Age differences of patients treated with wearable cardioverter defibrillator: Data from a multicentre registry.
Sudden cardiac death
age-differences
age-variation
arrhythmias
wearable cardioverter defibrillator
Journal
European journal of clinical investigation
ISSN: 1365-2362
Titre abrégé: Eur J Clin Invest
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0245331
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jul 2023
Jul 2023
Historique:
revised:
17
02
2023
received:
18
01
2023
accepted:
19
02
2023
medline:
13
6
2023
pubmed:
1
3
2023
entrez:
28
2
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Wearable cardioverter defibrillators (WCD) are used as a 'bridging' technology in patients, who are temporarily at high risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD). Several factors should be taken into consideration, for example patient selection, compliance and optimal drug treatment, when WCD is prescribed. We aimed to present real-world data from seven centres from Germany and Switzerland according to age differences regarding the outcome, prognosis, WCD data and compliance. Between 04/2012 and 03/2021, 1105 patients were included in this registry. Outcome data according to age differences (old ≥45 years compared to young <45 years) were analysed. At young age, WCDs were more often prescribed due to congenital heart disease and myocarditis. On the other hand, ischaemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) was more present in older patients. Wear days of WCD were similar between both groups (p = .115). In addition, during the WCD use, documented arrhythmic life-threatening events were comparable [sustained ventricular tachycardia: 5.8% vs. 7.7%, ventricular fibrillation (VF) .5% vs. .6%] and consequently the rate of appropriate shocks was similar between both groups. Left ventricular ejection fraction improvement was documented over follow-up with a better improvement in younger patients as compared to older patients (77% vs. 63%, p = .002). In addition, at baseline, the rate of atrial fibrillation was significantly higher in the older age group (23% vs. 8%; p = .001). The rate of permanent cardiac implantable electronic device implantation (CiED) was lower in the younger group (25% vs. 36%, p = .05). The compliance rate defined as wearing WCD at least 20 h per day was significantly lower in young patients compared to old patients (68.9% vs. 80.9%, p < .001). During the follow-up, no significant difference regarding all-cause mortality or arrhythmic death was documented in both groups. A low compliance rate of wearing WCD is predicted by young patients and patients suffering from non-ischaemic cardiomyopathies. Although the compliance rate in different age groups is high, the average wear hours tended to be lower in young patients compared to older patients. The clinical events were similar in younger patients compared to older patients.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Wearable cardioverter defibrillators (WCD) are used as a 'bridging' technology in patients, who are temporarily at high risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD). Several factors should be taken into consideration, for example patient selection, compliance and optimal drug treatment, when WCD is prescribed. We aimed to present real-world data from seven centres from Germany and Switzerland according to age differences regarding the outcome, prognosis, WCD data and compliance.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
METHODS
Between 04/2012 and 03/2021, 1105 patients were included in this registry. Outcome data according to age differences (old ≥45 years compared to young <45 years) were analysed. At young age, WCDs were more often prescribed due to congenital heart disease and myocarditis. On the other hand, ischaemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) was more present in older patients. Wear days of WCD were similar between both groups (p = .115). In addition, during the WCD use, documented arrhythmic life-threatening events were comparable [sustained ventricular tachycardia: 5.8% vs. 7.7%, ventricular fibrillation (VF) .5% vs. .6%] and consequently the rate of appropriate shocks was similar between both groups. Left ventricular ejection fraction improvement was documented over follow-up with a better improvement in younger patients as compared to older patients (77% vs. 63%, p = .002). In addition, at baseline, the rate of atrial fibrillation was significantly higher in the older age group (23% vs. 8%; p = .001). The rate of permanent cardiac implantable electronic device implantation (CiED) was lower in the younger group (25% vs. 36%, p = .05). The compliance rate defined as wearing WCD at least 20 h per day was significantly lower in young patients compared to old patients (68.9% vs. 80.9%, p < .001). During the follow-up, no significant difference regarding all-cause mortality or arrhythmic death was documented in both groups. A low compliance rate of wearing WCD is predicted by young patients and patients suffering from non-ischaemic cardiomyopathies.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Although the compliance rate in different age groups is high, the average wear hours tended to be lower in young patients compared to older patients. The clinical events were similar in younger patients compared to older patients.
Types de publication
Multicenter Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e13977Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. European Journal of Clinical Investigation published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Stichting European Society for Clinical Investigation Journal Foundation.
Références
McDonagh TA, Metra M, Adamo M, et al. 2021 ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure. Eur Heart J. 2021;42(36):3599-3726.
Zeppenfeld K, Tfelt-Hansen J, de Riva M, et al. 2022 ESC guidelines for the management of patients with ventricular arrhythmias and the prevention of sudden cardiac death. Eur Heart J. 2022;43:3997-4126.
McMurray JJ, Packer M, Desai AS, et al. Angiotensin-neprilysin inhibition versus enalapril in heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(11):993-1004.
Dreher TC, El-Battrawy I, RÖger S, et al. Comparison of the outcome of patients protected by the wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) for <90 wear days versus ≥90 wear days. In Vivo. 2020;34(6):3601-3610.
Rosenkaimer SL, El-Battrawy I, Dreher TC, et al. The wearable cardioverter-defibrillator: experience in 153 patients and a long-term follow-up. J Clin Med. 2020;9(3):893.
El-Battrawy I, Kovacs B, Dreher TC, et al. Real life experience with the wearable cardioverter-defibrillator in an international multicenter registry. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):3203.
Olgin JE, Pletcher MJ, Vittinghoff E, et al. Wearable cardioverter-defibrillator after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(13):1205-1215.
Garcia R, Combes N, Defaye P, et al. Wearable cardioverter-defibrillator in patients with a transient risk of sudden cardiac death: the WEARIT-France cohort study. Europace. 2021;23(1):73-81.
Ponikowski P, Voors AA, Anker SD, et al. 2016 ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2016;69(12):1167.
Poole JE, Gleva MJ, Birgersdotter-Green U, et al. A wearable cardioverter defibrillator with a low false alarm rate. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2022;33(5):831-842.
Steve Tsang CC, Browning J, Todor L, et al. Factors associated with medication nonadherence among Medicare low-income subsidy beneficiaries with diabetes, hypertension, and/or heart failure. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2021;27(8):971-981.
Goldenberg I, Erath JW, Russo AM, et al. Sex differences in arrhythmic burden with the wearable cardioverter-defibrillator. Heart Rhythm. 2021;18(3):404-410.
Abumayyaleh M, Dreher TC, Rosenkaimer S, et al. Sex differences and adherence of patients treated with wearable cardioverter-defibrillator: insights from an international multicenter register. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2022;33:2243-2249.
Duncker D, Konig T, Hohmann S, Bauersachs J, Veltmann C. Avoiding untimely implantable cardioverter/defibrillator implantation by intensified heart failure therapy optimization supported by the wearable cardioverter/defibrillator-the PROLONG study. J Am Heart Assoc. 2017;6(1):e004512.
Duncker D, Konig T, Hohmann S, Bauersachs J, Veltmann C. Ventricular arrhythmias in patients with newly diagnosed nonischemic cardiomyopathy: insights from the PROLONG study. Clin Cardiol. 2017;40(8):586-590.