Predictive value of the PRAETORIAN score for defibrillation test success in patients with subcutaneous ICD: A subanalysis of the PRAETORIAN-DFT trial

BACKGROUND

The PRAETORIAN score estimates the risk of failure of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) therapy by using generator and lead positioning on bidirectional chest radiographs. The PRospective randomized compArative trial of subcutanEous implanTable cardiOverter-defibrillatoR ImplANtation with and without DeFibrillation Testing (PRAETORIAN-DFT) investigates whether PRAETORIAN score calculation is noninferior to defibrillation testing (DFT) with regard to first shock efficacy in spontaneous events.

OBJECTIVE

This prespecified subanalysis assessed the predictive value of the PRAETORIAN score for defibrillation success in induced ventricular arrhythmias.

METHODS

This multicenter investigator-initiated trial randomized 965 patients between DFT and PRAETORIAN score calculation after de novo S-ICD implantation. Successful DFT was defined as conversion of induced ventricular arrhythmia in <5 seconds from shock delivery within 2 attempts. Bidirectional chest radiographs were obtained after implantation. The predictive value of the PRAETORIAN score for DFT success was calculated for patients in the DFT arm.

RESULTS

In total, 482 patients were randomized to undergo DFT. Of these patients, 457 (95%) underwent DFT according to protocol, of whom 445 (97%) had successful DFT and 12 (3%) had failed DFT. A PRAETORIAN score of ≥90 had a positive predictive value of 25% for failed DFT, and a PRAETORIAN score of <90 had a negative predictive value of 99% for successful DFT. A PRAETORIAN score of ≥90 was the strongest independent predictor for failed DFT (odds ratio 33.77; confidence interval 6.13-279.95; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

A PRAETORIAN score of <90 serves as a reliable indicator for DFT success in patients with S-ICD, and a PRAETORIAN score of ≥90 is a strong predictor for DFT failure.

Association Between Self-Rated Medication Adherence and Adverse Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With Hypertension

Background Medication nonadherence contributes to poor health outcomes but remains challenging to identify. This study assessed the association between self-rated adherence and systolic blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, cardiovascular events, and all-cause mortality in SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial). Methods and Results A total of 9361 patients randomized to 2 systolic blood pressure target groups, <120 mm Hg (intensive) and <140 mm Hg (standard), self-rated their medication adherence at each visit by marking a scale, ranging from 0% to 100%. Lower and high adherence were defined as scores ≤80% and >80%, respectively. Linear mixed effect regression models and Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate the association between self-rated adherence and systolic blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality, respectively. A total of 9278 participants (mean age 68±9.4 years, 35.6% female) had repeated self-rated adherence measurements available, with a mean of 15±4 measurements per participant over 3.8 years follow-up. Of these, 2694 participants (29.0%) had ≥1 adherence measurements ≤80%. Compared with high-adherent patients, patients with lower adherence had significantly higher estimated on-treatment systolic blood pressure at 2-year follow-up: 128.7 (95% CI, 127.6-129.9) versus 120.0 (95% CI, 119.7-120.2) mm Hg in the intensive arm; and 139.8 (95% CI 138.4-141.1) versus 135.0 (95% CI 134.7-135.2) in the standard arm. Moreover, lower adherence was associated with an estimated 11 mg/dL higher low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level, more cardiovascular events (hazard ratio [HR], 1.69 [95% CI, 1.20-2.39]), and higher all-cause mortality (HR, 1.63 [95% CI, 1.16-2.31]). Conclusions Self-rated adherence allows identification of lower medication adherence and correlates with blood pressure control, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, and adverse outcomes.

Voltage gradients in transvenous and subcutaneous defibrillation and their risk of myocardial damage

INTRODUCTION

Transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shocks have been associated with cardiac biomarker elevations and are thought in some cases to contribute to adverse clinical outcomes and mortality, possibly from myocardium exposed to excessive shock voltage gradients. Currently, there are only limited data for comparison with subcutaneous ICDs. We sought to compare ventricular myocardium voltage gradients resulting from transvenous (TV) and subcutaneous defibrillator (S-ICD) shocks to assess their risk of myocardial damage.

METHODS

A finite element model was derived from thoracic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Voltage gradients were modeled for an S-ICD with a left-sided parasternal coil and a left-sided TV-ICD with a mid-cavity, a septal right ventricle (RV) coil, or a dual coil lead (TV mid, TV septal, TV septal +  superior vena cava [SVC]). High gradients were defined as > 100 V/cm.

RESULTS

The volumes of ventricular myocardium with high gradients > 100 V/cm were 0.02, 2.4, 7.7, and 0 cc for TV mid, TV septal, TV septal + SVC, and S-ICD, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our models suggest that S-ICD shocks produce more uniform gradients in the myocardium, with less exposure to potentially damaging electrical fields, compared to TV-ICDs. Dual coil TV leads yield higher gradients, as does closer proximity of the shock coil to the myocardium.

Device-related complications in subcutaneous versus transvenous ICD: a secondary analysis of the PRAETORIAN trial

BACKGROUND

The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) is developed to overcome lead-related complications and systemic infections, inherent to transvenous ICD (TV-ICD) therapy. The PRAETORIAN trial demonstrated that the S-ICD is non-inferior to the TV-ICD with regard to the combined primary endpoint of inappropriate shocks and complications. This prespecified secondary analysis evaluates all complications in the PRAETORIAN trial.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The PRAETORIAN trial is an international, multicentre, randomized trial in which 849 patients with an indication for ICD therapy were randomized to receive an S- ICD (N = 426) or TV-ICD (N = 423) and followed for a median of 49 months. Endpoints were device-related complications, lead-related complications, systemic infections, and the need for invasive interventions. Thirty-six device-related complications occurred in 31 patients in the S-ICD group of which bleedings were the most frequent. In the TV-ICD group, 49 complications occurred in 44 patients of which lead dysfunction was most frequent (HR: 0.69; P = 0.11). In both groups, half of all complications were within 30 days after implantation. Lead-related complications and systemic infections occurred significantly less in the S-ICD group compared with the TV-ICD group (P < 0.001, P = 0.03, respectively). Significantly more complications required invasive interventions in the TV-ICD group compared with the S-ICD group (8.3% vs. 4.3%, HR: 0.59; P = 0.047).

CONCLUSION

This secondary analysis shows that lead-related complications and systemic infections are more prevalent in the TV-ICD group compared with the S-ICD group. In addition, complications in the TV-ICD group were more severe as they required significantly more invasive interventions. This data contributes to shared decision-making in clinical practice.

Efficacy and Safety of Appropriate Shocks and Antitachycardia Pacing in Transvenous and Subcutaneous Implantable Defibrillators: Analysis of All Appropriate Therapy in the PRAETORIAN Trial

BACKGROUND

The PRAETORIAN trial (A Prospective, Randomized Comparison of Subcutaneous and Transvenous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Therapy) showed noninferiority of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) compared with transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (TV-ICD) with regard to inappropriate shocks and complications. In contrast to TV-ICD, S-ICD cannot provide antitachycardia pacing for monomorphic ventricular tachycardia. This prespecified secondary analysis evaluates appropriate therapy and whether antitachycardia pacing reduces the number of appropriate shocks.

METHODS

The PRAETORIAN trial was an international, investigator-initiated randomized trial that included patients with an indication for implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy. Patients with previous ventricular tachycardia <170 bpm or refractory recurrent monomorphic ventricular tachycardia were excluded. In 39 centers, 849 patients were randomized to receive an S-ICD (n=426) or TV-ICD (n=423) and were followed for a median of 49.1 months. ICD programming was mandated by protocol. Appropriate ICD therapy was defined as therapy for ventricular arrhythmias. Arrhythmias were classified as discrete episodes and storm episodes (≥3 episodes within 24 hours). Analyses were performed in the modified intention-to-treat population.

RESULTS

In the S-ICD group, 86 of 426 patients received appropriate therapy, versus 78 of 423 patients in the TV-ICD group, during a median follow-up of 52 months (48-month Kaplan-Meier estimates 19.4% and 17.5%; P=0.45). In the S-ICD group, 83 patients received at least 1 shock, versus 57 patients in the TV-ICD group (48-month Kaplan-Meier estimates 19.2% and 11.5%; P=0.02). Patients in the S-ICD group had a total of 254 shocks, compared with 228 shocks in the TV-ICD group (P=0.68). First shock efficacy was 93.8% in the S-ICD group and 91.6% in the TV-ICD group (P=0.40). The first antitachycardia pacing attempt successfully terminated 46% of all monomorphic ventricular tachycardias, but accelerated the arrhythmia in 9.4%. Ten patients with S-ICD experienced 13 electrical storms, versus 18 patients with TV-ICD with 19 electrical storms. Patients with appropriate therapy had an almost 2-fold increased relative risk of electrical storms in the TV-ICD group compared with the S-ICD group (P=0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In this trial, no difference was observed in shock efficacy of S-ICD compared with TV-ICD. Although patients in the S-ICD group were more likely to receive an ICD shock, the total number of appropriate shocks was not different between the 2 groups. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01296022.

Complications related to elective generator replacement of the subcutaneous implantable defibrillator

Aims

To guarantee uninterrupted function of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD), the pulse generator needs to be surgically replaced before the battery is depleted. The risks related to this replacement substantially impact long-term outcome for S-ICD recipients, as the majority will undergo one or several of these procedures in their lifetime. We aim to describe the procedural characteristics of the replacement procedure and to provide an insight in the complications associated with these replacements.

Methods and results

In this retrospective analysis, data from replacement procedures and follow-up visits were collected from all patients who underwent elective S-ICD generator replacement in our tertiary centre from June 2014 until November 2019. Original device position was assessed using the PRAETORIAN score. Complications were defined as those requiring surgical intervention, systemic antibiotic treatment, or device extraction. Seventy-two patients were included, with a median follow-up of 1.9 years (IQR 0.6–3.3 years) after replacement. Battery depletion occurred after 5.9 ± 0.7 years. The pulse generator was repositioned in patients with a PRAETORIAN score ≥90 to minimize the defibrillation threshold. Although there was an increase in impedance compared to the implant procedure, first shock conversion rate during defibrillation testing was 91.4% with a success rate of 100% after multiple attempts. Two patients developed a complication after, respectively, 9 and 21 months, resulting in a complication rate of 1.4% per year.

Conclusion

With a median follow-up of 1.9 years, this study shows a low complication rate after S-ICD replacement, with a first shock conversion rate of 91.4%.

Long-term follow-up of the two-incision implantation technique for the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator

Introduction

The two‐incision implantation technique of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator (S‐ICD) was introduced as an alternative to the standard three‐incision approach by omitting the superior parasternal incision. Thereby, complications may be prevented. Short‐term follow‐up demonstrated the safety and efficacy of the two‐incision technique. However, long‐term results are lacking.

Methods

This retrospective study included patients implanted between February 2009 and June 2020. Patients were divided into a group of patients who were implanted with the standard three‐incision technique and a group who were implanted with the two‐incision technique. Outcomes were defibrillation impedance and efficacy and complications requiring intervention.

Results

A total of 268 patients were included (age 42.4 ± 16.6 years, 35.4% female, BMI 25.1 ± 4.5 kg/m²). Thirty‐one patients underwent S‐ICD implantation with the three‐incision technique and 237 patients with the two‐incision technique. First shock efficacy during defibrillation testing was 93% in the three‐incision group versus 94% in the two‐incision group (P = .69), and shock impedance was 85 versus 68 ohms (P = .04). First shock success was 75% versus 76% for spontaneous episodes (P = 1.00). Complication‐free survival at 5‐year follow‐up in the three‐incision group was estimated at 0.96 (95% CI 0.90‐1.00) versus 0.98 (95% CI 0.96‐1.00) in the two‐incision group (P = .20) and for inappropriate shocks at 5‐year 0.77 (95% CI 0.63‐0.94) versus 0.83 (95% CI 0.77‐0.89, P = .30), respectively.

Conclusion

Five‐year follow‐up in this S‐ICD cohort showed similar complication rates and effectiveness of two‐incision technique compared to the three‐incision technique. This technique offers physicians a less invasive and more simplified implantation procedure for the S‐ICD, with a better cosmetic result.

Subcutaneous or Transvenous Defibrillator Therapy

BACKGROUND

The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) was designed to avoid complications related to the transvenous ICD lead by using an entirely extrathoracic placement. Evidence comparing these systems has been based primarily on observational studies.

METHODS

We conducted a noninferiority trial in which patients with an indication for an ICD but no indication for pacing were assigned to receive a subcutaneous ICD or transvenous ICD. The primary end point was the composite of device-related complications and inappropriate shocks; the noninferiority margin for the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval for the hazard ratio (subcutaneous ICD vs. transvenous ICD) was 1.45. A superiority analysis was prespecified if noninferiority was established. Secondary end points included death and appropriate shocks.

RESULTS

A total of 849 patients (426 in the subcutaneous ICD group and 423 in the transvenous ICD group) were included in the analyses. At a median follow-up of 49.1 months, a primary end-point event occurred in 68 patients in the subcutaneous ICD group and in 68 patients in the transvenous ICD group (48-month Kaplan-Meier estimated cumulative incidence, 15.1% and 15.7%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 1.39; P = 0.01 for noninferiority; P = 0.95 for superiority). Device-related complications occurred in 31 patients in the subcutaneous ICD group and in 44 in the transvenous ICD group (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.44 to 1.09); inappropriate shocks occurred in 41 and 29 patients, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.43; 95% CI, 0.89 to 2.30). Death occurred in 83 patients in the subcutaneous ICD group and in 68 in the transvenous ICD group (hazard ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.70); appropriate shocks occurred in 83 and 57 patients, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.08 to 2.12).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with an indication for an ICD but no indication for pacing, the subcutaneous ICD was noninferior to the transvenous ICD with respect to device-related complications and inappropriate shocks. (Funded by Boston Scientific; PRAETORIAN ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01296022.).

Initial Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate Decline and Long-Term Renal Function During Intensive Antihypertensive Therapy: A Post Hoc Analysis of the SPRINT and ACCORD-BP Randomized Controlled Trials

Lowering blood pressure (BP) can lead to an initial decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). However, there is debate how much eGFR decline is acceptable. We performed a post hoc analysis of ACCORD-BP (Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes-Blood Pressure) and SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial), which randomized patients to intensive or standard systolic BP-targets. We determined the relation between initial decline in mean arterial pressure and eGFR. Subsequently, we stratified patients to BP-target and initial eGFR decrease and assessed the relation with annual eGFR decline after 1 year. A total of 13 266 patients with 41 126 eGFR measurements were analyzed. Up to 10 mm Hg of BP-lowering, eGFR did not change. Hereafter, there was a linear decrease of 3.4% eGFR (95% CI, 2.9%-3.9%) per 10 mm Hg mean arterial pressure decrease. The observed eGFR decline based on 95% of the subjects varied from 26% after 0 mm Hg to 46% with a 40 mm Hg mean arterial pressure decrease. There was no difference in eGFR slope (P=0.37) according to initial eGFR decline and BP-target, with a decrease of 1.24 (95% CI, 1.09-1.39), 1.20 (95% CI, 0.97-1.43), and 1.14 (95% CI, 0.77-1.50) in the 5%, 5% to 20%, and >20% stratum during intensive and 0.95 (95% CI, 0.81-1.09), 1.23 (95% CI, 0.97-1.49), and 1.17 (95% CI, 0.65-1.69) mL/minute per 1.73 m2 per year during standard treatment. In patients at high cardiovascular risk with and without diabetes mellitus, we found no association between initial eGFR and annual eGFR decline during BP-lowering treatment. Our results support that an eGFR decrease up to 20% after BP lowering can be accepted and suggest that the limit can be extended up to 46% depending on the achieved BP reduction. Registration- URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT00000620, NCT01206062.

Net Clinical Benefit of Left Atrial Appendage Closure Versus Warfarin in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: A Pooled Analysis of the Randomized PROTECT-AF and PREVAIL Studies

Background

The PROTECT‐AF (Watchman Left Atrial Appendage Closure Technology for Embolic Protection in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation) and PREVAIL (Evaluation of the Watchman LAA Closure Device in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Versus Long Term Warfarin Therapy) trials demonstrated noninferiority of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) to warfarin for the composite end point of stroke, systemic embolism, or cardiovascular death. This study aims to quantify the net clinical benefit (NCB) of LAAC versus warfarin, accounting for differences in clinical impact of different event types.

Methods and Results

We performed a post hoc analysis of the PROTECT‐AF and PREVAIL trials, which randomized atrial fibrillation patients to LAAC or warfarin in a 2:1 fashion. The trials enrolled patients in the United States and Europe between 2005 and 2012 with paroxysmal, persistent, or permanent atrial fibrillation and CHADS₂ risk scores ≥1. Relative to an index weight for death (1.0), events were assigned weights based on their disabling effect: (1) stroke event weights were based on modified Rankin scores in the base case analyses, and (2) major bleed (0.05) and pericardial effusion (0.05). NCB was calculated as the sum of weight‐adjusted events per 100 patient‐years. Among 1114 randomized subjects, the NCB of LAAC was 1.42% per year (95% CI 0.01–2.82, P=0.04) and a relative risk of 0.74 (95% CI 0.56–1.00). NCB point estimates favored warfarin early in follow‐up, but trended in favor of LAAC after 1 to 2 years. The benefit of LAAC was preserved across subgroups, with particular benefit observed in the subgroup of prior stroke and without diabetes mellitus.

Conclusions

This analysis demonstrates long‐term NCB of LAAC with Watchman over warfarin therapy, as the upfront risk of periprocedural events is counterbalanced over time by reduced bleeding events and mortality.

Clinical Trial Registration

UR: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: NCT01182441 and NCT00129545.

P2438Deep learning model for atrial fibrillation detection based on single beat morphology

Background

The electrocardiogram (ECG) is commonly used, but most recent rhythm discrimination algorithms still lack both specificity and sensitivity. Deep learning techniques have shown promising results in the classification of physiological signals like ECGs.

Purpose

To develop and test a deep learning (DL) model to discriminate between atrial fibrillation (AF) and sinus rhythm (SR).

Methods

For the development of the DL model we used 1499 ECGs sampled at 500 Hz of patients diagnosed with AF. All ECGs were labeled by two experienced investigators. Only ECGs labeled as SR or AF were included in the dataset. To simplify the learning process, solely the first ECG channel was used. The ECG waveforms were preprocessed using the Fourier cosine series to correct for baseline wander. Input data was generated by normalizing and scaling all different heartbeats by centralizing the R peak, leading to 15744 single heart beat samples of 80 data points (figure A). Multiple feedforward architectures were tested with different numbers of layers, filters and activation functions. The models were trained by equally splitting the data (50%SR, 50%AF) in a training (65%), validation (25%) and test set (15%). The best performing model was chosen based on the accuracy.

Results

A total of 1469 ECGs (1061 (72%)SR, 408 (28%)AF) were included. The model with the best performance was a feedforward model consisting three dense layers with ReLU activation and four dense layers with Linear activation. Training of the model was performed in 32 epochs. Validation of the model resulted in an accuracy of 96% (figure B), precision of 95% and recall of 96%.

Conclusions

The morphology based deep learning model developed in this study was able to discriminate atrial fibrillation from sinus rhythm with a fairly high accuracy using a limited size dataset and only one lead.

Rationale and design of the PRAETORIAN-DFT trial: A prospective randomized CompArative trial of SubcutanEous ImplanTable CardiOverter-DefibrillatoR ImplANtation with and without DeFibrillation testing

In transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (TV-ICD) implants, routine defibrillation testing (DFT) does not improve shock efficacy or reduce arrhythmic death but patients are exposed to the risk of complications related to DFT. The conversion rate of DFT in subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) is high and first shock efficacy is similar to TV-ICD efficacy rates. STUDY DESIGN: The PRAETORIAN-DFT trial is an investigator-initiated, randomized, controlled, multicenter, prospective two-arm trial designed to demonstrate non-inferiority of omitting DFT in patients undergoing S-ICD implantation in which the S-ICD system components are optimally positioned. Positioning of the S-ICD will be assessed with the PRAETORIAN score. The PRAETORIAN score is developed to systematically evaluate implant position of the S-ICD system components which determine the defibrillation threshold on post-operative chest X-ray. A total of 965 patients, scheduled to undergo a de novo S-ICD implantation without contra-indications for either DFT strategy, will be randomized to either standard of care S-ICD implantation with DFT, or S-ICD implantation without DFT but with evaluation of the implant position using the PRAETORIAN score. The study is powered to claim non-inferiority of S-ICD implantation without DFT in de novo S-ICD patients in respect to the primary endpoint of first shock efficacy in spontaneous arrhythmia episodes. Patients with a high PRAETORIAN score (≥90) in the interventional arm of this study will undergo DFT according to the same DFT protocol as in the control arm. CONCLUSION: The PRAETORIAN-DFT trial is a randomized trial that aims to gain scientific evidence to safely omit a routine DFT after S-ICD implantation in patients with correct device positioning.

A novel tool to evaluate the implant position and predict defibrillation success of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: The PRAETORIAN score

BACKGROUND

Suboptimal positioning of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) increases the defibrillation threshold and risk of conversion failure.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective is to develop a tool to evaluate the implant position and predict defibrillation success of the S-ICD: the PRAETORIAN score.

METHODS

The PRAETORIAN score is based on clinical and computer modeling knowledge of determinants affecting the defibrillation threshold: subcoil fat, subgenerator fat, and anterior positioning of the S-ICD generator. The score evaluates these determinants on the postoperative anterior-posterior and lateral chest radiographs and has 3 categories: 30-<90 points representing a low risk, 90-<150 points representing an intermediate risk, and ≥150 points representing a high risk of conversion failure. The score was developed using 2 separate S-ICD data sets for derivation and validation. The performance metrics are the positive and negative predictive values.

RESULTS

The development data set consisted of 181 patients with S-ICD, and the validation cohort consisted of 321 patients from the S-ICD Investigational Device Exemption trial. The distribution of scores was 93%-98% low risk (<90 points), 2%-5% intermediate risk (90-<150 points), and 1% high risk (≥150 points). The positive predictive value for an intermediate or high PRAETORIAN score for a failed conversion test was 51%, while a low PRAETORIAN score predicted a successful conversion in 99.8% of patients.

CONCLUSION

The PRAETORIAN score allows the identification of patients with high defibrillation thresholds by using the routine chest radiograph and provides feedback to implanters on S-ICD positioning. The PRAETORIAN-DFT trial will prospectively validate the score by randomizing to standard conversion testing vs using the score without conversion testing.

[Limits to the treatment of hypertension]

According to the 2011 Dutch guideline on Cardiovascular risk management 1 in 5 hypertensive patients are eligible for blood pressure lowering treatment. The Dutch guideline recommends striving for a systolic blood pressure (SBP) of < 140 mmHg in adult patients who have no cardiovascular disease or diabetes mellitus, while the recent American guideline now recommends an SBP target value of < 130 mmHg for all adult patients. An important reason for using a stricter SBP target value are the results of randomised studies and meta-analyses that looked at the effect of intensive antihypertensive therapy on the risk of mortality and cardiovascular disease. Based on the literature, there appears to be sufficient evidence that intensive antihypertensive therapy (SBP target value of < 130 mmHg) is useful in patients with cardiovascular disease and in patients with high cardiovascular risk. Currently, there is insufficient evidence that intensive antihypertensive therapy is useful in patients who have diabetes mellitus or who are over 80 years old.

Clinical parameters to optimize patient selection for subcutaneous and transvenous implantable defibrillator therapy

BACKGROUND

The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) lacks the antitachycardia pacing (ATP) capability of tranvenous ICDs (TV-ICD). S-ICD patient selection can be challenging as some patients may benefit from ATP. We aim to identify clinical predictors of ATP benefit, in order to improve patient selection for S-ICD or TV-ICD therapy.

METHODS

De novo single- and dual-chamber TV-ICD patients implanted between March 2011 and December 2015 were included. Ventricular arrhythmias terminated by ATP and not followed by a shock were considered successful ATP therapy. Cox proportional hazard analysis was performed to assess the adjusted effect of multiple predictors for appropriate ATP and shock therapy.

RESULTS

Note that 431 patients were included with a median follow-up of 26 months. Ninety-nine patients (23%) received appropriate ATP therapy, which terminated the arrhythmia in 67%. A history of nonsustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT) or monomorphic VT (MVT) was the only predictor of appropriate ATP therapy in the multivariable model (hazard ratio [HR] 2.73, P < 0.001). Sixty-five of 221 patients with a history of NS (VT) received appropriate ATP (29%) versus 24 patients (11%) without a history NS (VT) (P < 0.001). A secondary prevention indication was the only predictor in the multivariate model for appropriate shock therapy (HR 1.82, P  =  0.05).

CONCLUSION

A history of NSVT or MVT is a significant predictor for appropriate and successful ATP therapy. One in three patients with NSVT or MVT received appropriate ATP versus one in 10 patients without a history of NSVT or MVT over a 2-year period of follow-up.

Intensive Blood Pressure Lowering in Patients With and Patients Without Type 2 Diabetes: A Pooled Analysis From Two Randomized Trials

OBJECTIVE

The Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Blood Pressure (ACCORD-BP) study did not find a significant beneficial effect of intensive systolic blood pressure (SBP) lowering on cardiovascular events in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), while the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) did find a significant beneficial effect in patients without T2DM. The objective of this analysis was to assess the effect of both T2DM and baseline cardiovascular disease risk on the treatment effect of intensive blood pressure lowering.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The individual patient data from the ACCORD-BP and SPRINT studies were pooled and follow-up durations harmonized. Both studies randomized hypertensive patients to an SBP target of <120 mmHg or a target of <140 mmHg. The composite primary end point consisted of unstable angina, myocardial infarction, acute heart failure, stroke, and cardiovascular death. The interaction between intensive blood pressure lowering and both T2DM and 10-year cardiovascular risk was assessed using Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 14,094 patients with mean age 66 ± 8.9 years and mean baseline SBP 139.5 ± 15.6 mmHg; 33.6% had T2DM. The hazard ratio for the primary composite end point was 0.82 (95% CI 0.73-0.93), P = 0.0017. The interaction between intensive blood pressure lowering and T2DM was nonsignificant (P = 0.13). The 10-year cardiovascular risk was higher in primary prevention patients with T2DM, but risk did not interact with the treatment effect (P = 0.84).

CONCLUSIONS

Intensive blood pressure lowering may have a similar favorable effect and appears to decrease cardiovascular events in both patients with and patients without T2DM.

Implantation of the Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator

Background—

Alternative techniques to the traditional 3-incision subcutaneous implantation of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator may offer procedural and cosmetic advantages. We evaluate 4 different implant techniques of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator.

Methods and Results—

Patients implanted with subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators from 2 hospitals between 2009 and 2016 were included. Four implantation techniques were used depending on physician preference and patient characteristics. The 2- and 3-incision techniques both place the pulse generator subcutaneously, but the 2-incision technique omits the superior parasternal incision for lead positioning. Submuscular implantation places the pulse generator underneath the serratus anterior muscle and subfascial implantation underneath the fascial layer on the anterior side of the serratus anterior muscle. Reported outcomes include perioperative parameters, defibrillation testing, and clinical follow-up. A total of 246 patients were included with a median age of 47 years and 37% female. Fifty-four patients were implanted with the 3-incision technique, 118 with the 2-incision technique, 38 with submuscular, and 37 with subfascial. Defibrillation test efficacy and shock lead impedance during testing did not differ among the groups; respectively, P =0.46 and P =0.18. The 2-incision technique resulted in the shortest procedure duration and time-to-hospital discharge compared with the other techniques ( P <0.001). A total of 18 complications occurred, but there were no significant differences between the groups ( P =0.21). All infections occurred in subcutaneous implants (3-incision, n=3; 2-incision, n=4). In the 2-incision group, there were no lead displacements.

Conclusions—

The presented implantation techniques are feasible alternatives to the standard 3-incision subcutaneous implantation, and the 2-incision technique resulted in shortest procedure duration.

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in adults with congenital heart disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

Sudden cardiac death is a major cause of mortality in adult congenital heart disease (ACHD) patients. The indications for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation in ACHD patients are still not well established. We aim to systematically review the literature on indications and outcome of ICD implantation in ACHD patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed a comprehensive search in EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar to identify all studies on ICD implantation in ACHD patients. We used random effects models to calculate proportions and 95% confidence intervals. Of 1356 articles, 24 studies with 2162 patients were included, with a mean follow-up of 3.6 ± 0.9 years. Half of patients had tetralogy of Fallot. Mean age at implantation was 36.5 ± 5.5 years old and 66% was male. Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators were implanted for primary prevention in 53% (43.5-62.7). Overall, 24% (18.6-31.3) of patients received one or more appropriate ICD interventions (anti-tachycardia pacing or shocks) during 3.7 ± 0.9 years: 22% (16.9-28.8) of patients with primary prevention in 3.3 ± 0.3 years and 35% (26.6-45.2) of patients with secondary prevention in 4.3 ± 1.2 years. Inappropriate shocks occurred in 25% (20.1-31.0) in 3.7 ± 0.8 years and other, particularly lead-related complications in 26% (18.9-33.6) of patients in 3.8 ± 0.8 years. All-cause mortality was 10% during 3.7 ± 0.9 years.

CONCLUSIONS

In ACHD, remarkably high rates of appropriate ICD therapy were reported, both in primary and secondary prevention. Because of the young age and lower death rates, the cumulative beneficial effects are likely greater in ACHD patients than in acquired heart disease patients. However, considering the high rates of inappropriate shocks and complications, case-by-case weighing of costs and benefits, remains essential.

The learning curve associated with the introduction of the subcutaneous implantable defibrillator

Aims

The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) was introduced to overcome complications related to transvenous leads. Adoption of the S-ICD requires implanters to learn a new implantation technique. The aim of this study was to assess the learning curve for S-ICD implanters with respect to implant-related complications, procedure time, and inappropriate shocks (IASs).

Methods and results

In a pooled cohort from two clinical S-ICD databases, the IDE Trial and the EFFORTLESS Registry, complications, IASs at 180 days follow-up and implant procedure duration were assessed. Patients were grouped in quartiles based on experience of the implanter and Kaplan–Meier estimates of complication and IAS rates were calculated. A total of 882 patients implanted in 61 centres by 107 implanters with a median of 4 implants (IQR 1,8) were analysed. There were a total of 59 patients with complications and 48 patients with IAS. The complication rate decreased significantly from 9.8% in Quartile 1 (least experience) to 5.4% in Quartile 4 (most experience) (P = 0.02) and non-significantly for IAS from 7.9 to 4.8% (P = 0.10). Multivariable analysis demonstrated a hazard ratio of 0.78 (P = 0.045) for complications and 1.01 (P = 0.958) for IAS. Dual-zone programming increased with experience of the individual implanter (P < 0.001), which reduced IAS significantly in the multivariable model (HR 0.44, P = 0.01). Procedure time decreased from 75 to 65 min (P < 0.001). The complication rate and procedure time stabilized after Quartile 2 (>13 implants).

Conclusion

There is a short and significant learning curve associated with physicians adopting the S-ICD. Performance stabilizes after 13 implants.

Association Between Chest Compression Interruptions and Clinical Outcomes of Ventricular Fibrillation Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

BACKGROUND

Minimizing pauses in chest compressions during cardiopulmonary resuscitation is a focus of current guidelines. Prior analyses found that prolonged pauses for defibrillation (perishock pauses) are associated with worse survival. We analyzed resuscitations to characterize the association between pauses for all reasons and both ventricular fibrillation termination and patient survival.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In 319 patients with ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, we analyzed recordings from all defibrillators used during resuscitation and measured durations of all cardiopulmonary resuscitation pauses. Median durations were 32 seconds (25th and 75th percentile, 22 and 52 seconds) for the longest pause for any reason, 23 seconds (25th and 75th percentile, 14 and 34 seconds) for the longest perishock pause, and 24 seconds (25th and 75th percentile, 11 and 38 seconds) for the longest nonshock pause. Multivariable regression models showed lower odds for survival per 5-second increase in the longest overall pause (odds ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.83-0.95), longest perishock pause (odds ratio, 0.85; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-0.93), and longest nonshock pause (odds ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-0.91). In 36% of cases, the longest pause was a nonshock pause; this subgroup had lower survival than the group in whom the longest pause was a perishock pause (27% versus 44%, respectively; P<0.01) despite a higher chest compression fraction. Preshock pauses were 8 seconds (25th and 75th percentile, 4 and 17 seconds) for shocks that terminated ventricular fibrillation and 7 seconds (25th and 75th percentile, 4 and 13 seconds) for shocks that did not (P=0.18).

CONCLUSIONS

Prolonged pauses have a negative association with survival not explained by chest compression fraction or decreased ventricular fibrillation termination rate. Ventricular fibrillation termination was not the mechanism linking pause duration and survival. Strategies shortening the longest pauses may improve outcome.