propensity matching (especially considering S-ICD indication, P = 0.12). The burden of all complications (HR: 1.2; 95% CI: 0.7-2.1; P = 0.4) and inappropriate shocks (HR: 0.9; 95% CI: 0.4-2.0; P = 0.9) was comparable in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this nationwide study, patients with CHD represented 2% of all S-ICD implantations. Our findings emphasize the effectiveness and safety of S-ICD in this particularly high-risk population. (S-ICD French Cohort Study [HONEST]; NCT05302115).

Impact of Median Sternotomy on Safety and Efficacy of the Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator

BACKGROUND

Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillators (S-ICDs) are an attractive alternative to transvenous ICDs among those not requiring pacing. However, the risks of damage to the S-ICD electrode during sternotomy and adverse interactions with sternal wires remain unclear. We sought to determine the rates of damage to the S-ICD lead during sternotomy, inappropriate shocks from electrical noise due to interaction with sternal wires, and failure to terminate spontaneous or induced ventricular arrhythmias.

METHODS

Retrospective, multicenter study of patients undergoing sternotomy before or after S-ICD implantation. Clinical, procedural, and device-related data were collected by each center and analyzed by the coordinating center. These data were compared with a historical control cohort of nonsternotomy patients.

RESULTS

Of 196 identified patients (52±16 years, 47 women), 166 underwent S-ICD implantation after sternotomy and 30 sternotomy after S-ICD. There was no damage to any lead among those who underwent sternotomy after S-ICD. Defibrillation threshold testing was performed in 63% at implant, with 91% first shock success. During a median follow-up of 29 months (range, 1-188), S-ICD first shocks successfully terminated spontaneous ventricular arrhythmias in 31 of 32 patients (97%). Inappropriate shocks occurred in 22 patients, most commonly related to T wave oversensing (n=14). Compared with the nonsternotomy controls, there were no differences in rates of first shock success for induced or spontaneous arrhythmias or rate of inappropriate shocks.

CONCLUSIONS

Sternotomy before or after S-ICD does not confer additional risk relative to a historical control group without sternotomy.

S-ICD Implantation "Tips and Tricks"

An implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) was developed to provide protection against sudden cardiac death. Despite being effective in terminating ventricular arrhythmias, traditional transvenous ICDs appeared over time to have certain limitations related to the need for vascular access and the presence of foreign material inside the circulatory system (namely lead failure and infections). A subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) was developed to overcome those limitations and to provide prevention against sudden cardiac death from outside the cardiovascular system. Utilization of that modern method of treatment is constantly increasing worldwide, and new centers incorporate implantation of that system in their portfolio. This review aims to present the most relevant issues related to S-ICD implantation procedure, based on experience of the authors and an extensive literature search.

The R″ wave in V1 and the negative terminal QRS vector in aVF combine to a novel 12-lead ECG algorithm to identify slow conducting anatomical isthmus 3 in patients with tetralogy of Fallot

AIMS

Patients with repaired tetralogy of Fallot (rTOF) have an increased risk of ventricular tachycardia (VT), with slow conducting anatomical isthmus (SCAI) 3 as dominant VT substrate. In patients with right bundle branch block (RBBB), SCAI 3 leads to local activation delay with a shift of terminal RV activation towards the lateral RV outflow tract which may be detected by terminal QRS vector changes on sinus rhythm electrocardiogram (ECG).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Consecutive rTOF patients aged ≥16 years with RBBB who underwent electroanatomical mapping at our institution between 2017-2022 and 2010-2016 comprised the derivation and validation cohort, respectively. Forty-six patients were included in the derivation cohort (aged 40±15 years, QRS duration 165±23 ms). Among patients with SCAI 3 (n = 31, 67%), 17 (55%) had an R″ in V1, 18 (58%) had a negative terminal QRS portion (NTP) ≥80 ms in aVF, and 12 (39%) had both ECG characteristics, compared to only 1 (7%), 1 (7%), and 0 patient without SCAI, respectively.Combining R″ in V1 and/or NTP ≥80 ms in aVF into a diagnostic algorithm resulted in a sensitivity of 74% and specificity of 87% in detecting SCAI 3. The inter-observer agreement for the diagnostic algorithm was 0.875. In the validation cohort [n = 33, 18 (55%) with SCAI 3], the diagnostic algorithm had a sensitivity of 83% and specificity of 80% for identifying SCAI 3.

CONCLUSION

A sinus rhythm ECG-based algorithm including R″ in V1 and/or NTP ≥80 ms in aVF can identify rTOF patients with a SCAI 3 and may contribute to non-invasive risk stratification for VT.

Opportunities and drawbacks of the subcutaneous defibrillator across different clinical settings

INTRODUCTION

The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) is an established therapy for the prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD) and an alternative to a transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator system in selected patients. Beyond randomized clinical trials, many observational studies have described the clinical performance of S-ICD across different subgroups of patients.

AREAS COVERED

Our review aimed to describe the opportunities and drawbacks of the S-ICD, focusing on their use in special populations and across different clinical settings.

EXPERT OPINION

The choice to implant S-ICD should be based on the patient's tailored approach, which takes into account the adequate S-ICD screening at rest or during stress, the infective risk, the ventricular arrhythmia susceptibility, the progressive nature of the underlying disease, the work or sports activity, and the risk of lead-related complications.