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

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.

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.