Low efficacy of cardioversion of persistent atrial fibrillation with the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator

Aims

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure are conditions that often coexist. Consequently, many patients with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) present with AF. We evaluated the effectiveness of internal cardioversion of AF in patients with an ICD.

Methods

Retrospectively, we included 27 consecutive ICD patients with persistent AF who underwent internal cardioversion using the ICD. When ICD cardioversion failed, external cardioversion was performed.

Results

Patients were predominantly male (89 %) with a mean (SD) age of 65 ± 9 years and left ventricular ejection fraction of 36 ± 17 %. Only nine (33 %) patients had successful internal cardioversion after one, two or three shocks. The remaining 18 patients underwent external cardioversion after they failed internal cardioversion, which resulted in sinus rhythm in all. A smaller left atrial volume (99 ± 36 ml vs. 146 ± 44 ml; p = 0.019), a longer right atrial cycle length (227 (186–255) vs. 169 (152–183) ms, p = 0.030), a shorter total AF history (2 (0–17) months vs. 40 (5–75) months, p = 0.025) and dual-coil ICD shock (75 % vs. 26 %, p = 0.093) were associated with successful ICD cardioversion.

Conclusion

Internal cardioversion of AF in ICD patients has a low success rate but may be attempted in those with small atria, a long right atrial fibrillatory cycle length and a short total AF history, especially when a dual-coil ICD is present. Otherwise, it seems reasonable to prefer external over internal cardioversion when it comes to termination of persistent AF.     

Comparison of complications and shocks in paediatric and young transvenous and subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients

Background

Young implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) patients are prone to complications and inappropriate shocks (IAS). The subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) may avoid lead-related complications. This study aims to describe the incidence and nature of device-related complications in young transvenous ICD (TV-ICD) and S?ICD patients.

Methods

Single-chamber TV-ICD and S?ICD patients up to and including the age of 25 years implanted between 2002 and 2015 were retrospectively analysed. Complications were defined as device-related complications requiring surgical intervention. IAS were defined as shocks for anything other than ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation. Follow-up data were collected 5 years post-implantation. Kaplan-Meier estimates for complications at 5?year follow-up were calculated with a corresponding 95% confidence interval.

Results

Eighty-one patients (46 TV-ICD, 35 S-ICD) were included (median age 19.0 (IQR 16.0–23.0) and 16.5 (IQR 13.0–20.2) years respectively). Median follow-up was 60 and 40 months respectively. All-cause complication rate was 34% in the TV-ICD group and 25% in the S?ICD group (p?=?0.64). TV-ICD patients had more lead complications: 23% (10–36%) versus 0% (p?=?0.02). The rate of infections did not differ between TV-ICD and S?ICD: 2% (0–6%) versus 10% (0–21%) (p?=?0.15). No systemic infections occurred in the S?ICD patients. The rates of IAS were similar, TV-ICD 22% (9–35%) versus S?ICD 14% (0–30%) (p?=?0.40), as were those for appropriate shocks: 25% (11–39%) versus 27% (6–48%) (p?=?0.92).

Conclusion

The rates of all-cause complications in this cohort were equal, though the nature of the complications differed. S?ICD patients did not suffer lead failures or systemic infections. An era effect is present between the two groups.

     

Predictors of Appropriate ICD Therapy in Patients with Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy: Long Term Experience of a Tertiary Care Center

Introduction

Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) is a rare genetically transmitted disease prone to ventricular arrhythmias. We therefore investigated the clinical, echocardiographical and electrophysiological predictors of appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy in patients with ARVC.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed in 26 patients (median age of 40 years at diagnosis, 21 males and 5 females) with ARVC who underwent ICD implantation.

Results

Over a median (range) follow-up period of 10 (2.7, 37) years, appropriate ICD therapy for ventricular arrhythmias was documented in 12 (46%) out of 26 patients. In all patients with appropriate ICD therapy the ICD was originally inserted for secondary prevention. Median time from ICD implantation to ICD therapy was 9 months (range 3.6, 54 months). History of heart failure was a significant predictor of appropriate ICD therapy (p = 0.033). Left ventricular disease involvement (p = 0.059) and age at implantation (p = 0.063) were borderline significant predictors. Patients with syncope at time of diagnosis were significantly less likely to receive ICD therapy (p = 0.02). Invasive electrophysiological testing was not significantly associated with appropriate ICD therapy.

Conclusion

In our cohort of patients with ARVC, history of heart failure was a significant predictor of appropriate ICD therapy, whereas left ventricular involvement and age at time of ICD implantation were of borderline significance. These predictors should be tested in larger prospective cohorts to optimize ICD therapy in this rare cardiomyopathy.     

Change in myocardial function after resuscitated sudden cardiac arrest and its impact on long-term mortality and defibrillator implantation

BackgroundThe impact of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) changes after sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) on implantable defibrillator (ICD) utilization and long-term survival is not known. We therefore evaluated the influence of LVEF on these parameters in SCA survivors.MethodsData were collected on consecutive SCA survivors who had ≥1 echocardiogram after SCA and who survived to hospital discharge (n = 655). The median time from baseline to first follow-up echocardiogram was 162 days. LVEF ≥50% was defined as normal. Patients were classified into 4 groups according to baseline (LVEFb) and follow-up (LVEFf) myocardial function: normal LVEFb and LVEFf (group1, n = 261); reduced LVEFb and normal LVEFf (group 2, n = 104); normal LVEFb but reduced LVEFf (group 3, n = 41); and reduced LVEFb and LVEFf (group 4, n = 249). All-cause mortality and time to ICD implantation were examined in all groups.ResultsOver a median follow up of 4.3 years, death occurred in 279 (42%) of patients. Compared with patients in group 1, patients with any reduced LVEF at any time (groups 2–4) had significantly higher mortality, even after adjusting for unbalanced covariates (HR = 1.44, 95.0% CI 1.05–1.95, p = 0.022). ICDs were most commonly implanted in patients with persistently reduced LVEF (group 4: HR = 1.72, 95% CI = 1.26–2.35, p = 0.001).ConclusionWe demonstrate that, in survivors of SCA, a reduced LVEF at or after the index event is associated with higher mortality but that patients with persistently reduced LVEF were most likely to receive ICD therapy. These findings have implications on the management of SCA survivors.     

Normal pacing function with normal impedance trends despite evident lead fracture in an implantable defibrillator – What is the mechanism?

A 63-year-old lady with a high-grade atrioventricular (AV) block and a structurally normal heart underwent permanent pacemaker implantation (dual chamber, Medtronic Ltd) 8 years back. On follow up, she had a recurrence of syncope after 3 years. The device interrogation at that time had revealed ventricular tachycardia (VT) for which she underwent implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD, Medtronic Ltd, Egida DR, DF1) upgradation at another center (electrograms not available). Now, she presents with episodes of presyncope after another 5 years. The Echocardiography was unremarkable. The ICD was interrogated & there was a stored ventricular fibrillation (VF) episode. But the electrograms suggested noise over a true VF electrogram noted in both near and far-field. In all probability, the VF was not a true one which might have arisen from some lead noise or from an electromagnetic interference (EMI). Fluoroscopy revealed an evident lead fracture near the superior vena cava (SVC) coil. The stored electrogram (EGM) characteristics also suggested possible lead noise rather than a true VF. She was advised for lead revision. Interestingly, all pacing parameters were normal along with normal impedance despite the evident lead fracture. This happened due to the ICD lead arrangements as there are separate electrodes for the SVC/RV coil and pacing. While the SVC coil was damaged, the pacing electrodes remained unaffected. Since the patient has no episode of true VT/NSVT and the echocardiography was normal, she was managed temporarily by changing the pacemaker to asynchronous (DOO) mode.     

Implementation of guidelines for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy in clinical practice: Which patients do benefit?

Purpose

Based on multiple large clinical trials conducted over the last decades guidelines for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantations have been evolving. The increase in primary prophylactic ICD implantations challenges us to be critical towards the indications in certain patient populations.

Methods

We retrospectively collected patient characteristics and rates of appropriate and inappropriate ICD therapy, appropriate and inappropriate ICD shock and mortality of all patients who received an ICD in the University Medical Center Utrecht (UMCU) over the years 2006–2011.

Results

A total of 1075 patients were included in this analysis (74 % male, mean age 61 ± 13 years, left ventricular ejection fraction 30 ± 13 %); 61 % had a primary indication and 58 % had ischaemic heart disease. During a mean follow-up period of 31 ± 17 months, 227 of the patients (21 %) received appropriate ICD therapy (149 (14 %) patients received an appropriate ICD shock). Females, patients with a primary prophylactic indication and patients with non-ischaemic heart disease experienced significantly less ICD therapy. Only a few patients (54, 5 %) received inappropriate ICD therapy; 33 (3 %) patients received an inappropriate ICD shock. Fifty-five patients died within one year after ICD implantation and were therefore, in retrospect, not eligible for ICD implantation.

Conclusion

Our study confirms the benefit of ICD implantation in clinical practice. Nevertheless, certain patients experience less benefit than others. A more patient-tailored risk stratification based on electrophysiological parameters would be lucrative to improve clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness.     

Biventricular stimulation therapy in patients with heart failure and tachycardic arrhythmias. Indications--results--prospects]

Biventricular pacing (BV-P) therapy is a new therapeutic approach in patients (pts) with drug refractory congestive heart failure; the beneficial effects of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) without BV-P therapy in patients (pts) with life-threatening ventricular tachyarrhythmias and impaired left ventricular (LV) function is associated with a relatively high cardiac and total mortality. We studied the follow-up of 410 pts (368 males, 42 females, mean age 57 +/- 11 years) after ICD implant. The LV function was assessed by the New York Heart functional class of heart failure (NYHA). Fifty pts (12%) were in NYHA I-II, 151 pts (37%) in NYHA II, 117 pts (29%) in NYHA II-III and 92 pts (22%) in NYHA III. Epicardial ICD implantation was performed in 209 pts (51%) and 201 pts (49%) received nonthoracotomy ICDs. Perioperatively (within 30 days after implant), 12 pts (3%) died, significantly more frequent after epicardial (11 of 209 pts, 5%) than after transvenous ICD implant (1 of 201 pts, < 1%)(p < 0.05). During a mean follow-up of 28 + 24 months (range < 1 to 114 months), 90 pts (23%) died: 9 pts (2%) died from sudden arrhythmic death and 5 pts (1%) suddenly, but probably not from arrhythmic causes; 55 pts (14%) died from cardiac causes (congestive heart failure, myocardial reinfarction) and 21 pts (5%) from noncardiac causes. 338 pts (82%) received ICD shocks (mean incidence 21 +/- 43 shocks per pt). Our data show that pts with LV dysfunction benefit from ICD therapy and that these pts survive for a considerable time after the first shock. However, survival is clearly influenced by the degree of left ventricular dysfunction and, in addition to ICD therapy, aggressive treatment of heart failure is necessary. Therefore, BV-P is a very promising concept to improve the worse prognosis in pts with moderate or severe congestive heart failure.     

The risk of ventricular arrhythmias in a Dutch CRT population: CRT-defibrillator versus CRT-pacemaker

Background

Patients eligible for cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) have an indication for primary prophylactic implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy. However, response to CRT might influence processes involved in arrhythmogenesis and therefore change the necessity of ICD therapy in certain patients.

Method

In 202 CRT-defibrillator patients, the association between baseline variables, 6-month echocardiographic outcome (volume response: left ventricular end-systolic volume decrease < ≥15 % and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ >35 %) and the risk of first appropriate ICD therapy was analysed retrospectively.

Results

Fifty (25 %) patients received appropriate ICD therapy during a median follow-up of 37 (23–52) months. At baseline ischaemic cardiomyopathy (hazard ratio (HR) 2.0, p = 0.019) and a B-type natriuretic peptide level > 163 pmol/l (HR 3.8, p < 0.001) were significantly associated with the risk of appropriate ICD therapy. After 6 months, 105 (52 %) patients showed volume response and 51 (25 %) reached an LVEF > 35 %. Three (6 %) patients with an LVEF > 35 % received appropriate ICD therapy following echocardiography at ± 6 months compared with 43 patients (29 %) with an LVEF ≤ 35 % (p = 0.001). LVEF post-CRT was more strongly associated to the risk of ventricular arrhythmias than volume response (LVEF > 35 %, HR 0.23, p = 0.020).

Conclusion

Assessing the necessity of an ICD in patients eligible for CRT remains a challenge. Six months post-CRT an LVEF > 35 % identified patients at low risk of ventricular arrhythmias. LVEF might be used at the time of generator replacement to identify patients suitable for downgrading to a CRT-pacemaker.     

Short-coupled variant of torsade de pointes

A 36-year-old man with a history of primary sclerosing cholangitis and epilepsy was admitted to our hospital for cholangitis. During admission he was resuscitated because of ventricular fibrillation. ECGs showed multiple ventricular premature beats (VPBs) with a short coupling interval (240 ms), resulting in frequent torsade de pointes (TdP). In total, the patient had to be defibrillated 12 times. Short-coupled TdP is a rare variant of polymorphic ventricular tachycardia, with unknown aetiology. Verapamil seems to be the only drug able to suppress the arrhythmia. Verapamil, however, does not lower the risk of sudden death; therefore, an ICD implantation is advised. (Neth Heart J 2008;16:246-9.)     

Follow-up of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy: comparison of coronary artery disease and dilated cardiomyopathy

Purpose

Since several large trials have proven the effectiveness of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) in patients with left ventricular dysfunction, disadvantages have become more apparent. As the prognosis of patients with cardiovascular diseases is improving, assessment of ICD patients and re-evaluation of the current guidelines is mandatory. We aimed to evaluate differences in mortality and occurrence of (in)appropriate shocks in ICD patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) or dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM).

Methods

In a large teaching hospital, all consecutive patients with systolic dysfunction due to CAD or DCM who received an ICD with and without resynchronisation therapy, were collected in a database.

Results

A total of 320 consecutive patients (age 67 ± 10 years) were classified as CAD patients and 178 (63 ± 11 years) as DCM patients. Median follow-up was 40 months (interquartile range [IQR] 23─57 months). All–cause mortality was 14 % (CAD 15 % vs DCM 13 %). Appropriate shocks occurred in 13 % of all patients (CAD 15 % vs DCM 11 %, p = 0.12) and inappropriate shocks occurred in 10 % (CAD 8 % vs DCM 12 %, p = 0.27). Multivariate analysis demonstrated impaired left ventricular ejection fraction, QRS >120, age ≥75 years and low estimated glomerular filtration rate as predictors for all-cause mortality. Predictors for inappropriate shocks were permanent and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.

Conclusion

Mortality rates were similar in patients with CAD and DCM who received an ICD. Furthermore, no differences were found in the occurrence of appropriate and inappropriate ICD interventions between these patient groups.     

Pregnancy and the risk of torsades de pointes in congenital long-QT syndrome

Patients with congenital long-QT syndrome (LQTS) are at increased risk of ventricular arrhythmias during stressful situations. Large-scale studies have pointed out that affected individuals are particularly at risk in the period following pregnancy (post-partum). This is recognised especially for women with an LQTS type 2. Here, we describe two cases of young women with LQTS type 2, both admitted to our institution with symptomatic torsades de pointes a few weeks after delivery. Both patients carried a mutation in the KCNH2 gene. One patient was nullipara, while the other had had an uneventful previous pregnancy. In both cases treatment with a β-blocker did not prevent life-threatening cardiac arrhythmias. The risk of arrhythmias is thought to gradually decrease to pre-pregnancy values in the nine months after delivery. Considering the difficulties related to continuous monitoring of a patient for such a long period and the desire of these patients to have more children in the foreseeable future, ICD implantation was performed. (Neth Heart J 2008;16:422-5.)     

Towards a better risk stratification for sudden cardiac death in patients with structural heart disease

With the introduction of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD), patients can be protected against sudden cardiac death (SCD) due to ventricular arrhythmia (VA). Guidelines have been drawn up for selecting patients for primary and secondary prophylaxis. However, most ICD recipients today who receive an ICD for primary prevention will not experience a life-threatening VA requiring antitachypacing or shock therapy. Better risk stratification is desirable with efficacy, costs and complication rate in mind. An overview is presented of widely accepted and potentially valuable risk markers and the role they may play in better identifying candidates for ICD therapy. (Neth Heart J 2009;17:101–6.)     

Improved survival of patients with coronary artery disease and low ejection fraction with ICD implantation versus conventional therapy in a real world survey

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Coronary artery disease (CAD) is associated with an increased risk for sudden cardiac death. Randomized controlled trials have shown that implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) improve life expectancy unless they are implanted within the first days after an acute myocardial infarction and guidelines recommend their use. We aimed to validate that these results also apply to patients of a typical community hospital in Germany. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of patients undergoing coronary angiography in the Lippe-Detmold Hospital between 2003 and 2006. They had to have significant CAD and an ejection fraction (EF) [less than or equal to] 35% and no acute myocardial infarction within 28 days of implantation and no history of ventricular fibrillation. RESULTS: 213 patients were included; 70 of which received an ICD. Patients with an ICD implantation were younger (64.8+/-9.9 vs. 67.9+/-9.8 years; p=0.034), had single vessel CAD more frequently (22.9 vs. 11.2%; p=0.025) and a lower EF (26.7+/-6.3 vs. 29.1+/-4.6%; p=0.006). Hospital readmissions were comparable between the ICD and the control group (68.6 vs. 72.0%; p=0.602). ICD therapy was associated with a considerable survival benefit compared to conventional therapy (HR 0.52; 95%CI 0.29-0.93; p=0.027) in a Cox-Proportional Hazards Regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Appreciating the potential limitations of retrospective studies, we found that ICD use was associated with improved survival in patients with significant CAD and an EF 35%, typical for a large tertiary hospital.     

Influence of time between last myocardial infarction and prophylactic implantable defibrillator implant on device detections and therapies. Routine Practice data from the SEARCH MI registry

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: A multicenter European Registry, SEARCH-MI, was instituted in the year 2002 in order to asses patients' outcomes and ICD interventions in patients with a previous MI and depressed LV function, treated with an ICD according to MADIT II results. In this analysis, we evaluate the influence of the time elapsed between last myocardial infarction (MI) and prophylactic cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implant on device activations. METHODS: 643 patients with left ventricular dysfunction (mean LVEF 26 +/- 5%) and NYHA class I-III were prospectively followed for 1.8 +/- 1.2 years in a multicenter registry. The population was divided into 3 groups according to the time between last MI and ICD implant: [1] from 40 days to less than 1.5 years; [2] from 1.5 to less than 7 years and [3] at least 7 years. RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of ventricular tachyarrhymias and appropriate device therapy (ATP or shock) were higher in patients implanted longer time from last MI (Gray's Test p = 0.002 and p = 0.013 respectively). No significant differences were seen in all cause mortality (Gray's Test p = 0.618) or sudden cardiac death across the MI stratification groups (Gray's Test p = 0.663). CONCLUSIONS: Patients implanted with an ICD longer after the MI have a higher chance of presenting ventricular tachyarrhythmias and appropriate ICD therapy, while no differences were seen in overall mortality. These observations may be important for improving patient targeting in sudden death prevention.     

Dutch outcome in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy (DO-IT): registry design and baseline characteristics of a prospective observational cohort study to predict appropriate indication for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator

Background

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) are widely used for the prevention of sudden cardiac death. At present, both clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of ICD therapy in primary prevention patients are topics of discussion, as only a minority of these patients will eventually receive appropriate ICD therapy.

Methods/design

The DO-IT Registry is a nationwide prospective cohort with a target enrolment of 1,500 primary prevention ICD patients with reduced left ventricular function in a setting of structural heart disease. The primary outcome measures are death and appropriate ICD therapy for ventricular tachyarrhythmias. Secondary outcome measures are inappropriate ICD therapy, death of any cause, hospitalisation for ICD related complications and for cardiovascular reasons. As of December 2016, data on demographic, clinical, and ICD characteristics of 1,468 patients have been collected. Follow-up will continue up to 24 months after inclusion of the last patient. During follow-up, clinical and ICD data are collected based on the normal follow-up of these patients, assuming ICD interrogations take place every six months and clinical follow-up is once a year. At baseline, the mean age was 66 (standard deviation [SD] 10) years and 27% were women.

Conclusion

The DO-IT Registry represents a real-world nationwide cohort of patients receiving ICDs for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death with reduced left ventricular function in a setting of structural heart disease. The registry investigates the efficacy of the current practice and aims to develop prediction rules to identify subgroups who will not (sufficiently) benefit from ICD implantation and to provide results regarding costs and budget impact of targeted supply of primary preventions ICDs.

     

Prognostic value of microvolt T-wave alternans in a real-world ICD population. Twente ICD Cohort Studie (TICS)

Introduction

Survival benefit from ICD implantation is relatively low in primary prevention patients. Better patient selection is important to maintain maximum survival benefit while reducing the number of unnecessary implants. Microvolt T-wave alternans (MTWA) is a promising risk marker. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the predictive value of MTWA in ICD patients.

Methods and results

This study was a substudy of the Twente ICD Cohort Study (TICS). Patients with ischaemic or non-ischaemic left ventricular dysfunction who received an ICD following current ESC guidelines were eligible for inclusion. Exercise-MTWA was performed and classified as non-negative or negative. The primary endpoint was the composite of mortality and appropriate shock therapy. Analysis was performed in 134 patients (81 % male, mean age 62 years, mean ejection fraction 26.5 %). MTWA was non-negative in 64 %. There was no relation between non-negative MTWA testing and mortality and/or appropriate shock therapy (all p-values >0.15). Due to clinical conditions, 24 % were ineligible for testing. These patients experienced the highest risk for mortality (p < 0.01).

Conclusion

Non-negative MTWA testing did not predict mortality and/or appropriate shock therapy. Furthermore, MTWA testing is not feasible in a large percentage of patients. These ineligible patients experience the highest risk for mortality.     

Clinical implementation of guidelines for cardioverter defibrillator implantation: lost in translation?

Purpose: Guidelines for implantation of cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) are increasingly including indications for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in high-risk groups, where ICDs were traditionally implanted for secondary prevention. We performed a single-centre audit to evaluate adherence to the recent Dutch guidelines. Methods: All 1886 patients visiting a large regional Dutch teaching hospital (attending 1.8 to 2.0% of the Dutch population) in November 2005 were screened using the recently updated Dutch guidelines. Patients fulfilling these criteria were categorised as having an ICD indication for primary or secondary prevention. Results: 135 patients had an indication for ICD, 19 of whom had one or received one. Of the remaining 116 patients, 14 were ‘new’ to the department of cardiology. The 102 ‘known’ patients had 466 doctor-patient contacts in the previous year, which averages 4.57 cardiology contacts per patient per year. Patients were more likely to receive an ICD for the secondary prevention of SCD (10/11, 91%) than for primary prevention (9/124, 7%). Conclusion: In a large regional teaching hospital in the Netherlands, only a small proportion of patients eligible for ICD implantation actually receive one. Cardiologists tend to implant ICDs for secondary prevention of SCD. The low ICD implantation rate for primary prevention of SCD may relate to logistics (e.g. permission to implant ICDs, the presence of an electrophysiology lab) or the perceived low cost-benefit ratio. Our results indicate that once the substantial backlog (13,500 ICDs) has been addressed, the annual implantation of new ICDs should rise from the current 125 to at least 510 per million inhabitants per year in the Netherlands. (Neth Heart J 2007;15:129-32.)     

Wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (life-vest): A feasible bridging treatment in adult congenital heart disease

BackgroundWearable cardioverter-defibrillators (WCDs) are currently used in patients at temporarily heightened risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD) who are temporarily unable to receive an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). WCD can safely record and terminate life-threatening arrhythmias through a non-invasive electrode-based system. The current clinical indications for WCD use are varied and keep evolving as experience with this technology increases.MethodsWe reviewed and explored the data behind indications for WCD use and discuss its usefulness in congenital heart disease (CHD) patients.ResultsWe considered 8 consecutive patients (mean age 35.25 years, range 18–51 years, average duration of WCD use 4 months, range 3–6 months) with complex CHD, in which a WCD was used between June 2018 and January 2022. No sustained ventricular arrhythmias requiring shocks were recorded in the observation period. No inappropriate shocks were recorded. All the patients showed a good compliance and a very high mean wear time per day (21.2 ± 1 h a day). Four patients implanted a permanent device (3 CRT-D, 1 ICD), three underwent cardiac surgery at the end of the WCD period and one is still on the waiting list for the operation.ConclusionsLarger trial could confirm the possible conceivable benefit from an extended use of the WCD in certain populations with complex CHD as in our case series, especially in patients with life-treating ventricular arrhythmias waiting for surgery for residual cardiac defects or in the early phases following the surgical/hemodynamic interventions, patients with tachycardiomyopathy expected to improve after the arrhythmias are removed and patients awaiting implantation of an ICD at high risk due to active infection.     

Incidence and predictors of phantom shocks in implantable cardioverter defibrillator recipients

Background

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are designed to deliver shocks or antitachycardia pacing (ATP) in the event of ventricular arrhythmias. During follow-up, some ICD recipients experience the sensation of ICD discharge in the absence of an actual discharge (phantom shock). The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence and predictors of phantom shocks in ICD recipients.

Methods

Medical records of 629 consecutive patients with ischaemic or dilated cardiomyopathy and prior ICD implantation were studied.

Results

With a median follow-up of 35 months, phantom shocks were reported by 5.1 % of ICD recipients (5.7 % in the primary prevention group and 3.7 % for the secondary prevention group; p=NS). In the combined group of primary and secondary prevention, there were no significant predictors of the occurrence of phantom shocks. However, in the primary prevention group, phantom shocks were related to a history of atrial fibrillation (p=0.03) and NYHA class <III (p=0.05). In the secondary prevention group, there were no significant predictors for phantom shocks.

Conclusion

Phantom shocks occur in approximately 5 % of all ICD recipients. In primary prevention patients, a relation with a history of atrial fibrillation and NYHA class <III were significant predictors for the occurrence of phantom shocks. In the secondary prevention patients, no significant predictors were found.