Clinical impact of defibrillation testing in a real-world S-ICD population: Data from the ELISIR registry.
DFT
defibrillation testing
subcutaneous device
subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator
Journal
Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology
ISSN: 1540-8167
Titre abrégé: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9010756
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 2021
02 2021
Historique:
received:
22
09
2020
revised:
29
10
2020
accepted:
19
11
2020
pubmed:
10
12
2020
medline:
10
8
2021
entrez:
9
12
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Current guidelines recommend defibrillation testing (DT) performance in patients with a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD), theoretically to reduce the amount of ineffective shocks. DT, however, has been proven unnecessary in transvenous ICD and real-world data show a growing trend in avoidance of DT after S-ICD implantation. All patients undergoing S-ICD implant at nine associated Italian centers joining in the ELISIR registry (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04373876) were enrolled and classified upon DT performance. Long-term follow-up events were recorded and compared to report the long-term efficacy and safety of S-ICD implantations without DT in a real-world setting. A total of 420 patients (54.0 ± 15.5 years, 80.0% male) were enrolled in the study. A DT was performed in 254 (60.5%) patients (DT+ group), while in 166 (39.5%) was avoided (DT- group). Over a median follow-up of 19 (11-31) months, a very low rate (0.7%) of ineffective shocks was observed, and no significant differences in the primary combined arrhythmic outcome were observed between the two groups (p = .656). At regression analysis, the only clinical predictor associated with the primary combined outcome was S-ICD placement for primary prevention (odds ratio: 0.42; p = .013); DT performance instead was not associated with a reduction in primary outcome (p = .375). Implanting an S-ICD without DT does not appear to impact the safety of defibrillation therapy and overall patients' survival.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Current guidelines recommend defibrillation testing (DT) performance in patients with a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD), theoretically to reduce the amount of ineffective shocks. DT, however, has been proven unnecessary in transvenous ICD and real-world data show a growing trend in avoidance of DT after S-ICD implantation.
METHODS
All patients undergoing S-ICD implant at nine associated Italian centers joining in the ELISIR registry (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04373876) were enrolled and classified upon DT performance. Long-term follow-up events were recorded and compared to report the long-term efficacy and safety of S-ICD implantations without DT in a real-world setting.
RESULTS
A total of 420 patients (54.0 ± 15.5 years, 80.0% male) were enrolled in the study. A DT was performed in 254 (60.5%) patients (DT+ group), while in 166 (39.5%) was avoided (DT- group). Over a median follow-up of 19 (11-31) months, a very low rate (0.7%) of ineffective shocks was observed, and no significant differences in the primary combined arrhythmic outcome were observed between the two groups (p = .656). At regression analysis, the only clinical predictor associated with the primary combined outcome was S-ICD placement for primary prevention (odds ratio: 0.42; p = .013); DT performance instead was not associated with a reduction in primary outcome (p = .375).
CONCLUSION
Implanting an S-ICD without DT does not appear to impact the safety of defibrillation therapy and overall patients' survival.
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT04373876']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
468-476Informations de copyright
© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Weiss R, Knight BP, Gold MR, et al. Safety and efficacy of a totally subcutaneous implantable-cardioverter defibrillator. Circulation. 2013;128:944-953.
Basu-Ray I, Liu J, Jia X, et al. Subcutaneous versus transvenous implantable defibrillator therapy: a meta-analysis of case-control studies. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2017;3:1475-1483.
Knops RE, Brouwer TF, Barr CS, et al. The learning curve associated with the introduction of the subcutaneous implantable defibrillator. Europace. 2016;18:1010-1015.
Gold MR, Theuns DA, Knight BP, et al. Head-to-head comparison of arrhythmia discrimination performance of subcutaneous and transvenous ICD arrhythmia detection algorithms: the START study. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2012;23:359-366.
Healey JS, Hohnloser SH, Glikson M, et al. Cardioverter defibrillator implantation without induction of ventricular fibrillation: a single-blind, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial (SIMPLE). Lancet (London, England). 2015;385:785-791.
Bänsch D, Bonnemeier H, Brandt J, et al. Intra-operative defibrillation testing and clinical shock efficacy in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: the NORDIC ICD randomized clinical trial. Eur Heart J. 2015;36:2500-2507.
Wilkoff BL, Fauchier L, Stiles MK, et al. 2015 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/SOLAECE expert consensus statement on optimal implantable cardioverter-defibrillator programming and testing. Heart Rhythm. 2016;13:e50-e86.
Al-Ghamdi B, Mallawi Y, Shafquat A, Alruwaili N. Appropriate and inappropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillators therapies in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy/dysplasia patients. Cardiol Res. 2018;9:204-214.
Friedman DJ, Parzynski CS, Varosy PD, et al. Trends and In-hospital outcomes associated with adoption of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator in the United States. JAMA Cardiol. 2016;1:900-911.
Friedman DJ, Parzynski CS, Heist EK, et al. Ventricular fibrillation conversion testing after implantation of a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator report from the national cardiovascular data registry. Circulation. 2018;137:2463-2477.
Quast A-FBE, Baalman SWE, Brouwer TF, et al. A novel tool to evaluate the implant position and predict defibrillation success of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: the PRAETORIAN score. Heart Rhythm. 2019;16:403-410.
Quast A-FBE, Baalman SWE, Betts TR, et al. Rationale and design of the PRAETORIAN-DFT trial: a prospective randomized CompArative trial of SubcutanEous ImplanTable CardiOverter-DefibrillatoR ImplANtation with and without DeFibrillation testing. Am Heart J. 2019;214:167-174.
Biffi M, Ziacchi M, Angeletti A, et al. Successful defibrillation verification in subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients by low-energy shocks. Clin Cardiol. 2019;42:612-617.
Quast AFBE, Baalman SWE, Van der Stuijt W, Wilde AAM, Knops RE. Minimal defibrillation thresholds and the correlation with implant position in subcutaneous implantable-defibrillator patients. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2019;30:2441-2447.
Al-Khatib SM, Stevenson WG, Ackerman MJ, et al. 2017 AHA/ACC/HRS guideline for management of patients with ventricular arrhythmias and the prevention of sudden cardiac death: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society. Heart Rhythm. 2018;15:e190-e252.
D'Onofrio A, Pieragnoli P, Biffi M, et al. Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation: an analysis of Italian clinical practice and its evolution. Int J Cardiol. 2018;272:162-167.
Peddareddy L, Merchant FM, Leon AR, Smith P, Patel A, El-Chami MF. Effect of defibrillation threshold testing on effectiveness of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2018;41:996-1000.
Lambiase PD, Barr C, Theuns DAMJ, et al. Worldwide experience with a totally subcutaneous implantable defibrillator: early results from the EFFORTLESS S-ICD Registry. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:1657-1665.
Gold MR, Higgins S, Klein R, et al. Efficacy and temporal stability of reduced safety margins for ventricular defibrillation: primary results from the Low Energy Safety Study (LESS). Circulation. 2002;105:2043-2048.
Swerdlow CD, Russo AM, Degroot PJ. The dilemma of ICD implant testing. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2007;30:675-700.
Biffi M, Ziacchi M, D'Onofrio A, et al. 80 J shocks ensure high defibrillation safety margin in S-ICD recipients. Heart Rhythm Society Conference Abstract; 2020.
Russo AM, Chung MK. Is defibrillation testing necessary for implantable transvenous defibrillators?: defibrillation testing is necessary at the time of implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2014;7:337-346.
Rudic B, Tülümen E, Fastenrath F, Akin I, Borggrefe M, Kuschyk J. Defibrillation failure in patients undergoing replacement of subcutaneous defibrillator pulse generator. Heart Rhythm. 2020;17:455-459.
Biffi M, Viani S, Diemberger I, et al. Conversion test during subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation in clinical practice: in-hospital and mid-term outcome. Heart Rhythm Society Conference Abstract; 2020.
Køber L, Thune JJ, Nielsen JC, et al. Defibrillator implantation in patients with nonischemic systolic heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:1221-1230.