Managing ventricular arrhythmias and implantable cardiac defibrillator shocks after left ventricular assist device implantation.

Continuous flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVADs) have been shown to reduce mortality and morbidity in patients with advanced heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. However, ventricular arrhythmias (VA) are common, are mostly secondary to underlying myocardial scar, and have a higher incidence in patients with pre-LVAD VA. Sustained VA is well tolerated in the LVAD patient but can result in implantable defibrillator (ICD) shocks, right ventricular failure, hospitalizations, and reduced quality of life. There is limited data regarding best practices for the medical management of VA as well as the role for procedural interventions in patients with uncontrolled VA and/or ICD shocks. Vast majority of CF-LVAD patients have a preexisting cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) and ICD and/or cardiac resynchronization therapies are continued in many. Several questions, however, remain regarding the efficacy of ICD and CRT following CF-LVAD. Moreover, optimal CIED programming after CF-LVAD implantation. Therefore, the primary objective of this review article is to provide the most up-to-date evidence and to provide guidance on the clinical significance, pathogenesis, predictors, and management strategies for VA and ICD therapies in the CF-LVAD population. We also discuss knowledge gaps as well as areas for future research.

The impact of supraventricular arrhythmias on the outcomes of guideline-compliant implantable cardioverter defibrillator programming.

INTRODUCTION: Several implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) programming strategies are applied to minimize ICD therapy, especially unnecessary therapies from supraventricular arrhythmias (SVA). However, it remains unknown whether these optimal programming recommendations only benefit those with SVAs or have any detrimental effects from delayed therapy on those without SVAs. This study aims to assess the impact of SVA on the outcomes of ICD programming based on 2015 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/SOLAECE expert consensus statement and 2019 focused update on optimal ICD programming and testing guidelines. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent ICD insertion for primary prevention were classified into four groups based on SVA status and ICD programming: (1) guideline-concordant group (GC) with SVA, (2) GC without SVA, (3) nonguideline concordant group (NGC) with SVA, and (4) NGC without SVA. Cox proportional hazard models were analyzed for freedom from ICD therapies, shock, and mortality. RESULTS: Seven hundred and seventy-two patients (median age, 64 years) were enrolled. ICD therapies were the most frequent in NGC with SVA (24.0%), followed by NGC without SVA (19.9%), GC without SVA (11.6%), and GC with SVA (8.1%). Guideline concordant programming was associated with 68% ICD therapy reduction (HR 0.32, p = .007) and 67% ICD shock reduction (HR 0.33, p = .030) in SVA patients and 44% ICD therapy reduction in those without SVA (HR 0.56, p = .030). CONCLUSION: Programming ICDs in primary prevention patients based on current guidelines reduces therapy burden without increasing mortality in both SVA and non-SVA patients. A greater magnitude of reduced ICD therapy was found in those with supraventricular arrhythmias.

The role of trigger factors in the occurrence of appropriate ICD shocks and their clinical and prognostic implications.

BACKGROUND: The role of triggers in the occurrence of appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shocks due to ventricular tachyarrhythmias is not well known. The aim of the study was to assess the prevalence of trigger factors in appropriate ICD shocks and to analyze their prognostic impact on clinical outcome. METHODS: A total of 710 consecutive patients of a prospective single-center ICD-registry who received a first appropriate ICD shock between 2000 and 9/2021 were analyzed. RESULTS: In 35% of ICD patients with first ICD shock, at least one of the following triggers was found: Ischemia (22%), Compliance (9%), Decompensation (38%), Stress (12%), Technical (5%), Electrolyte/endocrinological disorder (22%) and Medication side effects (4%). The trigger factors can be summarized under the acronym ICD-STEMi. The prospective application of the ICD-STEMi scheme increased the rate of identified triggers from 32% to 56% (p < .001). Patients with triggered first ICD shock had an increased 5-year mortality rate (50% vs. 38%, p < .001). Patients with triggers did not show different mortality outcomes or recurrent ICD shocks whether they received arrhythmia therapy or not. CONCLUSIONS: The evaluation of trigger factors after the occurrence of ICD shocks is mandatory and can be systematically evaluated using the acronym ICD-STEMi. Systematic evaluation of triggers using the ICD-STEMi scheme can identify triggers in about half of ICD patients with first appropriate ICD shock. Patients with triggered ICD shock have a 12% higher 5-year mortality rate.

Implantable defibrillator-detected heart failure status predicts ventricular tachyarrhythmias.

INTRODUCTION: The prediction of ventricular tachyarrhythmias among patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators is difficult with available clinical tools. We sought to assess whether in patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction with defibrillators, physiological sensor-based HF status, as summarized by the HeartLogic index, could predict appropriate device therapies. METHODS: Five hundred and sixty-eight consecutive HF patients with defibrillators (n = 158, 28%) or cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillators (n = 410, 72%) were included in this prospective observational multicenter analysis. The association of both HeartLogic index and its physiological components with defibrillator shocks and overall appropriate therapies was assessed in regression and time-dependent Cox models. RESULTS: Over a follow-up of 25 (15-35) months, 122 (21%) patients received an appropriate device therapy (shock, n = 74, 13%), while the HeartLogic index crossed the threshold value (alert, HeartLogic ≥ 16) 1200 times (0.71 alerts/patient-year) in 370 (65%) subjects. The occurrence of ≥1 HeartLogic alert was significantly associated with both appropriate shocks (Hazard ratios [HR]: 2.44, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.49-3.97, p = .003), and any appropriate defibrillator therapies. In multivariable time-dependent Cox models, weekly IN-alert state was the strongest predictor of appropriate defibrillator shocks (HR: 2.94, 95% CI: 1.73-5.01, p < .001) and overall therapies. Compared with stable patients, patients with appropriate shocks had significantly higher values of HeartLogic index, third heart sound amplitude, and resting heart rate 30-60 days before device therapy. CONCLUSION: The HeartLogic index is an independent dynamic predictor of appropriate defibrillator therapies. The combined index and its individual physiological components change before the arrhythmic event occurs.

Sacubitril/valsartan and arrhythmic burden in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The aim of this study was to assess whether angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) decreases ventricular arrhythmic burden compared to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor antagonist (ACE-I/ARB) treatment in chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) patients. Further, we assessed if ARNI influenced the percentage of biventricular pacing. A systematic review of studies (both RCTs and observational studies) including HFrEF patients and those receiving ARNI after ACE-I/ARB treatment was conducted using Medline and Embase up to February 2023. Initial search found 617 articles. After duplicate removal and text check, 1 RCT and 3 non-RCTs with a total of 8837 patients were included in the final analysis. ARNI was associated with a significative reduction of ventricular arrhythmias both in RCT (RR 0.78 (95% CI 0.63-0.96); p = 0.02) and observational studies (RR 0.62; 95% CI 0.53-0.72; p < 0.001). Furthermore, in non-RCTs, ARNI also reduced sustained (RR 0.36 (95% CI 0.2-0.63); p < 0.001), non-sustained VT (RR 0.67 (95% CI 0.57-0.80; p = 0.007), ICD shock (RR 0.24 (95% CI 0.12-0.48; p < 0.001), and increased biventricular pacing (2.96% (95% CI 2.25-3.67), p < 0.001). In patients with chronic HFrEF, switching from ACE-I/ARB to ARNI treatment was associated with a consistent reduction of ventricular arrhythmic burden. This association could be related to a direct pharmacological effect of ARNI on cardiac remodeling.Trial registration: CRD42021257977.

Optimal left ventricular ejection fraction in risk stratification of patients with cardiac sarcoidosis.

AIMS: Identifying patients with cardiac sarcoidosis (CS) who are at an increased risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) poses a clinical challenge. We sought to identify the optimal cutoff for left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in predicting ventricular arrhythmia (VA) and all-cause mortality and to identify clinical and imaging risk factors in patients with known CS. METHODS AND RESULTS: This retrospective cohort included 273 patients with well-established CS. The primary endpoint was a composite of VA and all-cause mortality. A modified receiver operating curve analysis was utilized to identify the optimal cutoff for LVEF in predicting the primary composite endpoint. Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was used to identify independent risk factors of the outcomes. At median follow-up of 7.9 years, the rate of the primary endpoint was 38% (83 VAs and 32 all-cause deaths). The 5-year overall survival rate was 97%. The optimal cutoff LVEF for the primary composite endpoint was 42% in the entire cohort and in subjects without a history of VA. Younger age, history of VA, lower LVEF, and any presence of scar by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging and/or positron emission tomography (PET) were found to be independent risk factors for the primary endpoint and for VA, whereas lower LVEF, baseline NT-proBNP, and any presence of scar were independent risk factor of all-cause mortality. CONCLUSION: Among patients with CS, a mild reduction in LVEF of 42% was identified as the optimal cutoff for predicting VA and all-cause mortality. Prior VA and scar by CMR or PET are strong risk factors for future VA and all-cause mortality.

The predictive value of electrocardiographic polarization parameters on appropriate ICD shock in primary prevention heart failure patients.

OBJECT: The effect of frontal QRS-T angle, Tp-e and Tp-e/QT ratio on cardiac events have been shown in many studies. In this study, we aimed to determine the prognostic value of frontal QRS-T angle, TPe and Tp-e/QT ratio on ICD shock in patients who had ICD (Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator) implanted due to heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). MATERIAL AND METHOD: 158 patients with HFrEF who had previous ICD implantation were retrospectively analyzed. 27 patients were found to have an appropriate shock. Frontal QRS-T angle, Tp-e interval, Tp-e/QT ratio were calculated by evaluating the basal ECG records of the patients. Comparisons of these arrhythmogenic predictors were made in patients with and without ICD shock at follow-up. RESULT: When 158 patients with previous ICD implantation were analyzed in two groups with and without ICD shock, the number of patients with frontal QRS-T angle >120°, Tp-e interval > 105 ms, Tp-e/QT > 0.2 in the shock group (n: 27) was found to be high with a different significance (p:<0.01, p:<0.01, p:<0.01). There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding other ECG parameters such as QRS duration, QT interval, PR interval, fragmented QRS and positive T wave. In addition, more amiodarone use was observed in the shock group, and more hyperlipidemia cases were observed in the non-shocked group (p:0.01; p:<0.01). CONCLUSION: Increased frontal QRS-T angle, Tp-e interval, and Tp-e/QT ratio are arrhythmogenic parameters and predict appropriate ICD shock.

Diagnosis and treatment of the rare procedural complication of malpositioned pacing leads in the left heart: a single center experience.

Objectives. This study assessed the management approach and outcome of the pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) leads malpositioned in the left heart. Malpositioned leads (MPLs) may have deleterious consequences, and appropriate management remains uncertain. Methods. The study population included all patients referred to a single institution for MPL in the left side of the heart after pacemaker or ICD implantation during the period from 2015 to 2021. The approach and outcome of lead management were retrospectively assessed. Results. During the study period, 6887 patients underwent device implantation. MPL was diagnosed in five patients (0.07%). In four cases, the pacing lead was placed in a coronary sinus (CS) branch, while the pacing lead was inside the left ventricle (LV) in one case. Symptoms suggestive of lead malposition were reported by 2 patients (40%). One of the patients presented with recurrent TIAs. Another presented with inappropriate ICD shocks. In one asymptomatic case, an ICD lead changed position from the right ventricle to the CS, suggesting idiopathic lead migration. In 4/5 patients, the leads were removed or repositioned by percutaneous approach, with no major periprocedural complications. Conclusions. In this series of MPL in the left heart, two patients presented with thromboembolic events or inappropriate ICD shocks. These serious complications highlight the critical need for early correct diagnosis and proper management of MPL.

Predictors of appropriate shock after generator replacement in patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator.

BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are indicated for the primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). The ongoing risk/benefit profile of an ICD at generator replacement is unknown. This study aimed to identify predictors of appropriate ICD shocks and therapies after first ICD generator replacement, and its procedure-related complications. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort study including patients with primary prevention ICDs who underwent generator replacement between April 2005 and July 2015 at three Canadian centers. The primary and secondary outcomes were appropriate ICD shock and any appropriate ICD therapy, respectively. Procedure-related complication rates were also reported. RESULTS: Of the 219 patients in the cohort, 61 (28%) experienced an appropriate shock while 40 (18%) experienced appropriate antitachycardia pacing over a median follow up of 2.2 years. Independent predictors of appropriate ICD shocks included: LVEF at time of replacement (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.4 per 10% increase in LVEF, P < .001), a history of appropriate ICD shocks prior to replacement (OR 4.9, P < .001), and a history of inappropriate ICD shocks (OR 4.2, 95%, P < .002). Similar predictors were identified for the secondary outcome of any appropriate ICD therapy. Device-related complications were reported in 25 (11%) patients, with 1 (0.5%) resulting in death, 14 (6.3%) requiring site re-operation, and 6 (2.7%) requiring cardiac surgical management. CONCLUSION: Not all primary prevention ICD patients undergoing generator replacement will require appropriate device therapies afterwards. Generator replacement is associated with several risks that should be weighed against its anticipated benefit. A comprehensive assessment of the risk-benefit profile of patients undergoing generator replacement is warranted.

Inappropriate defibrillator shock due to oversensing. What is the mechanism?

Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is often advised for secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death. Inappropriate shocks from ICD is uncommon but can seriously affect the quality of life. One of the reasons for inappropriate ICD shock is loose set screw, which may remain undetected by device interrogation and/or fluoroscopy. A 55-year lady presented with multiple inappropriate shocks few hours after an ICD implantation. The discrepancy between near field (NF, tip to ring) and far field (FF, Can to RV coil) signals helped us to suspect noise related to loose set screw, as the underlying problem. Re-exploration of the pocket had to be performed as the last resort to confirm the diagnosis and rectify the problem.

N-acetyl-b-D-glucosaminidase: A potential cardiorenal biomarker with a relevant impact on ICD shock therapies and mortality.

AIMS: Chronic heart failure may lead to chronic kidney disease. Previous studies suggest tubular markers N-acetyl-b-D-glucosaminidase (NAG) and Kidney-injury-molecule-1 (KIM-1) as potential markers for the cardiorenal syndrome (CRS). The prognostic value of NAG and KIM-1 regarding implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) shock therapies is unknown. METHODS: We included 314 patients with an ICD and collected plasma and urine samples. Urine-values of NAG and KIM-1 got related to urinary creatinine. Outcomes of interest were sustained adequate shock therapies and a combined endpoint of all-cause mortality, rehospitalisation due to congestive heart failure and adequate shock therapies. Follow up time was 32 months (IQR 6-35 months). RESULTS: KIM-1 and NAG were positively correlated with NT-proBNP (KIM-1: r = .34, P < .001; NAG: r = .47, P < .001). NAG was significantly elevated in patients with primary prevention compared with secondary prevention ICD indication (P = .003). According to Kaplan Meier analysis, NAG as well as NT-proBNP were significant predictors for adequate ICD shock therapies and for the combined endpoint (each P < .001). Elevated KIM-1 showed no significant differences (each P = n.s.). In multivariate cox regression analysis, NAG as well as NT-proBNP were both independent predictors for adequate ICD shock therapies as well as the combined endpoint, beside ejection fraction <35% (each P < .05). Diabetes, primary prevention ICD indication, coronary artery disease, eGFR and age were no significant predictors for both endpoints (each P = n.s.). CONCLUSION: Similar to NT-proBNP, NAG showed promising value for overall prognostication in ICD patients. Especially, NAG seems to incorporate an additional prognostic value regarding occurrence of ICD shock therapies.

Long-term performance and lead failure analysis of the Durata defibrillation lead compared to its previous model, the recalled Riata defibrillation lead.

INTRODUCTION: Data on long-term durability of St Jude Medical Durata defibrillation leads compared to its previous model, the St Jude Medical Riata leads in clinical practice are missing. Aim of the study was to analyze the long-term performance of the Durata defibrillation leads compared to the Riata leads in clinical practice. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 1407 consecutive patients of a prospective single-centre implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD)-registry were analyzed who underwent ICD implantation with a Durata (n = 913) or Riata (n = 494) ICD lead between 2002 and 2017. Most of the leads were implanted via a subclavian vein access. The estimated lead defect rates after 5 and 10 years were not different between the Durata (11% and 36%) and Riata leads (13% and 38%). Among Durata leads single coil and DF-4 connector ICD leads had a lower incidence of lead failure. Major causes of lead failure were compression of the lead in the clavicular region, generator to lead friction and distal fatigue fracture whereas lead defect due to externalization was a rare cause of lead defect in Riata leads (3%). CONCLUSION: Among ICD leads implanted via the subclavian vein access the lead defect rate of Durata leads after 10 years is similar to that of Riata leads. Single coil and DF-4 ICD leads are associated with a lower lead failure rate. Mechanical stress represents a major cause of lead failure mechanism whereas externalization might only play a minor role in clinical practice.

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy in device recipients who survived a cardiac arrest associated with a reversible cause.

BACKGROUND: Guideline recommendations for implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) for secondary prevention of sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) have excluded patients with reversible causes. We previously demonstrated mortality benefit with the ICD in survivors of SCA associated with reversible causes other than myocardial infarction (MI) or ischemia treated with coronary revascularization. In the current study, we examined the incidence of ICD therapy in patients with SCA related to reversible causes. METHODS: Data were collected for all patients over the age of 18 years who had survived to hospital discharge after SCA between 2002 and 2012. ICD recipients with reversible causes were divided into 2 groups based on their reversible etiology of SCA: MI + ICD (n = 132) and non-MI + ICD (n = 75). Delivered ICD therapy was examined. RESULTS: Over a follow-up period of 3.8 ± 3.1 years, more patients without MI/ischemia who received an ICD experienced appropriate (adjusted HR, 3.96; 95% CI, 1.32-11.84) but not inappropriate (adjusted HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.14-2.97) ICD therapy compared with patients without MI/ischemia. The proportion of patients receiving appropriate (P = 0.012) but not inappropriate (P = 0.80) ICD therapy was also higher in the non-MI + ICD compared with the MI + ICD group. CONCLUSION: We show higher rates of appropriate ICD therapy in survivors of SCA associated with reversible causes other than MI/ischemia. This finding, in conjunction with the previously demonstrated lower all-cause mortality noted in the presence of an ICD in SCA survivors with reversible etiology other than MI/ischemia, further supports consideration of ICD implantation in this population.

Inappropriate ICD shock due to hot tub-induced external electrical interference.

BACKGROUND: A 72-year-old white male with a history of rapid nonsustained ventricular tachycardia, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, and intermittent Brugada-type ECG had a single-lead implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation and received a sudden ICD shock while in the hot tub. To the best of our knowledge this is the first case report of hot tub jet-induced inappropriate ICD shock. METHODS: ICD interrogation and analysis of intracardiac electrograms and event markers. RESULTS: ICD interrogation revealed inappropriate ICD shocks due to electrical interference of hot tub engine; 60-cycle electrical artifact mimicking fast ventricular fibrillation erroneously detected by the device. The device then delivered a 34.8 joules shock while the patient was actually in sinus rhythm. CONCLUSIONS: Electrical interference due to external sources such as hot tub engines may occur and produce an inappropriate detection and ICD shock. Precaution and patient education is warranted.

Sex Differences in Inappropriate ICD Device Therapies: MADIT-II and MADIT-CRT.

INTRODUCTION: Approximately 10-20% of ICD recipients receive inappropriate device therapies. The purpose of this study was to compare the frequency of inappropriate therapies (IT) between men and women enrolled in MADIT II and MADIT-CRT, and assess for potential adverse outcomes. METHODS: The electrograms for each ICD or CRT-D therapy, defined as either ATP or shock, were reviewed by adjudication committees for both studies. ICD therapy was considered inappropriate if it was delivered for reasons other than VT/VF. The rhythm triggering IT was categorized as atrial fibrillation/flutter, SVT, or inappropriate sensing when possible. RESULTS: One thousand nine hundred and fifty-four men and 556 women received ICD or CRT-D devices. The risk of IT was significantly lower in women than men (9.2% vs. 13.5%, P = 0.006). The most common cause of IT in men was atrial fibrillation (38%) and SVT in women (43%). Inappropriate shock was not associated with increased mortality in either women (HR 0.82 [95% CI 0.11-6.08]; P = NS) or men (HR 1.37 [95% CI 0.75-2.48]; P = NS) by multivariate analysis. Conversely, appropriate shock therapy strongly correlated with increased risk of death during subsequent post-shock follow-up in women (HR 5.99 [95% CI 2.75-13.02]; P < 0.0001) and men (HR 2.61 [95% CI 1.82-3.74]; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Women experience significantly less IT than men, partially explained by the increased frequency of atrial fibrillation in men. IT was not associated with increased mortality in either sex. Appropriate shock therapy was a strong predictor of death in both, with women showing a 2-fold higher risk than men during post-shock long-term follow-up.

Erroneous Magnet Positioning Leads to Failure of Inhibition of Inappropriate Shock during Fast Conducting Atrial Fibrillation Episodes.

We present the case of a 75-year-old patient with a single-chamber St. Jude Medical internal cardioverter defibrillator (ICD; St. Jude Medical, St. Paul, MN, USA) for primary prevention, who was admitted with 39 inappropriate ICD shocks because of atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular frequention, despite magnet placement. Review of the device manual and literature revealed that apart from different responses to magnet placement programmed for the various manufacturers, the type of magnet and the positioning can be of specific interest. In the case presented, the donut-shaped magnet should have been placed off-center instead of directly over the device.

Do implantable cardioverter defibrillators contribute to new depression or anxiety symptoms? A retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: In this retrospective cross-sectional study, we evaluated the existence of psychiatric symptoms which appeared after implantation of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). METHODS: Patients with ICDs were diagnosed using the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) and were excluded if they had any psychiatric diagnosis prior to ICD implantation. Depression and anxiety were evaluated using the HAM-D and HAM-A rating scales and their attitude towards the ICD using a visual analog scale (VAS). Ninety five ICD patients with mean age of 66 years (±11.5) were recruited, 80 (84%) were men. RESULTS: Four (4%) patients were diagnosed with new-onset MDD and one patient (1%) with anxiety. Twenty seven (28%) were found to have significant depressive symptoms (HAM-D >8), without MDD diagnosis; half of them attributing these symptoms to the device. Seven (8%) patients experienced phantom shocks and had relatively higher depressive scores (HAM-D 10.3 vs. 5.8; F = 3.696; p = 0.058). The MDD rates in our study were rather consistent with those reported for cardiac patients. CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that ICD contributed little, if any, additional depressive or anxiety symptoms after implantation. We found that the overall attitude towards the device was positive and that shocks and phantom shocks were related to depressive symptoms.

The association between ICD interventions and mortality is independent of their modality: clinical implications.

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe structural heart disease have increased mortality after implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shocks. Whether this is limited to ICD shock therapy only or extends also to no-shock therapies, such as antitachycardia pacing (ATP), is unclear. We investigated the impact of different ICD therapies on long-term mortality. METHODS: We enrolled 573 patients who underwent ICD implantation at our institution from 2004 to 2011. The population was divided into 3 groups: no device interventions (group 1), ATP interventions (group 2), and shock interventions (group 3). The endpoint was the all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Over a follow-up period of 48 months (range 1-110), 447 (78%) had no device interventions, 71 (12%) had ATP therapy only, and 55 (10%) had at least one shock intervention. All-cause mortality occurred in 94 patients in group 1 (21%), 23 patients (43%) in group 2, and 21 patients (38%) in group 3. At multivariable Cox regression analysis, ATP intervention (HR: 1.8; 95% CI 1.1-3; P < 0.001), shock intervention (HR: 1.39; 95% CI 1.09-1.77; P = 0.008), age (HR: 1.05; 95% CI 1.02-1.07; P < 0.001), and LVEF (HR: 0.95; 95% CI 0.93-0.98; P = 0.001) were predictors of all-cause mortality. No significant difference in mortality was found between group 2 and 3. CONCLUSION: Patients with ICDs who receive appropriate interventions are at increased risk of mortality. Such risk is not dependent on different types of ICD therapy, such as shocks or ATP. Our data suggest that sustained ventricular arrhythmias per se have a negative impact on prognosis rather than modality of ICD therapy.

Fragmentation of the paced QRS complex: a marker of antitachycardia pacing effectiveness among ICD patients.

INTRODUCTION: The presence of notches in the paced QRS complex (P-QRS) from the right ventricular apex (RVA) reflects delays in the activation of the left ventricle and may therefore be associated with longer times of stimulus conduction. Our objective was to determine prospectively the relationship between the duration of a notch ≥0.1 mV in the P-QRS (DN) and the effectiveness of antitachycardia pacing (ATP). METHODS AND RESULTS: We followed 286 implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) patients with left ventricular dysfunction (pacing site: RVA) for 41 ± 27 months. ICD programming was standardized. P-QRS (100 bpm) was obtained at implant (50 mm/s). A total of 955 monomorphic ventricular tachycardias (VTs) with a cycle length of 335 ± 32 milliseconds occurred consecutively in 108 patients. ATP was successful in 84% of VTs. DN correlated with the probability of ineffective ATP (C = 0.67; P < 0.001), the cutoff point with the best sensitivity and specificity being 50 milliseconds. The adjusted mean ATP effectiveness per patient was 76% (95% CI: 72-85). Patients with a DN ≥ 50 milliseconds had a lower ATP efficiency: 67% (56-77) versus 92% (87-97) and a higher proportion of VTs terminated with shocks (SH): 31% (21-42) versus 8% (2-14); P < 0.001 for both. Although the occurrence of VT was similar (41% vs. 40%), the incidence of VT-related SH was higher in patients with a DN ≥ 50 (25% vs. 14%; P = 0.01) in the overall study population (n = 286). CONCLUSIONS: When ATP is applied to the RVA, a DN ≥ 50 milliseconds is associated with a lower ATP effectiveness and a higher risk of SH due to VT.