Active Arrhythmia Pattern: A Novel Predictor of ICD Shocks-A Subanalysis From the PARTITA Study

BACKGROUND

In the PARTITA trial (Does Timing of Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation Affect Prognosis in Patients With an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator?), antitachycardia pacing (ATP) predicted the occurrence of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) shocks. Catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia after the first shock reduced the risk of death or worsening heart failure. A threshold of ATPs that might warrant an ablation procedure before ICD shocks is unknown. Our aim was to identify a threshold of ATPs and clinical features that predict the occurrence of shocks and cardiovascular events.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 517 patients in phase A of the PARTITA study. We used classification and regression tree analysis to develop and test a risk stratification model based on arrhythmia patterns and clinical data to predict ICD shocks. Secondary end points were worsening heart failure and cardiovascular hospitalization.

RESULTS

Classification and regression tree classified patients into 6 leaves by increasing shock probability. Patients treated with ≥5 ATPs in 6 months (active arrhythmia pattern) had the highest risk of ICD shocks (93% and 86%, training and testing samples, respectively). Patients without ATPs had the lowest (1% and 2%). Other predictors included left ventricle ejection fraction<35%, age of <60 years, and obesity. Survival analysis revealed a higher risk of worsening heart failure (hazard ratio, 5.45 [95% CI, 1.62-18.4]; P=0.006) and cardiovascular hospitalization (hazard ratio, 7.29 [95% CI, 3.66-14.5]; P<0.001) for patients with an active arrhythmia pattern compared with those without ATPs.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with an active arrhythmia pattern (≥5 ATPs in 6 months) are associated with an increased risk of ICD shocks, as well as heart failure hospitalization and cardiovascular hospitalization. These data suggest that additional treatments may be helpful to this high-risk group as a preventive strategy to reduce the incidence of major events. Further prospective randomized trials are needed to confirm the benefits of early ventricular tachycardia ablation in this setting.

Performance of Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (S-ICD) in Chinese Population with Primary Prevention Indications: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study

BACKGROUND International studies have shown that use of a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) could reduce lead-related complications while maintaining adequate defibrillation performance; however, data from the Chinese population or other Asian groups are limited. MATERIAL AND METHODS SCOPE is a prospective, multicenter, observational cohort study. Two hundred patients with primary prevention indication for sudden cardiac death (SCD), who are candidates for S-ICD, will be enrolled. From the same population, another 200 patients who are candidates for transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (TV-ICD) will be enrolled after being matched for age, sex, SCD high-risk etiology (ischemic cardiomyopathy, and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, ion channel disease, and other) and atrial fibrillation in a 1: 1 ratio with enrolled S-ICD patients. All the patients will be followed for 18 months under standard of care. RESULTS The primary endpoint is proportion of patients free from inappropriate shock (IAS) at 18 months in the S-ICD group. The lower 95% confidence bound of the proportion will be compared with a performance goal of 90.3%, which was derived from the previous meta-analysis. The comparisons between S-ICD and TV-ICD on IAS, appropriate shock, and complications will be used as secondary endpoints without formal assumptions. CONCLUSIONS This is the first prospective multicenter study focusing on the long-term performance of S-ICD in a Chinese population. By comparing with the data derived from international historical studies and a matched TV-ICD group, data from SCOPE will allow for the assessment of S-ICD in the Chinese population in a contemporary real-world implantation level and programming techniques, which will help us to further modify the device implantation and programming protocol in this specific population in the future.

Arrhythmic Risk in Biventricular Pacing Compared With Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing: Results From the I-CLAS Study

BACKGROUND

Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) may be associated with greater improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction and reduction in death or heart failure hospitalization compared with biventricular pacing (BVP) in patients requiring cardiac resynchronization therapy. We sought to compare the occurrence of sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) and new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients undergoing BVP and LBBAP.

METHODS

The I-CLAS study (International Collaborative LBBAP Study) included patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% who underwent BVP or LBBAP for cardiac resynchronization therapy between January 2018 and June 2022 at 15 centers. We performed propensity score-matched analysis of LBBAP and BVP in a 1:1 ratio. We assessed the incidence of VT/VF and new-onset AF among patients with no history of AF. Time to sustained VT/VF and time to new-onset AF was analyzed using the Cox proportional hazards survival model.

RESULTS

Among 1778 patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (BVP, 981; LBBAP, 797), there were 1414 propensity score-matched patients (propensity score-matched BVP, 707; propensity score-matched LBBAP, 707). The occurrence of VT/VF was significantly lower with LBBAP compared with BVP (4.2% versus 9.3%; hazard ratio, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.29-0.74]; P<0.001). The incidence of VT storm (>3 episodes in 24 hours) was also significantly lower with LBBAP compared with BVP (0.8% versus 2.5%; P=0.013). Among 299 patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemakers (BVP, 111; LBBAP, 188), VT/VF occurred in 8 patients in the BVP group versus none in the LBBAP group (7.2% versus 0%; P<0.001). In 1194 patients with no history of VT/VF or antiarrhythmic therapy (BVP, 591; LBBAP, 603), the occurrence of VT/VF was significantly lower with LBBAP than with BVP (3.2% versus 7.3%; hazard ratio, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.26-0.81]; P=0.007). Among patients with no history of AF (n=890), the occurrence of new-onset AF >30 s was significantly lower with LBBAP than with BVP (2.8% versus 6.6%; hazard ratio, 0.34 [95% CI, 0.16-0.73]; P=0.008). The incidence of AF lasting >24 hours was also significantly lower with LBBAP than with BVP (0.7% versus 2.9%; P=0.015).

CONCLUSIONS

LBBAP was associated with a lower incidence of sustained VT/VF and new-onset AF compared with BVP. This difference remained significant after adjustment for differences in baseline characteristics between patients with BVP and LBBAP. Physiological resynchronization by LBBAP may be associated with lower risk of arrhythmias compared with BVP.

Update on Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Infections and Their Prevention, Diagnosis, and Management: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association: Endorsed by the International Society for Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases

The American Heart Association sponsored the first iteration of a scientific statement that addressed all aspects of cardiovascular implantable electronic device infection in 2010. Major advances in the prevention, diagnosis, and management of these infections have occurred since then, necessitating a scientific statement update. An 11-member writing group was identified and included recognized experts in cardiology and infectious diseases, with a career focus on cardiovascular infections. The group initially met in October 2022 to develop a scientific statement that was drafted with front-line clinicians in mind and focused on providing updated clinical information to enhance outcomes of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic device infection. The current scientific statement highlights recent advances in prevention, diagnosis, and management, and how they may be incorporated in the complex care of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic device infection.

Arrhythmia and Death Following Percutaneous Revascularization in Ischemic Left Ventricular Dysfunction: Prespecified Analyses From the REVIVED-BCIS2 Trial

BACKGROUND

Ventricular arrhythmia is an important cause of mortality in patients with ischemic left ventricular dysfunction. Revascularization with coronary artery bypass graft or percutaneous coronary intervention is often recommended for these patients before implantation of a cardiac defibrillator because it is assumed that this may reduce the incidence of fatal and potentially fatal ventricular arrhythmias, although this premise has not been evaluated in a randomized trial to date.

METHODS

Patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction, extensive coronary disease, and viable myocardium were randomly assigned to receive either percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) plus optimal medical and device therapy (OMT) or OMT alone. The composite primary outcome was all-cause death or aborted sudden death (defined as an appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy or a resuscitated cardiac arrest) at a minimum of 24 months, analyzed as time to first event on an intention-to-treat basis. Secondary outcomes included cardiovascular death or aborted sudden death, appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy or sustained ventricular arrhythmia, and number of appropriate ICD therapies.

RESULTS

Between August 28, 2013, and March 19, 2020, 700 patients were enrolled across 40 centers in the United Kingdom. A total of 347 patients were assigned to the PCI+OMT group and 353 to the OMT alone group. The mean age of participants was 69 years; 88% were male; 56% had hypertension; 41% had diabetes; and 53% had a clinical history of myocardial infarction. The median left ventricular ejection fraction was 28%; 53.1% had an implantable defibrillator inserted before randomization or during follow-up. All-cause death or aborted sudden death occurred in 144 patients (41.6%) in the PCI group and 142 patients (40.2%) in the OMT group (hazard ratio, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.82-1.30]; P=0.80). There was no between-group difference in the occurrence of any of the secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

PCI was not associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality or aborted sudden death. In patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy, PCI is not beneficial solely for the purpose of reducing potentially fatal ventricular arrhythmias.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov; Unique identifier: NCT01920048.

One-year quality-of-life outcomes of cardiac arrest survivors by initial defibrillation provider

OBJECTIVE

To assess the long-term functional and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) outcomes for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) survivors stratified by initial defibrillation provider.

METHODS

This retrospective study included adult non-traumatic OHCA with initial shockable rhythms between 2010 and 2019. Survivors at 12 months after arrest were invited to participate in structured telephone interviews. Outcomes were identified using the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOS-E), EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D), 12-Item Short Form Health Survey and living and work status-related questions.

RESULTS

6050 patients had initial shockable rhythms, 3211 (53.1%) had a pulse on hospital arrival, while 1879 (31.1%) were discharged alive. Bystander defibrillation using the closest automated external defibrillator had the highest survival rate (52.8%), followed by dispatched first responders (36.7%) and paramedics (27.9%). 1802 (29.8%) patients survived to 12-month postarrest; of these 1520 (84.4%) were interviewed. 1088 (71.6%) were initially shocked by paramedics, 271 (17.8%) by first responders and 161 (10.6%) by bystanders. Bystander-shocked survivors reported higher rates of living at home without care (87.5%, 75.2%, 77.0%, p<0.001), upper good recovery (GOS-E=8) (41.7%, 30.4%, 30.6%, p=0.002) and EQ-5D visual analogue scale (VAS) ≥80 (64.9%, 55.9%, 52.9%, p=0.003) compared with first responder and paramedics, respectively. After adjustment, initial bystander defibrillation was associated with higher odds of EQ-5D VAS ≥80 (adjusted OR (AOR) 1.56, 95% CI 1.15-2.10; p=0.004), good functional recovery (GOS-E ≥7) (AOR 1.53, 95% CI 1.12-2.11; p=0.009), living at home without care (AOR 1.77, 95% CI 1.16-2.71; p=0.009) and returning to work (AOR 1.72, 95% CI 1.05-2.81; p=0.031) compared with paramedic defibrillation.

CONCLUSION

Survivors receiving initial bystander defibrillation reported better functional and HRQoL outcomes at 12 months after arrest compared with those initially defibrillated by paramedics.

Association between implanted cardioverter-defibrillators and mortality for patients with left ventricular ejection fraction between 30% and 35

BACKGROUND

Consensus guidelines support the use of implanted cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in patients with either non-ischaemic or ischaemic cardiomyopathy with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35%. However, evidence from trials for efficacy specifically for patients with LVEF near 35% is weak. Past trials are underpowered for this population and future trials are unlikely to be performed.

METHODS

Patients with lowest LVEF between 30% and 35% without an ICD prior to the lowest-LVEF echo (defined as 'time zero') were identified by querying echocardiography data from 28 November 2001 to 9 July 2020 at the Massachusetts General Hospital linked to ICD treatment status. To assess the association between ICD and mortality, propensity score matching followed by Cox proportional hazards models considering treatment status as a time-dependent covariate was used. A secondary analysis was performed for LVEF 36%-40%.

RESULTS

Initially, 526 440 echocardiograms representing 266 601 unique patients were identified. After inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, 6109 patients remained for the analytical cohort. In bivariate unadjusted comparisons, patients who received ICDs were substantially more often male (79.8% vs 65.4%, p<0.0001), more often white (87.5% vs 83.7%, p<0.046) and more often had a history of ventricular tachycardia (74.5% vs 19.1%, p<0.0001) and myocardial infarction (56.1% vs 38.2%, p<0.0001). In the propensity matched sample, after accounting for time-dependence, there was no association between ICD and mortality (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.15, p=0.482).

CONCLUSIONS

ICD therapy was not associated with reduced mortality near the conventional LVEF threshold of 35%. Although this treatment design cannot definitively demonstrate lack of efficacy, our results are concordant with available prior trial data. A definitive, well-powered trial is needed to answer the important clinical question of primary prevention ICD efficacy between LVEF 30% and 35%.

Long-Term Outcomes of Brugada Substrate Ablation: A Report from BRAVO (Brugada Ablation of VF Substrate Ongoing Multicenter Registry)

BACKGROUND

Treatment options for high-risk Brugada syndrome (BrS) with recurrent ventricular fibrillation (VF) are limited. Catheter ablation is increasingly performed but a large study with long-term outcome data is lacking. We report the results of the multicenter, international BRAVO (Brugada Ablation of VF Substrate Ongoing Registry) for treatment of high-risk symptomatic BrS.

METHODS

We enrolled 159 patients (median age 42 years; 156 male) with BrS and spontaneous VF in BRAVO; 43 (27%) of them had BrS and early repolarization pattern. All but 5 had an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator for cardiac arrest (n=125) or syncope (n=34). A total of 140 (88%) had experienced numerous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks for spontaneous VF before ablation. All patients underwent a percutaneous epicardial substrate ablation with electroanatomical mapping except for 8 who underwent open-thoracotomy ablation.

RESULTS

In all patients, VF/BrS substrates were recorded in the epicardial surface of the right ventricular outflow tract; 45 (29%) patients also had an arrhythmic substrate in the inferior right ventricular epicardium and 3 in the posterior left ventricular epicardium. After a single ablation procedure, 128 of 159 (81%) patients remained free of VF recurrence; this number increased to 153 (96%) after a repeated procedure (mean 1.2±0.5 procedures; median=1), with a mean follow-up period of 48±29 months from the last ablation. VF burden and frequency of shocks decreased significantly from 1.1±2.1 per month before ablation to 0.003±0.14 per month after the last ablation (P<0.0001). The Kaplan-Meier VF-free survival beyond 5 years after the last ablation was 95%. The only variable associated with a VF-free outcome in multivariable analysis was normalization of the type 1 Brugada ECG, both with and without sodium-channel blockade, after the ablation (hazard ratio, 0.078 [95% CI, 0.008 to 0.753]; P=0.0274). There were no arrhythmic or cardiac deaths. Complications included hemopericardium in 4 (2.5%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Ablation treatment is safe and highly effective in preventing VF recurrence in high-risk BrS. Prospective studies are needed to determine whether it can be an alternative treatment to implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation for selected patients with BrS.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov; Unique identifier: NCT04420078.

Differing strategies for sudden death prevention in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

Sudden death (SD) has traditionally been the most visible and feared complication of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). Substantial progress in reducing the occurrence of these catastrophic events represents a new paradigm in disease management. Prevention of SD in HCM has resulted from introduction of primary prevention ICDs that reliably terminate life-threatening ventricular tachyarrhythmias, as well as a matured risk stratification algorithm capable of reliably identifying those patients at highest risk. This initiative has been a major determinant of reducing HCM-related mortality to a low rate of 0.5%/year. In such a heterogeneous heart disease as HCM, no perfect risk stratification strategy is possible, and available approaches differ in terms of sensitivity and specificity for identifying patients with SD risk. Major cardiovascular societies, American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology in the USA and European Society of Cardiology in Europe have promoted different risk stratification guidelines creating the potential for judging SD risk in a given HCM patient differently based on commitment to a particular societal guideline or country of residence. In this review, we provide a critical but balanced assessment of these two divergent SD prevention strategies with regard to their respective strengths and weaknesses, as a guide to clinicians directly engaged in this important management issue.

Evolution and triggers of defibrillator shocks in patients with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy

INTRODUCTION

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) can prevent sudden cardiac death due to ventricular arrhythmias in patients with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC). The aim of our study was to assess the cumulative burden, evolution and potential triggers of appropriate ICD shocks during long-term follow-up, which may help to reduce and further refine individual arrhythmic risk in this challenging disease.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included 53 patients with definite ARVC according to the 2010 Task Force Criteria from the multicentre Swiss ARVC Registry with an implanted ICD for primary or secondary prevention. Follow-up was conducted by assessing all available patient records from patient visits, hospitalisations, blood samples, genetic analysis, as well as device interrogation and tracings.

RESULTS

Fifty-three patients (male 71.7%, mean age 43±2.2 years, genotype positive 58.5%) were analysed during a median follow-up of 7.9 (IQR 10) years. In 29 (54.7%) patients, 177 appropriate ICD shocks associated with 71 shock episodes occurred. Median time to first appropriate ICD shock was 2.8 (IQR 3.6) years. Long-term risk of shocks remained high throughout long-term follow-up. Shock episodes occurred mainly during daytime (91.5%, n=65) and without seasonal preference. We identified potentially reversible triggers in 56 of 71 (78.9%) appropriate shock episodes, the main triggers representing physical activity, inflammation and hypokalaemia.

CONCLUSION

The long-term risk of appropriate ICD shocks in patients with ARVC remains high during long-term follow-up. Ventricular arrhythmias occur more often during daytime, without seasonal preference. Reversible triggers are frequent with the most common triggers for appropriate ICD shocks being physical activity, inflammation and hypokalaemia in this patient population.

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Improves Outcomes in Patients With Intraventricular Conduction Delay But Not Right Bundle Branch Block: A Patient-Level Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Benefit from cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) varies by QRS characteristics; individual randomized trials are underpowered to assess benefit for relatively small subgroups.

METHODS

The authors analyzed patient-level data from pivotal CRT trials (MIRACLE [Multicenter InSync Randomized Clinical Evaluation], MIRACLE-ICD [Multicenter InSync ICD Randomized Clinical Evaluation], MIRACLE-ICD II [Multicenter InSync ICD Randomized Clinical Evaluation II], REVERSE [Resynchronization Reverses Remodeling in Systolic Left Ventricular Dysfunction], RAFT [Resynchronization-Defibrillation for Ambulatory Heart Failure], BLOCK-HF [Biventricular Versus Right Ventricular Pacing in Heart Failure Patients with Atrioventricular Block], COMPANION [Comparison of Medical Therapy, Pacing and Defibrillation in Heart Failure], and MADIT-CRT [Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial - Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy]) using Bayesian Hierarchical Weibull survival regression models to assess CRT benefit by QRS morphology (left bundle branch block [LBBB], n=4549; right bundle branch block [RBBB], n=691; and intraventricular conduction delay [IVCD], n=1024) and duration (with 150-ms partition). The continuous relationship between QRS duration and CRT benefit was also examined within subgroups defined by QRS morphology. The primary end point was time to heart failure hospitalization (HFH) or death; a secondary end point was time to all-cause death.

RESULTS

Of 6264 patients included, 25% were women, the median age was 66 [interquartile range, 58 to 73] years, and 61% received CRT (with or without an implantable cardioverter defibrillator). CRT was associated with an overall lower risk of HFH or death (hazard ratio [HR], 0.73 [credible interval (CrI), 0.65 to 0.84]), and in subgroups of patients with QRS ≥150 ms and either LBBB (HR, 0.56 [CrI, 0.48 to 0.66]) or IVCD (HR, 0.59 [CrI, 0.39 to 0.89]), but not RBBB (HR 0.97 [CrI, 0.68 to 1.34]; Pinteraction <0.001). No significant association for CRT with HFH or death was observed when QRS was <150 ms (regardless of QRS morphology) or in the presence of RBBB. Similar relationships were observed for all-cause death.

CONCLUSIONS

CRT is associated with reduced HFH or death in patients with QRS ≥150 ms and LBBB or IVCD, but not for those with RBBB. Aggregating RBBB and IVCD into a single "non-LBBB" category when selecting patients for CRT should be reconsidered.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov; Unique identifiers: NCT00271154, NCT00251251, NCT00267098, and NCT00180271.

The Prevalence and Association of Exercise Test Abnormalities With Sudden Cardiac Death and Transplant-Free Survival in Childhood Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy

BACKGROUND

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) can be associated with an abnormal exercise response. In adults with HCM, abnormal results on exercise stress testing are predictive of heart failure outcomes. Our goal was to determine whether an abnormal exercise response is associated with adverse outcomes in pediatric patients with HCM.

METHODS

In an international cohort study including 20 centers, phenotype-positive patients with primary HCM who were <18 years of age at diagnosis were included. Abnormal exercise response was defined as a blunted blood pressure response and new or worsened ST- or T-wave segment changes or complex ventricular ectopy. Sudden cardiac death (SCD) events were defined as a composite of SCD and aborted sudden cardiac arrest. Using Kaplan-Meier survival, competing outcomes, and Cox regression analyses, we analyzed the association of abnormal exercise test results with transplant and SCD event-free survival.

RESULTS

Of 724 eligible patients, 630 underwent at least 1 exercise test. There were no major differences in clinical characteristics between those with or without an exercise test. The median age at exercise testing was 13.8 years (interquartile range, 4.7 years); 78% were male and 39% were receiving beta-blockers. A total of 175 (28%) had abnormal test results. Patients with abnormal test results had more severe septal hypertrophy, higher left atrial diameter z scores, higher resting left ventricular outflow tract gradient, and higher frequency of myectomy compared with participants with normal test results (P<0.05). Compared with normal test results, abnormal test results were independently associated with lower 5-year transplant-free survival (97% versus 88%, respectively; P=0.005). Patients with exercise-induced ischemia were most likely to experience all-cause death or transplant (hazard ratio, 4.86 [95% CI, 1.69-13.99]), followed by those with an abnormal blood pressure response (hazard ratio, 3.19 [95% CI, 1.32-7.71]). Exercise-induced ischemia was also independently associated with lower SCD event-free survival (hazard ratio, 3.32 [95% CI, 1.27-8.70]). Exercise-induced ectopy was not associated with survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Exercise abnormalities are common in childhood HCM. An abnormal exercise test result was independently associated with lower transplant-free survival, especially in those with an ischemic or abnormal blood pressure response with exercise. Exercise-induced ischemia was also independently associated with SCD events. These findings argue for routine exercise testing in childhood HCM as part of ongoing risk assessment.

Experiences Implementing a Suite of Decision Aids for Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators: Qualitative Insights From the DECIDE-ICD Trial

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) is gaining importance in cardiology, including Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) reimbursement policies requiring documented SDM for patients considering primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators. The DECIDE-ICD Trial (Decision Support Intervention for Patients offered implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators) assessed the implementation and effectiveness of patient decision aids (DAs) using a stepped-wedge design at 7 sites. The purpose of this subanalysis was to qualitatively describe electrophysiology clinicians' experience implementing and using the DAs.

METHODS

This included semi-structured individual interviews with electrophysiology clinicians at participating sites across the US, at least 6 months following conversion into the implementation phase of the trial (from June 2020 through February 2022). The interview guide was structured according to the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance [implementation evaluation model]) framework, assessing clinician experiences, which can impact implementation domains, and was qualitatively assessed using a mixed inductive/deductive method.

RESULTS

We completed 22 interviews post-implementation across all 7 sites. Participants included both physicians (n=16) and other clinicians who counsel patients regarding treatment options (n=6). While perception of SDM and the DA were positive, participants highlighted reasons for uneven delivery of DAs to appropriate patients. The CMS mandate for SDM was not universally viewed as associating with patients receiving DA's, but rather (1) logistics of DA delivery, (2) perceived effectiveness in improving patient decision-making, and (3) match of DA content to current patient populations. Remaining tensions include the specific trial data used in DAs and reconciling timing of delivery with when patients are actively making decisions.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians charged with delivering DAs to patients considering primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators were generally supportive of the tenets of SDM, and of the DA tools themselves, but noted several opportunities to improve the reach and continued use of them in routine care.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov; Unique Identifier: NCT03374891.

Incidence of Sudden Cardiac Death and Life-Threatening Arrhythmias in Clinically Manifest Cardiac Sarcoidosis With and Without Current Indications for an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator

BACKGROUND

Cardiac sarcoidosis (CS) predisposes to sudden cardiac death (SCD). Guidelines for implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) in CS have been issued by the Heart Rhythm Society in 2014 and the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Heart Rhythm Society consortium in 2017. How well they discriminate high from low risk remains unknown.

METHODS

We analyzed the data of 398 patients with CS detected in Finland from 1988 through 2017. All had clinical cardiac manifestations. Histological diagnosis was myocardial in 193 patients (definite CS) and extracardiac in 205 (probable CS). Patients with and without Class I or IIa ICD indications at presentation were identified, and subsequent occurrences of SCD (fatal or aborted) and sustained ventricular tachycardia were recorded, as were ICD indications emerging first on follow-up.

RESULTS

Over a median of 4.8 years, 41 patients (10.3%) had fatal (n=8) or aborted (n=33) SCD, and 98 (24.6%) experienced SCD or sustained ventricular tachycardia as the first event. By the Heart Rhythm Society guideline, Class I or IIa ICD indications were present in 339 patients (85%) and absent in 59 (15%), of whom 264 (78%) and 30 (51%), respectively, received an ICD. Cumulative 5-year incidence of SCD was 10.7% (95% CI, 7.4%-15.4%) in patients with ICD indications versus 4.8% (95% CI, 1.2%-19.1%) in those without (χ2=1.834, P=0.176). The corresponding rates of SCD were 13.8% (95% CI, 9.1%-21.0%) versus 6.3% (95% CI, 0.7%-54.0%; χ2=0.814, P=0.367) in definite CS and 7.6% (95% CI, 3.8%-15.1%) versus 3.3% (95% CI, 0.5%-22.9%; χ2=0.680, P=0.410) in probable CS. In multivariable regression analysis, SCD was predicted by definite histological diagnosis (P=0.033) but not by Class I or IIa ICD indications (P=0.210). In patients without ICD indications at presentation, 5-year incidence of SCD, sustained ventricular tachycardia, and emerging Class I or IIa indications was 53% (95% CI, 40%-71%). By the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Heart Rhythm Society guideline, all patients with complete data (n=245) had Class I or IIa indications for ICD implantation.

CONCLUSIONS

Current ICD guidelines fail to distinguish a truly low-risk group of patients with clinically manifest CS, the 5-year risk of SCD approaching 5% despite absent ICD indications. Further research is needed on prognostic factors, including the role of diagnostic histology. Meanwhile, all patients with CS presenting with clinical cardiac manifestations should be considered for an ICD implantation.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of sacubitril/valsartan for reducing the use of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) and the risk of death in ICD-eligible heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction

Although previous cost-effectiveness evaluations of sacubitril/valsartan have demonstrated cardiovascular and economic benefits in heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), whether sacubitril/valsartan is cost-effective for reducing the need for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation and the risk of death in ICD-eligible patients has not been investigated in patients with HFrEF. Herein, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan versus standard of care in reducing the need for ICD implantation and the death rate in HFrEF. A Markov model was developed from the Qatari hospital perspective, comprised of 'survival' and 'death' health states, and was based on 1-monthly Markovian cycles, a 20-years follow-up horizon, and a 3% discount rate. The model inputs were obtained from the literature and local sources. Sacubitril/valsartan resulted in a relative increase of 0.04 quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and 0.67 years of life lived (YLL)/person, with an incremental cost increase of QAR13,952 (USD3,832). Sacubitril/valsartan was associated with incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of QAR341,113 (USD93,687)/QALYs gained and QAR24,431 (USD6,710)/YLL. Sensitivity analyses confirmed robustness, with the cost effectiveness maintained in ≥96.5% of simulated cases. To conclude, sacubitril/valsartan is a cost-effective alternative to standard care against QALY gained and YLL in reducing the need for an ICD therapy and the rate of death among ICD-eligible HFrEF patients.

Role of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator in Heart Failure With Contemporary Medical Therapy

Implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy is indicated in a subset of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection as primary prevention for sudden cardiac death. The advent of novel medical therapies including mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, angiotensin receptor blocker/neprilysin inhibitors, and sodium-glucose transporter 2 inhibitor in the past 2 decades has revolutionized heart failure with reduced ejection management. Current guideline-directed medical therapy has reduced all-cause mortality and sudden cardiac death and confers a considerable improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction over a short period of time. However, there is limited evidence at present to suggest whether implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy continues to have the same benefit in sudden cardiac death prevention at current left ventricular ejection fraction cutoff indications for patients on contemporary guideline-directed medical therapy for heart failure with reduced ejection. In this review, the authors propose in lieu of current evidence that it is reasonable to reevaluate indications for implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy in patients on contemporary guideline-directed medical therapy for heart failure with reduced ejection.

First-Line Catheter Ablation of Monomorphic Ventricular Tachycardia in Cardiomyopathy Concurrent With Defibrillator Implantation: The PAUSE-SCD Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Catheter ablation as first-line therapy for ventricular tachycardia (VT) at the time of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation has not been adopted into clinical guidelines. Also, there is an unmet clinical need to prospectively examine the role of VT ablation in patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy, an increasingly prevalent population that is referred for advanced therapies globally.

METHODS

We conducted an international, multicenter, randomized controlled trial enrolling 180 patients with cardiomyopathy and monomorphic VT with an indication for ICD implantation to assess the role of early, first-line ablation therapy. A total of 121 patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to ablation plus an ICD versus conventional medical therapy plus an ICD. Patients who refused ICD (n=47) were followed in a prospective registry after stand-alone ablation treatment. The primary outcome was a composite end point of VT recurrence, cardiovascular hospitalization, or death.

RESULTS

Randomly assigned patients had a mean age of 55 years (interquartile range, 46-64) and left ventricular ejection fraction of 40% (interquartile range, 30%-49%); 81% were male. The underlying heart disease was ischemic cardiomyopathy in 35%, nonischemic cardiomyopathy in 30%, and arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy in 35%. Ablation was performed a median of 2 days before ICD implantation (interquartile range, 5 days before to 14 days after). At 31 months, the primary outcome occurred in 49.3% of the ablation group and 65.5% in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.35-0.96]; P=0.04). The observed difference was driven by a reduction in VT recurrence in the ablation arm (hazard ratio, 0.51 [95%CI, 0.29-0.90]; P=0.02). A statistically significant reduction in both ICD shocks (10.0% versus 24.6%; P=0.03) and antitachycardia pacing (16.2% versus 32.8%; P=0.04) was observed in patients who underwent ablation compared with control. No differences in cardiovascular hospitalization (32.0% versus. 33.7%; hazard ratio, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.43-1.56]; P=0.55) or mortality (8.9% versus 8.8%; hazard ratio, 1.40 [95% CI, 0.38-5.22]; P=0.62]) were observed. Ablation-related complications occurred in 8.3% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with cardiomyopathy of varied causes, early catheter ablation performed at the time of ICD implantation significantly reduced the composite primary outcome of VT recurrence, cardiovascular hospitalization, or death. These findings were driven by a reduction in ICD therapies.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov; Unique identifier: NCT02848781.

Does Timing of Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation Affect Prognosis in Patients With an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator? Results From the Multicenter Randomized PARTITA Trial

BACKGROUND

Optimal timing for catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia is an important unresolved issue. There are no randomized trials evaluating the benefit of ablation after the first implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) shock.

METHODS

We conducted a 2-phase, prospective, multicenter, randomized clinical trial. Patients with ischemic or nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy and primary or secondary prevention indication for ICD were enrolled in an initial observational phase until first appropriate shock (phase A). After reconsenting, patients were randomly assigned 1:1 in phase B to immediate ablation (within 2 months from shock delivery) or continuation of standard therapy. The primary end point was a composite of death from any cause or hospitalization for worsening heart failure. Amiodarone intake was not allowed except for documented atrial tachyarrhythmias. On July 23, 2021, phase B of the trial was interrupted as a result of the first interim analysis on the basis of the Bayesian adaptive design.

RESULTS

Of the 517 patients enrolled in phase A, 154 (30%) had ventricular tachycardia, 56 (11%) received an appropriate shock over a median follow-up of 2.4 years (interquartile range, 1.4-4.4), and 47 of 56 (84%) agreed to participate in phase B. After 24.2 (8.5-24.4) months, the primary end point occurred in 1 of 23 (4%) patients in the ablation group and 10 of 24 (42%) patients in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.11 [95% CI, 0.01-0.85]; P=0.034). The results met the prespecified termination criterion of >99% Bayesian posterior probability of superiority of treatment over standard therapy. No deaths were observed in the ablation group versus 8 deaths (33%) in the control group (P=0.004); there was 1 worsening heart failure hospitalization in the ablation group (4%) versus 4 in the control group (17%; P=0.159). ICD shocks were less frequent in the ablation group (9%) than in the control group (42%; P=0.039).

CONCLUSIONS

Ventricular tachycardia ablation after first appropriate shock was associated with a reduced risk of the combined death or worsening heart failure hospitalization end point, lower mortality, and fewer ICD shocks. These findings provide support for considering ventricular tachycardia ablation after the first ICD shock.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov; Unique identifier: NCT01547208.

Does Timing of Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation Affect Prognosis in Patients With an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator? Results From the Multicenter Randomized PARTITA Trial

BACKGROUND

Optimal timing for catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia is an important unresolved issue. There are no randomized trials evaluating the benefit of ablation after the first implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) shock.

METHODS

We conducted a 2-phase, prospective, multicenter, randomized clinical trial. Patients with ischemic or nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy and primary or secondary prevention indication for ICD were enrolled in an initial observational phase until first appropriate shock (phase A). After reconsenting, patients were randomly assigned 1:1 in phase B to immediate ablation (within 2 months from shock delivery) or continuation of standard therapy. The primary end point was a composite of death from any cause or hospitalization for worsening heart failure. Amiodarone intake was not allowed except for documented atrial tachyarrhythmias. On July 23, 2021, phase B of the trial was interrupted as a result of the first interim analysis on the basis of the Bayesian adaptive design.

RESULTS

Of the 517 patients enrolled in phase A, 154 (30%) had ventricular tachycardia, 56 (11%) received an appropriate shock over a median follow-up of 2.4 years (interquartile range, 1.4-4.4), and 47 of 56 (84%) agreed to participate in phase B. After 24.2 (8.5-24.4) months, the primary end point occurred in 1 of 23 (4%) patients in the ablation group and 10 of 24 (42%) patients in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.11 [95% CI, 0.01-0.85]; P=0.034). The results met the prespecified termination criterion of >99% Bayesian posterior probability of superiority of treatment over standard therapy. No deaths were observed in the ablation group versus 8 deaths (33%) in the control group (P=0.004); there was 1 worsening heart failure hospitalization in the ablation group (4%) versus 4 in the control group (17%; P=0.159). ICD shocks were less frequent in the ablation group (9%) than in the control group (42%; P=0.039).

CONCLUSIONS

Ventricular tachycardia ablation after first appropriate shock was associated with a reduced risk of the combined death or worsening heart failure hospitalization end point, lower mortality, and fewer ICD shocks. These findings provide support for considering ventricular tachycardia ablation after the first ICD shock.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov; Unique identifier: NCT01547208.

History and evolution of pacing and devices

Cardiac implanted electronic devices are commonplace in the modern practice of cardiology. This article reviews the history of the development of these technologies, with particular reference to the role played by UK physicians and members of the British Cardiovascular Society. Key breakthroughs in the treatment of heart block, ventricular arrhythmia and heart failure are presented in their historical and contemporary context so that the reader might look back on the incredible progress and achievements of the last 100 years and also look forward to what may be achieved in the coming decades.

DREAM-ICD-II Study

BACKGROUND

Regulatory authorities of most industrialized countries recommend 6 months of private driving restriction after implantation of a secondary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). These driving restrictions result in significant inconvenience and social implications. This study aimed to assess the incidence rate of appropriate device therapies in contemporary recipients of a secondary prevention ICD.

METHODS

This retrospective study at 3 Canadian tertiary care centers enrolled consecutive patients with new secondary prevention ICD implants between 2016 and 2020.

RESULTS

For a median of 760 days (324, 1190 days), 721 patients were followed up. The risk of recurrent ventricular arrhythmia was highest during the first 3 months after device insertion (34.4%) and decreased over time (10.6% between 3 and 6 months, 11.7% between 6 and 12 months). The corresponding incidence rate per 100 patient-days was 0.48 (95% CI, 0.35-0.64) at 90 days, 0.28 (95% CI, 0.17-0.45) at 180 days, and 0.21 (95% CI, 0.13-0.33) between 181 and 365 days after ICD insertion (P<0.001). The cumulative incidence of arrhythmic syncope resulting in sudden cardiac incapacitation was 1.8% within the first 90 days and subsequently dropped to 0.4% between 91 and 180 days (P<0.001) after ICD insertion.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence rate of appropriate therapies resulting in sudden cardiac incapacitation in contemporary recipients of a secondary prevention ICD is much lower than previously reported and declines significantly after the first 3 months. Lowering driving restrictions to 3 months after the index cardiac event seems safe, and revision of existing guidelines should be considered in countries still adhering to a 6-month period. Existing restrictions for private driving after implantation of a secondary prevention ICD should be reconsidered.

Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators in Infants and Toddlers: Indications, Placement, Programming, and Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Limited data exist regarding implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) usage in infants and toddlers. This study evaluates ICD placement indications, procedural techniques, programming strategies, and outcomes of ICDs in infants and toddlers.

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective review of all patients ≤3 years old who received an ICD from 2009 to 2021.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients received an ICD at an age of 1.2 years (interquartile range [IQR], 0.1-2.4; 12 [80%] women; weight, 8.2 kg [IQR, 4.2-12.6]) and were followed for a median of 4.28 years (IQR, 1.40-5.53) or 64.2 patient-years. ICDs were placed for secondary prevention in 12 patients (80%). Diagnoses included 8 long-QT syndromes (53%), 4 idiopathic ventricular tachycardias/ventricular fibrillations (VFs; 27%), 1 recurrent ventricular tachycardia with cardiomyopathy (7%), 1 VF with left ventricular noncompaction (7%), and 1 catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (7%). All implants were epicardial, with a coil in the pericardial space. Intraoperative defibrillation safety testing was attempted in 11 patients (73%), with VF induced in 8 (53%). Successful restoration of sinus rhythm was achieved in all tested patients with a median of 9 (IQR, 7.3-11.3) J or 0.90 (IQR, 0.68-1.04) J/kg. Complications consisted of 1 postoperative chylothorax and 3 episodes of feeding intolerance. VF detection was programmed to 250 (IQR, 240-250) ms with first shock delivering 10 (IQR, 5-15) J or 1.1 (IQR, 0.8-1.4) J/kg. Three patients (20%) received appropriate shocks for ventricular tachycardia/VF. No patient received an inappropriate shock. There were 2 (13%) ventricular lead fractures (at 2.6 and 4.2 years post-implant), 1 (7%) pocket-site infection, and 2 (13%) generator exchanges. All patients were alive, and 1 patient (7%) received a heart transplant.

CONCLUSIONS

ICDs can be safely and effectively placed for sudden death prevention in infants and toddlers with good midterm outcomes.

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.

Persistent Opioid Use After Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Procedures

BACKGROUND

Prescription opioids are a major contributor to the ongoing epidemic of persistent opioid use (POU). The incidence of POU among opioid-naïve patients after cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) procedures is unknown.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used data from a national administrative claims database from 2004 to 2018 of patients undergoing CIED procedures. Adult patients were included if they were opioid-naïve during the 180-day period before the procedure and did not undergo another procedure with anesthesia in the next 180 days. POU was defined by filling an additional opioid prescription >30 days after the CIED procedure.

RESULTS

Of the 143 400 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 15 316 (11%) filled an opioid prescription within 14 days of surgery. Among these patients, POU occurred in 1901 (12.4%) patients 30 to 180 days after surgery. The likelihood of developing POU was increased for patients who had a history of drug abuse (odds ratio, 1.52; P=0.005), preoperative muscle relaxant (odds ratio, 1.52; P<0.001) or benzodiazepine (odds ratio, 1.23; P=0.001) use, or opioid use in the previous 5 years (OR, 1.76; P<0.0001). POU did not differ after subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator or other CIED procedures (11.1 versus 12.4%; P=0.5). In a sensitivity analysis excluding high-risk patients who were discharged to a facility or who had a history of drug abuse or previous opioid, benzodiazepine, or muscle relaxant use, 8.9% of the remaining cohort had POU. Patients prescribed >135 mg of oral morphine equivalents had a significantly increased risk of POU.

CONCLUSIONS

POU is common after CIED procedures, and 12% of patients continued to use opioids >30 days after surgery. Higher initially prescribed oral morphine equivalent doses were associated with developing POU.

Long-Term Electrocardiographic and Echocardiographic Progression of Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy and Their Correlation With Ventricular Tachyarrhythmias

BACKGROUND

Prior studies of structural and electrocardiographic changes in arrhythmogenic right ventricular (RV) cardiomyopathy and their role in predicting ventricular arrhythmias (ventricular tachycardia) have shown conflicting results.

METHODS

We reviewed 405 ECGs, 315 transthoracic echocardiographies, and 441 implantable cardioverter defibrillator interrogations in 64 arrhythmogenic RV cardiomyopathy patients (56% men, mean age [SD], 44.2 [14.6] years) over a mean follow-up of 10 (range, 2.3-19) years. Generalized estimating equations were used to identify the association between ECG abnormalities, clinical variables, and transthoracic echocardiographic measurements (>mild degree of tricuspid regurgitation, RV outflow tract diameter in parasternal long axis and short axis, RV end-diastolic area, fractional area change).

RESULTS

There was a 4.65 (95% CI, 0.51%-8.8%) increase in RV end-diastolic area, a 3.75 (95% CI, 1.17%-6.34%) decrease in fractional area change, and 1.9 (95% CI, 1.3-2.8) higher odds (odds ratio) of RV wall motion abnormality with every 5-year increase in age after patients' first transthoracic echocardiography. >Mild tricuspid regurgitation was an independent predictor of RV enlargement and dysfunction (hazard ratio of >10% drop in fractional area change from baseline [95% CI], 3.51 [1.77-6.95] and hazard ratio of >10% increase in RV end-diastolic area from baseline [95% CI], 4.90 [2.52-9.52]). Patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillator were more likely to develop >mild tricuspid regurgitation and larger structural and functional disease progression. More pronounced increase in RV end-diastolic area was translated into higher rates of any ventricular tachycardia. Inferior T-wave inversions and sum of R waves (mm) in V1 to V3 were predictors of RV enlargement and dysfunction with the former also predicting risk of any ventricular tachycardia.

CONCLUSIONS

Arrhythmogenic RV cardiomyopathy is a progressive disease. Tricuspid regurgitation is an independent predictor of structural disease progression, which may be exacerbated by use of a transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator lead.

Management of Congenital Long-QT Syndrome: Commentary From the Experts

While published guidelines are useful in the care of patients with long-QT syndrome, it can be difficult to decide how to apply the guidelines to individual patients, particularly those with intermediate risk. We explored the diversity of opinion among 24 clinicians with expertise in long-QT syndrome. Experts from various regions and institutions were presented with 4 challenging clinical scenarios and asked to provide commentary emphasizing why they would make their treatment recommendations. All 24 authors were asked to vote on case-specific questions so as to demonstrate the degree of consensus or divergence of opinion. Of 24 authors, 23 voted and 1 abstained. Details of voting results with commentary are presented. There was consensus on several key points, particularly on the importance of the diagnostic evaluation and of β-blocker use. There was diversity of opinion about the appropriate use of other therapeutic measures in intermediate-risk individuals. Significant gaps in knowledge were identified.

Relationship of LVEF and Myocardial Scar to Long-Term Mortality Risk and Mode of Death in Patients With Nonischemic Cardiomyopathy

BACKGROUND

Nonischemic cardiomyopathy is a leading cause of reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and is associated with high mortality risk from progressive heart failure and arrhythmias. Myocardial scar on cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging is increasingly recognized as a risk marker for adverse outcomes; however, left ventricular dysfunction remains the basis for determining a patient's eligibility for primary prophylaxis with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. We investigated the relationship of LVEF and scar with long-term mortality and mode of death in a large cohort of patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy.

METHODS

This study is a prospective, longitudinal outcomes registry of 1020 consecutive patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy who underwent clinical cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging for the assessment of LVEF and scar at 3 centers.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up of 5.2 (interquartile range, 3.8, 6.6) years, 277 (27%) patients died. On survival analysis, LVEF ≤35% and scar were strongly associated with all-cause (log-rank test P=0.002 and P<0.001, respectively) and cardiac death (P=0.001 and P<0.001, respectively). Whereas scar was strongly related to sudden cardiac death (SCD; P=0.001), there was no significant association between LVEF ≤35% and SCD risk (P=0.57). On multivariable analysis including established clinical factors, LVEF and scar are independent risk markers of all-cause and cardiac death. The addition of LVEF provided incremental prognostic value but insignificant discrimination improvement by C-statistic for all-cause and cardiac death, but no incremental prognostic value for SCD. Conversely, scar extent demonstrated significant incremental prognostic value and discrimination improvement for all 3 end points. On net reclassification analysis, the addition of LVEF resulted in no significant improvement for all-cause death (11.0%; 95% CI, -6.2% to 25.9%), cardiac death (9.8%; 95% CI, -5.7% to 29.3%), or SCD (7.5%; 95% CI, -41.2% to 42.9%). Conversely, the addition of scar extent resulted in significant reclassification improvement of 25.5% (95% CI, 11.7% to 41.0%) for all-cause death, 27.0% (95% CI, 11.6% to 45.2%) for cardiac death, and 40.6% (95% CI, 10.5% to 71.8%) for SCD.

CONCLUSIONS

Myocardial scar and LVEF are both risk markers for all-cause and cardiac death in patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy. However, whereas myocardial scar has strong and incremental prognostic value for SCD risk stratification, LVEF has no incremental prognostic value over clinical measures. Scar assessment should be incorporated into patient selection criteria for primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator placement.

Primary Results From the Understanding Outcomes With the S-ICD in Primary Prevention Patients With Low Ejection Fraction (UNTOUCHED) Trial

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Background:

The subcutaneous (S) implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is safe and effective for sudden cardiac death prevention. However, patients in previous S-ICD studies had fewer comorbidities, had less left ventricular dysfunction, and received more inappropriate shocks (IAS) than in typical transvenous ICD trials. The UNTOUCHED trial (Understanding Outcomes With the S-ICD in Primary Prevention Patients With Low Ejection Fraction) was designed to evaluate the IAS rate in a more typical, contemporary ICD patient population implanted with the S-ICD using standardized programming and enhanced discrimination algorithms.

Methods:

Primary prevention patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% and no pacing indications were included. Generation 2 or 3 S-ICD devices were implanted and programmed with rate-based therapy delivery for rates ≥250 beats per minute and morphology discrimination for rates ≥200 and <250 beats per minute. Patients were followed for 18 months. The primary end point was the IAS-free rate compared with a 91.6% performance goal, derived from the results for the ICD-only patients in the MADIT-RIT study (Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial–Reduce Inappropriate Therapy). Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed to evaluate event-free rates for IAS, all-cause shock, and complications. Multivariable proportional hazard analysis was performed to determine predictors of end points.

Results:

S-ICD implant was attempted in 1116 patients, and 1111 patients were included in postimplant follow-up analysis. The cohort had a mean age of 55.8±12.4 years, 25.6% were women, 23.4% were Black, 53.5% had ischemic heart disease, 87.7% had symptomatic heart failure, and the mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 26.4±5.8%. Eighteen-month freedom from IAS was 95.9% (lower confidence limit, 94.8%). Predictors of reduced incidence of IAS were implanting the most recent generation of device, using the 3-incision technique, no history of atrial fibrillation, and ischemic cause. The 18-month all-cause shock-free rate was 90.6% (lower confidence limit, 89.0%), meeting the prespecified performance goal of 85.8%. Conversion success rate for appropriate, discrete episodes was 98.4%. Complication-free rate at 18 months was 92.7%.

Conclusions:

This study demonstrates high efficacy and safety with contemporary S-ICD devices and programming despite the relatively high incidence of comorbidities in comparison with earlier S-ICD trials. The inappropriate shock rate (3.1% at 1 year) is the lowest reported for the S-ICD and lower than many transvenous ICD studies using contemporary programming to reduce IAS.

Registration:

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02433379.

A Validated Model for Sudden Cardiac Death Risk Prediction in Pediatric Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy

BACKGROUND

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is the leading cause of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in children and young adults. Our objective was to develop and validate a SCD risk prediction model in pediatric hypertrophic cardiomyopathy to guide SCD prevention strategies.

METHODS

In an international multicenter observational cohort study, phenotype-positive patients with isolated hypertrophic cardiomyopathy <18 years of age at diagnosis were eligible. The primary outcome variable was the time from diagnosis to a composite of SCD events at 5-year follow-up: SCD, resuscitated sudden cardiac arrest, and aborted SCD, that is, appropriate shock following primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators. Competing risk models with cause-specific hazard regression were used to identify and quantify clinical and genetic factors associated with SCD. The cause-specific regression model was implemented using boosting, and tuned with 10 repeated 4-fold cross-validations. The final model was fitted using all data with the tuned hyperparameter value that maximizes the c-statistic, and its performance was characterized by using the c-statistic for competing risk models. The final model was validated in an independent external cohort (SHaRe [Sarcomeric Human Cardiomyopathy Registry], n=285).

RESULTS

Overall, 572 patients met eligibility criteria with 2855 patient-years of follow-up. The 5-year cumulative proportion of SCD events was 9.1% (14 SCD, 25 resuscitated sudden cardiac arrests, and 14 aborted SCD). Risk predictors included age at diagnosis, documented nonsustained ventricular tachycardia, unexplained syncope, septal diameter z-score, left ventricular posterior wall diameter z score, left atrial diameter z score, peak left ventricular outflow tract gradient, and presence of a pathogenic variant. Unlike in adults, left ventricular outflow tract gradient had an inverse association, and family history of SCD had no association with SCD. Clinical and clinical/genetic models were developed to predict 5-year freedom from SCD. Both models adequately discriminated between patients with and without SCD events with a c-statistic of 0.75 and 0.76, respectively, and demonstrated good agreement between predicted and observed events in the primary and validation cohorts (validation c-statistic 0.71 and 0.72, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our study provides a validated SCD risk prediction model with >70% prediction accuracy and incorporates risk factors that are unique to pediatric hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. An individualized risk prediction model has the potential to improve the application of clinical practice guidelines and shared decision making for implantable cardioverter defibrillator insertion. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT0403679.

Year in Review in Cardiac Electrophysiology

In the past year, there have been numerous advances in our understanding of arrhythmia mechanisms, diagnosis, and new therapies. We have seen advances in basic cardiac electrophysiology with data suggesting that secretoneurin may be a biomarker for patients at risk of ventricular arrhythmias, and we have learned of the potential role of an NPR-C (natriuretic peptide receptor-C) in atrial fibrosis and the role of an atrial specific 2-pore potassium channel TASK-1 as a therapeutic target for atrial fibrillation. We have seen studies demonstrating the role of sensory neurons in sleep apnea-related atrial fibrillation and the association between bariatric surgery and atrial fibrillation ablation outcomes. Artificial intelligence applied to electrocardiography has yielded estimates of age, sex, and overall health. We have seen new tools for collection of patient-centered outcomes following catheter ablation. There have been significant advances in the ability to identify ventricular tachycardia termination sites through high-density mapping of deceleration zones. We have learned that right ventricular dysfunction may be a predictor of survival benefit after implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation in patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy. We have seen further insights into the role of His bundle pacing on improving outcomes. As our understanding of cardiac laminopathies advances, we may have new tools to predict arrhythmic event rates in gene carriers. Finally, we have seen numerous advances in the treatment of arrhythmias in patients with congenital heart disease.

Preventive or Deferred Ablation of Ventricular Tachycardia in Patients With Ischemic Cardiomyopathy and Implantable Defibrillator (BERLIN VT): A Multicenter Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Catheter ablation for ventricular tachycardia (VT) reduces the recurrence of VT in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). The appropriate timing of VT ablation and its effects on mortality and heart failure progression remain a matter of debate. In patients with life-threatening arrhythmias necessitating ICD implantation, we compared outcomes of preventive VT ablation (undertaken before ICD implantation to prevent ICD shocks for VT) and deferred ablation after 3 ICD shocks for VT.

METHODS

The BERLIN VT study (Preventive Ablation of Ventricular Tachycardia in Patients With Myocardial Infarction) was a prospective, open, parallel, randomized trial performed at 26 centers. Patients with stable ischemic cardiomyopathy, a left ventricular ejection fraction between 30% and 50%, and documented VT were randomly assigned 1:1 to a preventive or deferred ablation strategy. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death and unplanned hospitalization for either symptomatic ventricular arrhythmia or worsening heart failure. Secondary outcomes included sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmia and appropriate ICD therapy. We hypothesized that preventive ablation strategy would be superior to deferred ablation strategy in the intention-to-treat population.

RESULTS

During a mean follow-up of 396±284 days, the primary end point occurred in 25 (32.9%) of 76 patients in the preventive ablation group and 23 (27.7%) of 83 patients in the deferred ablation group (hazard ratio, 1.09 [95% CI, 0.62-1.92]; P=0.77). On the basis of prespecified criteria for interim analyses, the study was terminated early for futility. In the preventive versus deferred ablation group, 6 versus 2 patients died (7.9% versus 2.4%; P=0.18), 8 versus 2 patients were admitted for worsening heart failure (10.4% versus 2.3%; P=0.062), and 15 versus 21 patients were hospitalized for symptomatic ventricular arrhythmia (19.5% versus 25.3%; P=0.27). Among secondary outcomes, the proportions of patients with sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmia (39.7% versus 48.2%; P=0.050) and appropriate ICD therapy (34.2% versus 47.0%; P=0.020) were numerically reduced in the preventive ablation group.

CONCLUSIONS

Preventive VT ablation before ICD implantation did not reduce mortality or hospitalization for arrhythmia or worsening heart failure during 1 year of follow-up compared with the deferred ablation strategy. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02501005.

Characterization of Structural Changes in Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy With Recurrent Ventricular Tachycardia After Ablation: Insights From Repeat Electroanatomic Voltage Mapping

BACKGROUND

Data characterizing structural changes of arrhythmogenic right ventricular (RV) cardiomyopathy are limited.

METHODS

Patients presenting with left bundle branch block ventricular tachycardia in the setting of arrhythmogenic RV cardiomyopathy with procedures separated by at least 9 months were included.

RESULTS

Nineteen consecutive patients (84% males; mean age 39±15 years [range, 20-76 years]) were included. All 19 patients underwent 2 detailed sinus rhythm electroanatomic endocardial voltage maps (average 385±177 points per map; range, 93-847 points). Time interval between the initial and repeat ablation procedures was mean 50±37 months (range, 9-162). No significant progression of voltage was observed (bipolar: 38 cm² [interquartile range (IQR), 25-54] versus 53 cm² [IQR, 25-65], P=0.09; unipolar: 116 cm² [IQR, 61-209] versus 159 cm² [IQR, 73-204], P=0.36) for the entire study group. There was a significant increase in RV volumes (percentage increase, 28%; 206 mL [IQR, 170-253] versus 263 mL [IQR, 204-294], P<0.001) for the entire study population. Larger scars at baseline but not changes over time were associated with a significant increase in RV volume (bipolar: Spearman ρ, 0.6965, P=0.006; unipolar: Spearman ρ, 0.5743, P=0.03). Most patients with progressive RV dilatation (8/14, 57%) had moderate (2 patients) or severe (6 patients) tricuspid regurgitation recorded at either initial or repeat ablation procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with arrhythmogenic RV cardiomyopathy presenting with recurrent ventricular tachycardia, >10% increase in RV endocardial surface area of bipolar voltage consistent with scar is uncommon during the intermediate term. Most recurrent ventricular tachycardias are localized to regions of prior defined scar. Voltage indexed scar area at baseline but not changes in scar over time is associated with progressive increase in RV size and is consistent with adverse remodeling but not scar progression. Marked tricuspid regurgitation is frequently present in patients with arrhythmogenic RV cardiomyopathy who have progressive RV dilation.

Implantable cardioverter defibrillator deactivation and advance care planning: a focus group study

Objective

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators can treat life-threatening arrhythmias, but may negatively influence the last phase of life if not deactivated. Advance care planning conversations can prepare patients for future decision-making about implantable cardioverter defibrillator deactivation. This study aimed at gaining insight in the experiences of patients with advance care planning conversations about implantable cardioverter defibrillator deactivation.

Methods

In this qualitative study, we held five focus groups with 41 patients in total. Focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed. Transcripts were analysed thematically, using the constant comparative method, whereby themes emerging from the data are compared with previously emerged themes.

Results

Most patients could imagine deciding to have their implantable cardioverter defibrillator deactivated, for instance because the benefits of an active device no longer outweigh the harm of unwanted shocks, when having another life-limiting illness, or when relatives would think this would be in their best interest. Some patients expressed a need for advance care planning conversations with a healthcare professional about deactivation, but few had had these. Others did not, saying they solely focused on living. Some patients were hesitant to record their preferences about deactivation in advance care directives, because they were unsure whether their current preferences would reflect future preferences.

Conclusions

Although patients expressed a need for more information, advance care planning conversations about implantable cardioverter defibrillator deactivation seemed to be uncommon. Deactivation should be more frequently addressed by healthcare professionals, tailored to the disease stage of the patient and readiness to discuss this topic.

Characteristics and Outcomes of Pediatric Patients Who Undergo Placement of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators: Insights From the National Cardiovascular Data Registry

Background Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are an important part of therapy for many patients, yet there is little data on population characteristics, complications, or system survival in pediatric patients. Methods A retrospective review of ICD recipients in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry was performed from 2010 to 2016. Patient characteristics and complications between pediatric (≤21 years) and adult populations (>21 years) were compared. Variables associated with complications and early device interventions within the pediatric cohort were evaluated using multivariate modeling. Results There were 562 209 total ICD implants, of which 3461 occurred in the pediatric cohort. Among the pediatric patients, 60% of implants were for primary prevention, and nonischemic cardiomyopathy was the most common underlying disease (60%). Over time, there was an increasing trend of both primary and secondary prevention ICD implantations ( P<0.05). Compared with adults, pediatric patients were more likely to have structural heart disease, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, and channelopathy, and to receive a single-chamber device (all P<0.001). There was no difference in inhospital complications between the adult and pediatric cohorts (2.4% versus 2.6%, P=0.3). However, among the pediatric patients, lower weight, Ebstein anomaly, worse New York Heart Association class, dual chamber, and cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator were associated with greater risk of complications. Although reintervention for generator replacement or upgrade was more common in adults, the time to reintervention was shorter in the pediatric cohort. Conclusions We observed an increasing trend in ICD device implantation among pediatric patients. The pediatric cohort had similar inhospital complication rates compared with adults but had a shorter time to reintervention.

Joint Shock/Death Risk Prediction Model for Patients Considering Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators

BACKGROUND

The risk of death or appropriate therapy varies widely among recipients of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). The goals of this study were to develop a risk prediction tool that jointly considers future outcome probabilities of ICD shock and death.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed a secondary analysis of patients receiving ICDs as part of the SCD-HeFT trial (Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Trial). We applied an illness-death regression model to jointly model both ICD shocks and death under the semi-competing risks framework, which predicts for each patient their probability of having received ICD shocks, dying, or both at any given point in time. Among 803 ICD recipients (mean age, 60 years; 23% women) followed for a median of 41.1 months, 430 (53.5%) patients completed the study without dying or receiving an ICD shock, 206 (25.7%) received at least 1 shock but survived, 113 (14.1%) died before experiencing a shock, and 54 (6.7%) received at least 1 shock and subsequently died. Predicted outcome probabilities based on baseline demographic and clinical variables reveal substantial heterogeneity in joint shock and death risks, both between patients at each time point and for each single patient across time. Overall, predictive performance for ICD shock and death individually was adequate, based on area under the curve at 5 years of 0.65 for shocks and of 0.79 for death.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis of outcomes after ICD implantation provides an alternative predictive model for individual risk of death or ICD shocks. If validated, this may provide a useful tool for individualized counseling regarding likely outcomes after device implantation, while also informing the design of further studies to focus the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of ICD therapy.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00000609.