Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Differences in underlying cardiac substrate among S-ICD recipients and its impact on long-term device-related outcomes: Real-world insights from the iSUSI registry.
Gasperetti, Alessio; Schiavone, Marco; Milstein, Jenna; Compagnucci, Paolo; Vogler, Julia; Laredo, Mikael; Breitenstein, Alexander; Gulletta, Simone; Martinek, Martin; Casella, Michela; Kaiser, Lukas; Santini, Luca; Rovaris, Giovanni; Curnis, Antonio; Biffi, Mauro; Kuschyk, Jürgen; Di Biase, Luigi; Tilz, Roland; Tondo, Claudio; Forleo, Giovanni B.
Afiliação
  • Gasperetti A; Cardiology Unit, Luigi Sacco University Hospital, Milan, Italy; Department of Cardiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland. Electronic address: alessio.gasperetti93@gmail.com.
  • Schiavone M; Department of Clinical Electrophysiology & Cardiac Pacing, Centro Cardiologico Monzino, IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Systems Medicine, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy.
  • Milstein J; Department of Cardiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
  • Compagnucci P; Cardiology and Arrhythmology Clinic, University Hospital "Ospedali Riuniti", Ancona, Italy.
  • Vogler J; Department of Rhythmology, University Heart Center Lübeck, Lubeck, Germany.
  • Laredo M; Institut de Cardiologie, Groupe Hospitalier Pitié-Salpêtrière and Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
  • Breitenstein A; Cardiology Clinic, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
  • Gulletta S; Arrhythmology and Electrophysiology Unit, San Raffaele Hospital, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
  • Martinek M; Ordensklinikum Linz Elisabethinen Internal Medicine 2 with Cardiology, Angiology, and Intensive Care Medicine, Linz, Austria.
  • Casella M; Cardiology and Arrhythmology Clinic, University Hospital "Ospedali Riuniti", Ancona, Italy.
  • Kaiser L; Department of Cardiology and Critical Care Medicine, St. George Klinik Asklepios, Hamburg, Germany.
  • Santini L; Cardiology Unit, Ospedale G.B. Grassi, Ostia, Rome, Italy.
  • Rovaris G; Cardiology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardo dei Tintori, Monza, Italy.
  • Curnis A; Cardiology Unit, Spedali Civili Brescia, Brescia, Italy.
  • Biffi M; Cardiology Unit, IRCCS, Department of Experimental, Diagnostic and Specialty Medicine, Sant'Orsola Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
  • Kuschyk J; Cardiology Unit, University Medical Centre Mannheim, Manheim, Germany.
  • Di Biase L; Cardiac Arrhythmia Center, Division of Cardiology at Montefiore-Einstein Center, Bronx, New York.
  • Tilz R; Department of Rhythmology, University Heart Center Lübeck, Lubeck, Germany.
  • Tondo C; Department of Clinical Electrophysiology & Cardiac Pacing, Centro Cardiologico Monzino, IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
  • Forleo GB; Cardiology Unit, Luigi Sacco University Hospital, Milan, Italy.
Heart Rhythm ; 21(4): 410-418, 2024 Apr.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38246594
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Outcome comparisons among subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) recipients with nonischemic cardiomyopathies are scarce.

OBJECTIVE:

The aim of this study was to evaluate differences in device-related outcomes among S-ICD recipients with different structural substrates.

METHODS:

Patients enrolled in the i-SUSI (International SUbcutaneouS Implantable cardioverter defibrillator registry) project were grouped according to the underlying substrate (ischemic vs nonischemic) and subgrouped into dilated cardiomyopathy, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, Brugada syndrome (BrS), arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC). The main outcome of our study was to compare the rates of appropriate and inappropriate shocks and device-related complications.

RESULTS:

Among 1698 patients, the most common underlying substrate was ischemic (31.7%), followed by dilated cardiomyopathy (20.5%), BrS (10.8%), hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (8.5%), and ARVC (4.4%). S-ICD for primary prevention was more common in the nonischemic cohort (70.9% vs 65.4%; P = .037). Over a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 26.5 (12.6-42.8) months, no differences were observed in appropriate shocks between ischemic and nonischemic patients (4.8%/y vs 3.9%/y; log-rank, P = .282). ARVC (9.0%/y; hazard ratio [HR] 2.492; P = .001) and BrS (1.8%/y; HR 0.396; P = .008) constituted the groups with the highest and lowest rates of appropriate shocks, respectively. Device-related complications did not differ between groups (ischemic 6.4%/y vs nonischemic 6.1%/y; log-rank, P = .666), nor among underlying substrates (log-rank, P = .089). Nonischemic patients experienced higher rates of inappropriate shocks than did ischemic S-ICD recipients (4.4%/y vs 3.0%/y; log-rank, P = .043), with patients with ARVC (9.9%/y; P = .001) having the highest risk, even after controlling for confounders (adjusted HR 2.243; confidence interval 1.338-4.267; P = .002).

CONCLUSION:

Most S-ICD recipients were primary prevention nonischemic cardiomyopathy patients. Among those, patients with ARVC tend to receive the most frequent appropriate and inappropriate shocks and patients with BrS the least frequent appropriate shocks.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Cardiomiopatia Dilatada / Desfibriladores Implantáveis / Displasia Arritmogênica Ventricular Direita / Cardiomiopatias Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Heart Rhythm Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Cardiomiopatia Dilatada / Desfibriladores Implantáveis / Displasia Arritmogênica Ventricular Direita / Cardiomiopatias Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Heart Rhythm Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article