Incidence, implications, and management of sense-B-noise failure in subcutaneous cardioverter-defibrillator patients: insights from a large multicentre registry.

AIMS: Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (S-ICDs) offer potentially distinct advantages over transvenous defibrillator systems. Recent randomized trials showed significantly lower lead failure rates than transvenous ICD. Still, S-ICDs remain associated with the risk of inappropriate shocks (IAS). While previous studies have reported varying causes of IAS, this study explores a rare cause of IAS, referred to as 'sense-B-noise.' It was recently described in case series, but its incidence has not been studied in a large cohort of S-ICD patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively reviewed data from patients implanted with S-ICD models 1010, A209, and A219 between October 2009 and July 2023 across nine centres in Europe and the USA. The analysis concentrated on determining the incidence and understanding the implications of sense-B-noise events. Sense-B-noise represents a rare manifestation of distinct electrogram abnormalities within the primary and alternate sensing vectors. Data were collected from medical records, device telemetry, and manufacturer reports for investigation. This registry is registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05713708). Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator devices of the 1158 patients were analysed. The median follow-up time for all patients was 46 (IQR 23-64) months. In 107 patients (9.2%) ≥1 IAS was observed during follow-up. Sense-B-noise failure was diagnosed in six (0.5 and 5.6% of all IAS) patients, in all patients, the diagnosis was made after an IAS episode. Median lead dwell time in the affected patients was 23 (2-70) months. To resolve the sense-B-noise defect, in three patients reprogramming to the secondary vector was undertaken, and two patients underwent system removal with subsequent S-ICD reimplantation due to low amplitude in the secondary vector. In one patient, the secondary vector was initially programmed, and subsequently, an S-ICD system exchange was performed due to T-wave-oversensing IAS episodes. CONCLUSION: This multicentre analysis' findings shed light on a rare but clinically highly significant adverse event in S-ICD therapy. To our knowledge, we provide the first systematic multicentre analysis investigating the incidence of sense-B-noise. Due to being difficult to diagnose and limited options for resolution, management of sense-B-noise is challenging. Complete system exchange may be the only option for some patients. Educating healthcare providers involved in S-ICD patient care is crucial for ensuring accurate diagnosis and effective management of sense-B-noise issues.

Is it safe to give birth with an activated implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: A multicentre observational study.

OBJECTIVE: Data and guidelines are lacking, so implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) are often deactivated during labour to prevent inappropriate shocks. This study aimed to ascertain the safety of an activated ICD during labour. DESIGN: An observational study was performed. SETTING: Dutch hospitals. POPULATION OR SAMPLE: A total of 41 childbirths were included of 26 patients who gave birth between February 2009 and November 2018 after receiving an ICD in our tertiary hospital. Five of these childbirths were attended by the research team between December 2018 and August 2020, during which the ICD remained active. METHODS: Groups were made based on ICD status during labour. Patients who gave birth with an activated ICD at least once were stratified to the activated ICD group. Patients' files were checked and patients received a questionnaire about childbirth perceptions and treatment preferences. The differences in ordinal data resulting from the questionnaire were calculated using a chi-square or Fisher's exact test. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was inappropriate ICD therapy and occurrence of ventricular arrhythmias requiring treatment. RESULTS: During the 41 childbirths, no inappropriate shocks or ventricular arrhythmias occurred during labour. All patients in the activated ICD group (n = 13) preferred this setting, while 8 of the 13 patients in the deactivated ICD group preferred activation (p = 0.002). Reasons included avoiding hemodynamic monitoring, magnet placement, or labour induction to facilitate technician availability. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows no evidence that labour and birth in women with an activated ICD are unsafe, as there were no ventricular arrhythmias or inappropriate therapy. In addition, most patients prefer an activated ICD during labour.

Modern physiological approach to inappropriate ICD shocks due to atrial fibrillation with very fast ventricular response. A case report.

BACKGROUND: Fast-conducting atrial fibrillation misinterpreted as ventricular tachycardia is the leading cause for inappropriate shocks in patients with implantable cardiac defibrillators (ICD). These inappropriate shocks are associated with significant morbidity and mortality and cause great discomfort and stress. CASE PRESENTATION: We report the case of a patient with ischemic cardiomyopathy, permanent atrial fibrillation, and a single-chamber DF-1 ICD implanted for the primary prevention of sudden cardiac death, who presented for multiple inappropriate internal shocks due to very fast-conducting atrial fibrillation, which was mislabeled as ventricular fibrillation by the ICD. Since the patient was under maximal atrioventricular nodal blocking medical therapy (beta-blockers and digitalis) and we didn`t find any reversible causes for the heart rate acceleration, we opted for rate control with atrioventricular node ablation. To counteract the risk of pacing-induced cardiomyopathy in this patient who would become totally pacemaker-dependent, we successfully performed left bundle branch area pacing. Because the patient`s ICD had a DF-1 connection and the battery had a long life remaining, we connected the physiological pacing lead to the IS-1 sense-pace port of the ICD. The 6-month follow-up showed an improvement in left ventricular function with no more inappropriate shocks. CONCLUSIONS: Left bundle branch area pacing and atrioventricular node ablation in patients with an implantable single-chamber DF-1 defibrillator and fast-conducting permanent atrial fibrillation is a cost-efficient and very effective method to prevent and treat inappropriate shocks, avoiding the use of an additional dual-chamber or CRT-D device.

A cluster of inappropriate shocks in a pediatric S-ICD patient - how to troubleshoot?

We present the case of a 16-year-old male pediatric patient diagnosed with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM, identified as having a high risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD), who underwent a successful subcutaneous implantable cardiac defibrillator (S-ICD) implantation as a primary prevention measure in 2018. His past medical history included ADHD, Autism, and panic attacks. The patient experienced appropriate shocks that successfully terminated VF episodes. However, he also experienced multiple inappropriate shocks from the S-ICD, triggered by anxiety-induced tachycardia during panic episodes. Meticulous assessment of S-ICD tracings and electrocardiograms (ECGs) revealed the erroneous classification of sinus tachycardia as sustained ventricular tachycardia, leading to unwarranted therapeutic interventions. Clinical intervention involved reprogramming of the S-ICD, emphasizing the pivotal role of personalized device configuration in pediatric cases where fine margins matter. While literature on S-ICD use in pediatric populations remains limited, emerging registries underscore the efficacy and safety of S-ICDs in preventing sudden cardiac death while reducing complications associated with intravascular leads. This case underscores the critical nature of customized device programming in pediatric patients, underscoring S-ICDs as a practical defibrillation alternative that addresses distinct concerns within this cohort of patients.

Exploiting SMART pass filter deactivation detection to minimize inappropriate subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapies: a real-world single-centre experience and management guide.

AIMS: The SMART Pass™ (SP) algorithm is a high-pass filter that aims to reduce inappropriate therapy (IT) in subcutaneous internal cardiac defibrillator (S-ICD), but SP can deactivate due to low amplitude sensed R waves or asystole. The association between IT and SP deactivation and management strategies were evaluated, hypothesizing SP deactivation increases the risk of IT and device re-programming, or lead/generator re-positioning could reduce this risk. METHODS AND RESULTS: Retrospective single-centre audit of Emblem™ S-ICD devices implanted 2016 to 2020 utilizing health records and remote monitoring data. Cox regression models evaluated associations between SP deactivation and IT. A total of 348 patients (27 ± 16.6 months follow-up) were studied: 73% primary prevention. Thirty-eight patients (11.8%) received 83 shocks with 27 patients (7.8%) receiving a total of 44 IT. Causes of IT were oversensing (98%) and aberrantly conducted atrial fibrillation (2%). SP deactivation occurred in 32 of 348 patients (9%) and was significantly associated with increased risk of IT (hazard ratio 5.36, 95% CI 2.37-12.13). SP deactivation was due to low amplitude R waves (94%), associated with a higher defibrillation threshold at implant and presence of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy. No further IT occurred 16 ± 15.5 months after corrective interventions, with changing the sensing vector being successful in 59% of cases. CONCLUSION: To reduce the risk of IT, the cause of the SP deactivation should be investigated, and appropriate reprogramming, device, or lead modifications made. Utilizing the alert for SP deactivation and electrograms could pro-actively prevent IT.

Pre-implant predictors of inappropriate shocks with the third-generation subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator.

AIMS: Despite recent improvements, inappropriate shocks emitted by implanted subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillators (S-ICDs) remain a challenge in 'real-life' practice. We aimed to study the pre-implant factors associated with inappropriate shocks for the latest generation of S-ICDs. METHODS AND RESULTS: Three-hundred patients implanted with the third-generation S-ICD system for primary or secondary prevention between January 2017 and March 2020 were included in this multicentre retrospective observational study. A follow-up of at least 6 months and pre-implant screening procedure data were mandatory for inclusion. During a mean follow-up of 22.8 (±11.4) months, 37 patients (12.3%) received appropriate S-ICD shock therapy, whereas 26 patients (8.7%) experienced inappropriate shocks (incidence 4.9 per 100 patient years). The total number of inappropriate shock episodes was 48, with nine patients experiencing multiple episodes. The causes of inappropriate shocks included supraventricular arrhythmias (34.6%) and cardiac (30.7%) or extra-cardiac noise (38.4%) oversensing. Using multivariate analysis, we explored the independent factors associated with inappropriate shocks. These were the availability of less than three sensing vectors during pre-implant screening [hazard ratio (HR), 0.33; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.11-0.93; P = 0.035], low QRS/T wave ratio in Lead I (for a threshold <3; HR, 4.79; 95% CI, 2.00-11.49; P < 0.001), history of supraventricular tachycardia (HR, 8.67; 95% CI, 2.80-26.7; P < 0.001), and being overweight (body mass index > 25; HR, 2.66; 95% CI, 1.10-6.45; P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Automatic pre-implant screening data are a useful quantitative predictor of inappropriate shocks. Electrocardiogram features should be taken into consideration along with other clinical factors to identify patients at high risk of inappropriate shocks.

S-ICD screening revisited: do passing vectors sometimes fail?

INTRODUCTION: Pre-implant ECG screening is performed to ensure that S-ICD recipients have at least one suitable sensing vector, yet cardiac over-sensing remains the commonest cause of inappropriate shock therapy in the S-ICD population. One explanation would be the presence of dynamic variations in ECG morphology that result in variations in vector eligibility. METHODS: Adult ICD patients had a 24-h ambulatory ECG performed using a digital Holter positioned to record all three S-ICD vectors. Using an S-ICD simulator, automated screening was then performed at one-minute intervals. In vectors with a mean vector score > 100 (the accepted value for a passing vector when screened on a single occasion), the percentage of all screening assessments that passed, eligible vector time (EVT), was calculated. EVT was compared statistically to QRS duration, corrected time to peak T (pTc) and mean vector score. RESULTS: Ambulatory monitoring was performed in 14 patients (mean age 63.7 ± 5.2 years, 71.4% male) with 42 vectors analysed. In 19 vectors the mean vector score was > 100. Within this "passing" cohort EVT varied between 42.7% and 100%. In 7/19 (37%) the EVT was <75%. A negative correlation was found between QRS duration and EVT (Pearson correlation -.60, p = .007). No correlation was found between EVT and mean vector score or pTc. CONCLUSION: Vector eligibility is dynamic. When "passing" vectors are subjected to repeated screening, 37% are found to be ineligible, more than a quarter of the time. Further investigation is required to determine the clinical significance of these findings.

Subcutaneous and Transvenous ICDs: an Update on Contemporary Questions and Controversies.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: While the subcutaneous (S-) implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICDs) is an alternative to the transvenous (TV-) ICD in many patients, optimal use remains unclear. In this review, we summarize recent clinically relevant data on sensing algorithms, inappropriate shocks, defibrillation testing, and battery and electrode failures. RECENT FINDINGS: Changes in sensing algorithms and S-ICD programming have significantly decreased inappropriate shock rates. Avoiding fat below the S-ICD coil and can is key for reducing the defibrillation threshold. While S-ICD battery and electrode failures have resulted in recalls, system components remain commercially available since failure rates are low and no other similar devices are available. The S-ICD is a good alternative to the TV-ICD for many patients, and particularly in light of recently developed device algorithms and improvements in implant technique. Future research will need to better understand: the impact of S-ICD electrode and battery failures and the potential for integrating leadless pacing into a modular S-ICD platform.

Non-transvenous ICD therapy: current status and beyond.

Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter/defibrillators (S-ICDs) have been developed to offer ICD treatment to patients without venous access to the heart and to overcome complications associated with transvenous leads, particularly lead fracture/insulation defects and endocarditis. Several studies and registries have demonstrated the feasibility and safety of S­ICD in different groups of patients. Further developments in S­ICD technology involve the combination with devices that can provide anti-bradycardia and anti-tachycardia pacing if needed. The extravascular ICD (EV-ICD) is a new system that similarly offers ICD therapy without a transvenous lead but uses a substernal instead of a subcutaneous lead to facilitate detection of ventricular fibrillation and to provide anti-tachycardia and also temporary anti-bradycardia pacing. The first animal but also clinical data on EV-ICDs have been published. This review discusses the current state, potential advantages and limitations, and future research of both S­ICD and EV-ICD.

Unexpected inhibition of bradycardia pacing due to oversensing in ICD lead fracture associated with spurious tachyarrhythmia detection and discharges.

Ιn a 76-year old man with a dual-chamber ICD implanted five years ago, dizzy spells and significant bradycardia on Holter were not initially recognized as inhibition of bradycardia pacing, due to oversensing. Hospital admission was deemed necessary only after repetitive ICD shocks attributed to right ventricular pace-sense lead fracture. The need to ensure adequate ICD antibradycardia backup pacing in pacing-dependent patients when deleterious sensing errors occur, cannot be overemphasized.

Impact of routine right parasternal electrocardiographic screening in assessing eligibility for subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator.

INTRODUCTION: Between 7% and 15% of patients with an indication for an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) are not eligible for implantation of a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) on the basis of the result of the conventional left parasternal electrocardiographic screening (LPES). Our objective was to determine the impact of systematically performing right parasternal electrocardiographic screening (RPES) in addition to conventional LPES, in terms of increasing both the total percentage of potentially eligible patients for S-ICD implantation and the number of suitable vectors per patient. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients from the outpatient device clinic who already had an implanted ICD, and no requirement for pacing were enrolled. Conventional left parasternal electrode position and right parasternal electrode positions were used. The automatic screening tool was used to analyze the recordings. Screenings were performed in the supine and standing positions. Overall, 209 patients were included. The mean age was 63.4 ± 13 years, 59.8% had ischemic heart disease, mean QRS duration was 100 ± 31 ms, and 69.9% had a primary prevention ICD indication. Based on conventional isolated LPES, 12.9% of patients were not eligible for S-ICD compared with 11.5% based on RPES alone (P = .664). Considering LPES and RPES together, only 7.2% of patients were not eligible for S-ICD (P < .001). Moreover, the number of patients with more than one suitable vector increased from 66.5% with isolated LPES to 82.3% (23.7% absolute increase [P < .001]). CONCLUSION: Adding an automated RPES to the conventional automated LPES increased patient eligibility for the S-ICD significantly. Moreover, combined screening increased the number of suitable vectors per eligible patient.

Change of sensing vector in the subcutaneous ICD during follow-up and after device replacement.

BACKGROUND: The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) has been established as a valuable alternative to transvenous ICD for prevention of sudden cardiac death. The system automatically chooses the optimal sensing vector. However, during follow-up and especially after device replacement we observed a change of the suggested sensing vector in automatic setup. Therefore, we analyzed frequency and reasons of vector change and its impact on inappropriate shocks (IAS). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between June 2010 and December 2017, a total of 216 patients with S-ICD® were included in this analysis. In all patients sensing vectors at the time of implantation, during follow-up, and after device replacement were investigated. Median follow-up time was 27.3 ± 25.3 months. RESULTS: A change of the initial vector was seen in 77 patients (35.7%). The most frequent reason for vector change was the postoperative setup in supine and erect position in 54 patients (70.1%). In 12 patients (15.5%), the vector was manually changed due to inappropriate sensing and/or therapies. Routine setup during follow-up led to automatic vector change in 10 cases (13.0%). In only 1 patient the vector was manually changed due to oversensing in an exercise treadmill test. In 27 patients, the device was replaced due to battery depletion and in 6 of these patients the sensing vector was changed by the automatic setup. Vector change did not have an impact for inappropriate therapies in the follow-up; only 1 patient received an IAS due to an inadvertent vector change after device replacement. CONCLUSION: In the present study, a significant number of S-ICD® patients had a manual or automatic vector change during follow-up and after device replacement. The study underlines the importance of a thoroughly performed screening and at least two valuable sensing vectors preimplant. Further studies are needed to evaluate the necessity of a routine automatic setup during follow-up.

Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator oversensing and shock delivery due to chest compressions during CPR.

We report the case of a patient who received both appropriate and inappropriate shocks from an entirely subcutaneous implantable defibrillator (S-ICD). The inappropriate shocks were due to oversensing of chest compressions in the setting of a profound postshock bradycardia. It is important to recognize that the therapy from the S-ICD can not only be withheld, as previously described, but can also be inappropriately delivered during chest compressions.

An Overview of Clinical Outcomes in Transvenous and Subcutaneous ICD Patients.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Clear guidelines on when to select a subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) over a transvenous ICD (TV-ICD) are lacking. This review will provide an overview of the most recent clinical data on S-ICD and TV-ICD therapy by pooling comparison studies in order to aid clinical decision making. RECENT FINDINGS: Pooling of observational-matched studies demonstrated an incidence rate ratio (IRR) for device-related complication of 0.90 (95% CI 0.58-1.42) and IRR for lead-related complications of 0.15 (95% CI 0.06-0.39) in favor of S-ICD. The IRR for device infections was 2.00 (95% CI 0.95-4.22) in favor of TV-ICD. Both appropriate shocks (IRR 0.67 (95% CI 0.42-1.06)) and inappropriate shocks (IRR 1.17 (95% CI 0.77-1.79)) did not differ significantly between both groups. With randomized data underway, the observational data demonstrate that the S-ICD is associated with reduced lead complications, but this has not yet resulted in a significant reduction in total number of complications compared to TV-ICDs. New technologies are expected to make the S-ICD a more attractive alternative.

Device updates successfully reduce T­wave oversensing and inappropriate shocks in subcutaneous ICD patients.

AIMS: To analyse the impact of device and software updates on the prevention of T­wave oversensing (TWOS) and inappropriate shocks (IS) in subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) patients. BACKGROUND: TWOS is a feared complication after implantation. It may lead to harmful IS. To date, specific strategies to reduce these events are lacking. METHODS: In this retrospective single-centre trial we analysed 146 S­ICD patients who were implanted between 2010 and 2016. In all eligible consecutive patients (n = 139), follow-up of at least 6 weeks was studied. The incidence of TWOS/IS was analysed in patients receiving a 2nd generation S­ICD (Emblem-S-ICD) between 2014 and 2016 (Emblem). Their outcome was compared with a control group (SQ) treated with the SQ1010 device between 2010 and 2014, who were followed up for a maximum of 2 years. Furthermore, to test if the software update SMR8 reduces inappropriate shocks in the SQ1010-S-ICD population, the incidence of TWOS/IS was evaluated before and after update installation. RESULTS: Basic characteristics and indications for S­ICD implantation were similar in both groups. However, the cumulative incidence of TWOS/IS was significantly decreased in Emblem vs. SQ (SQ: 15.4%, n = 14/91 vs. Emblem 4.2%, n = 2/48; p = 0.049). Furthermore, with regards to the SQ population we also observed a trend towards a significant reduction of TWOS/IS after installation of the software update SMR8 in 2014 (before update: 13.4%, n = 11/82 vs. after update: 4.6%, 3/65, p = 0.07). CONCLUSION: 2nd generation devices but probably also the SMR8 software update reduce the incidence of TWOS/IS in S­ICD patients.

Mechanisms of Undersensing by a Noise Detection Algorithm That Utilizes Far-Field Electrograms With Near-Field Bandpass Filtering.

BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) must establish a balance between delivering appropriate shocks for ventricular tachyarrhythmias and withholding inappropriate shocks for lead-related oversensing ("noise"). To improve the specificity of ICD therapy, manufacturers have developed proprietary algorithms that detect lead noise. The SecureSenseTM RV Lead Noise discrimination (St. Jude Medical, St. Paul, MN, USA) algorithm is designed to differentiate oversensing due to lead failure from ventricular tachyarrhythmias and withhold therapies in the presence of sustained lead-related oversensing. METHODS AND RESULTS: We report 5 patients in whom appropriate ICD therapy was withheld due to the operation of the SecureSense algorithm and explain the mechanism for inhibition of therapy in each case. Limitations of algorithms designed to increase ICD therapy specificity, especially for the SecureSense algorithm, are analyzed. CONCLUSION: The SecureSense algorithm can withhold appropriate therapies for ventricular arrhythmias due to design and programming limitations. Electrophysiologists should have a thorough understanding of the SecureSense algorithm before routinely programming it and understand the implications for ventricular arrhythmia misclassification.

Impaired left atrial function predicts inappropriate shocks in primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator candidates.

INTRODUCTION: Inappropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shocks, commonly caused by atrial fibrillation (AF), are associated with an increased mortality. Because impaired left atrial (LA) function predicts development of AF, we hypothesized that impaired LA function predicts inappropriate shocks beyond a history of AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: We prospectively analyzed the association between LA function and incident inappropriate shocks in primary prevention ICD candidates. In the Prospective Observational Study of ICD (PROSE-ICD), we assessed LA function using tissue-tracking cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) prior to ICD implantation. A total of 162 patients (113 males, age 56 ± 15 years) were included. During the mean follow-up of 4.0 ± 2.9 years, 26 patients (16%) experienced inappropriate shocks due to AF (n = 19; 73%), supraventricular tachycardia (n = 5; 19%), and abnormal sensing (n = 2; 8%). In univariable analyses, inappropriate shocks were associated with AF history prior to ICD implantation, age below 70 years, QRS duration less than 120 milliseconds, larger LA minimum volume, lower LA stroke volume, lower LA emptying fraction, impaired LA maximum and preatrial contraction strains (Smax and SpreA ), and impaired LA strain rate during left ventricular systole and atrial contraction (SRs and SRa ). In multivariable analysis, impaired Smax (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.96, P = 0.044), SpreA (HR: 0.94, P = 0.030), and SRa (HR: 0.25, P < 0.001) were independently associated with inappropriate shocks. The receiver-operating characteristics curve showed that SRa improved the predictive value beyond the patient demographics including AF history (P = 0.033). CONCLUSION: Impaired LA function assessed by tissue-tracking CMR is an independent predictor of inappropriate shocks in primary prevention ICD candidates beyond AF history.

Eligibility of Pacemaker Patients for Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators.

INTRODUCTION: The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) has emerged as a viable therapeutic option for patients who are deemed high risk for sudden cardiac death. Previous studies have shown that 7-15% of patients are not candidates for the S-ICD based on their intrinsic QRS/T-wave morphology. Presently, it is not known if the S-ICD can be considered as supplementary therapy in patients who are ventricularly paced. We sought to determine the proportion of ventricularly paced patients who would qualify for an S-ICD. METHODS AND RESULTS: We evaluated 100 patients with transvenous pacemakers/ICDs, including 25 biventricular devices to determine S-ICD candidacy during right ventricular (RV) pacing and biventricular pacing based on the recommended QRS:T-wave ratio screening template. Fifty-eight percent of patients qualified for an S-ICD based on their QRS morphology during ventricular pacing. More patients during biventricular pacing met criteria compared to during RV pacing alone (80% vs. 46%, P <0.01). Patients that were paced from the RV septum were more likely to qualify compared to those paced from the RV apex (67% vs. 37%, respectively, P <0.01). CONCLUSION: While S-ICD implantation may be considered as supplemental therapy in select patients with preexisting transvenous devices, relatively fewer candidates who are paced from the RV apex qualify. QRS morphologies generated from biventricular pacing as well as from septal RV pacing are more likely to screen in based on the recommended S-ICD template.

Inappropriate shocks in single-chamber and subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: Single-chamber (VR-ICD) and subcutaneous (S-ICD) implantable cardioverter-defibrillators are effective to protect patients against sudden death but expose them to higher risk of inappropriate shock (IS). We sought to quantify the annual rate and influencing factors of ISs in VR- and S-ICDs from the literature. METHODS AND RESULTS: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for full text articles with IS rates. Poisson distribution estimated proportion of patients with ISs; rates were annualized based on follow-up duration. Random effects meta-analysis accounted for study-to-study variation. Out of 3264 articles, 16 qualified for the meta-analysis. Across studies, 6.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 5.1-7.9%] of patients received an IS per year. Meta-regression analyses demonstrated that IS rates were lower in more recent studies [rate ratio (RR) per year: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.87-0.98; P = 0.01] and trended lower in studies with longer follow-up (RR per year: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.60-1.01; P = 0.06). Use of S-ICDs (RR: 1.81, 95% CI: 0.86-3.81; P = 0.12) and ventricular tachycardia zone programmed on (RR: 1.13, 95% CI: 0.65-1.97; P = 0.66) were not associated with a significantly increased change in risk. The IS rate observed in one of the more recent studies was significantly lower than predicted after accounting for covariates (RR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.14-0.60; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A comprehensive review of the literature shows that 6.4% of patients with ICDs experienced their first IS annually. One of the 16 studies was better than predicted with the lowest reported rate (1.9%) and could not be explained by timing of the study or other covariates.

Inappropriate ICD shocks do not induce pro-arrhythmic electrocardiographic changes in men.

OBJECTIVES: Longer-term electrocardiographic effects of multiple inappropriate ICD shocks were investigated to study their hypothesized pro-arrhythmic potential. DESIGN: Thirteen male patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy who received ≥2 inappropriate shocks within 24 h and for whom 12-lead ECGs were available both before and within 72h after the inappropriate shocks were analyzed. Exclusion criteria included continuous ventricular pacing, underlying AF, events within 6 weeks after lead implantation and concomitant acute medical problems. RESULTS: A total of 149 inappropriate shocks (mean 11 ± 19) were received. There were no significant differences in any of the measured intervals or morphological indices, nor was there a correlation between the "before-after" differences and the number of shocks received. Non-significant changes showed Percentage of Loop Area increase and relative T-wave Residuum decrease while the opposite changes have previously been associated with arrhythmic risk. CONCLUSIONS: No potentially pro-arrhythmic electrocardiographic changes were found 19 h after multiple inappropriate shocks.