Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators in Patients With Congenital Heart Disease.
congenital heart disease
implantable cardioverter defibrillator
sudden death
ventricular arrhythmia
Journal
Journal of the American College of Cardiology
ISSN: 1558-3597
Titre abrégé: J Am Coll Cardiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8301365
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 08 2023
15 08 2023
Historique:
received:
11
04
2023
revised:
12
05
2023
accepted:
15
05
2023
medline:
11
8
2023
pubmed:
10
8
2023
entrez:
9
8
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Very few data have been published on the use of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (S-ICDs) in patients with congenital heart disease (CHD). The aim of this study was to analyze outcomes associated with S-ICDs in patients with CHD. This nationwide French cohort including all patients with an S-ICD was initiated in 2020 by the French Institute of Health and Medical Research. Characteristics at implantation and outcomes were analyzed in patients with CHD. From October 12, 2012, to December 31, 2019, among 4,924 patients receiving an S-ICD implant in 150 centers, 101 (2.1%) had CHD. Tetralogy of Fallot, univentricular heart, and dextro-transposition of the great arteries represented almost one-half of the population. Patients with CHD were significantly younger (age 37.1 ± 15.4 years vs 50.1 ± 14.9 years; P < 0.001), more frequently female (37.6% vs 23.0%; P < 0.001), more likely to receive an S-ICD for secondary prevention (72.3% vs 35.9%; P < 0.001), and less likely to have severe systolic dysfunction of the systemic ventricle (28.1% vs 53.1%; P < 0.001). Over a mean follow-up period of 1.9 years, 16 (15.8%) patients with CHD received at least 1 appropriate shock, with all shocks successfully terminating the ventricular arrhythmia. The crude risk of appropriate S-ICD shock was twice as high in patients with CHD compared with non-CHD patients (annual incidences of 9.0% vs 4.4%; HR: 2.1; 95% CI: 1.3-3.4); however, this association was no longer significant after propensity matching (especially considering S-ICD indication, P = 0.12). The burden of all complications (HR: 1.2; 95% CI: 0.7-2.1; P = 0.4) and inappropriate shocks (HR: 0.9; 95% CI: 0.4-2.0; P = 0.9) was comparable in both groups. In this nationwide study, patients with CHD represented 2% of all S-ICD implantations. Our findings emphasize the effectiveness and safety of S-ICD in this particularly high-risk population. (S-ICD French Cohort Study [HONEST]; NCT05302115).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Very few data have been published on the use of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (S-ICDs) in patients with congenital heart disease (CHD).
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this study was to analyze outcomes associated with S-ICDs in patients with CHD.
METHODS
This nationwide French cohort including all patients with an S-ICD was initiated in 2020 by the French Institute of Health and Medical Research. Characteristics at implantation and outcomes were analyzed in patients with CHD.
RESULTS
From October 12, 2012, to December 31, 2019, among 4,924 patients receiving an S-ICD implant in 150 centers, 101 (2.1%) had CHD. Tetralogy of Fallot, univentricular heart, and dextro-transposition of the great arteries represented almost one-half of the population. Patients with CHD were significantly younger (age 37.1 ± 15.4 years vs 50.1 ± 14.9 years; P < 0.001), more frequently female (37.6% vs 23.0%; P < 0.001), more likely to receive an S-ICD for secondary prevention (72.3% vs 35.9%; P < 0.001), and less likely to have severe systolic dysfunction of the systemic ventricle (28.1% vs 53.1%; P < 0.001). Over a mean follow-up period of 1.9 years, 16 (15.8%) patients with CHD received at least 1 appropriate shock, with all shocks successfully terminating the ventricular arrhythmia. The crude risk of appropriate S-ICD shock was twice as high in patients with CHD compared with non-CHD patients (annual incidences of 9.0% vs 4.4%; HR: 2.1; 95% CI: 1.3-3.4); however, this association was no longer significant after propensity matching (especially considering S-ICD indication, P = 0.12). The burden of all complications (HR: 1.2; 95% CI: 0.7-2.1; P = 0.4) and inappropriate shocks (HR: 0.9; 95% CI: 0.4-2.0; P = 0.9) was comparable in both groups.
CONCLUSIONS
In this nationwide study, patients with CHD represented 2% of all S-ICD implantations. Our findings emphasize the effectiveness and safety of S-ICD in this particularly high-risk population. (S-ICD French Cohort Study [HONEST]; NCT05302115).
Identifiants
pubmed: 37558371
pii: S0735-1097(23)05965-X
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2023.05.057
pii:
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT05302115']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
590-599Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Funding Support and Author Disclosures This study was supported by the French Institute of Health and Medical Research and Paris-Sudden Death Expertise Center, the French Society of Cardiology (Electrophysiology Working Group), and the French Federation of Cardiology. The Paris Sudden Death Expertise Center activities are supported by the Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM), the University of Paris, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Fondation Cœur et Artères, Global Heart Watch, Fédération Française de Cardiologie, Société Française de Cardiologie, and Fondation Recherche Medicale, as well as unrestricted grants from industrial partners (Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, MicroPort, ZOLL, and Schiller). Dr Waldmann has served as a consultant for Abbott and Medtronic. Dr Marijon has served as a consultant for Boston Scientific, Medtronic, ZOLL, and Abbott. Dr Ollitrault has received consulting fees from Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic. Dr Champ-Rigot has received consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and MicroPort CRM. Dr Garcia has received grants and honoraria from Boston Scientific. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.