Evaluation of new predictive scores for sudden cardiac death in childhood hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in a French cohort.

BACKGROUND: Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is rare in children, and sudden cardiac death (SCD) is difficult to predict. Two prognostic scores - HCM Risk-Kids and Precision Medicine for Cardiomyopathy (PRIMaCY) - were developed to assess the risk of SCD in the next 5 years in children with HCM. AIMS: To test the ability of these scores to predict SCD in children with HCM. Also, to identify factors associated with a severe cardiac rhythmic event (SCRE) (ventricular fibrillation, sustained ventricular tachycardia, heart transplant for rhythmic reasons or SCD). METHODS: Retrospective, multicentre, observational study at 10 medical centres in the Nord-Pas-de-Calais region, France. RESULTS: This study included 72 paediatric patients with HCM during 2009-2019 who were followed for a median (interquartile range [IQR]) of 8.5 (5.0-16.2) years. Eleven patients (15.3%) presented with SCRE. HCM Risk-Kids was high, with a median (IQR) score of 6.2% (2.1-12.8%; significant threshold≥6.0%) and the PRIMaCY median (IQR) score was 7.1% (2.6-15.0%; significant threshold≥8.3%). The positive predictive value was only 27.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 21.5-32.5%) for HCM Risk-Kids (with a threshold of≥6.0%) and 33.2% (95% CI 27.1-38.9%) for the PRIMaCY score (with a threshold of≥8.3%). The negative predictive values were 95.4% (95% CI 92.3-97.7%) and 93.0% (95% CI 89.8-96.2%), respectively. Three of 28 patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) experienced complications (including inappropriate shocks). CONCLUSION: HCM Risk-Kids and the PRIMaCY score have low positive predictive values to predict SCD in paediatric patients. If used alone, they could increase the rate of ICD implantation and thus ICD complications. Therefore, the scores should be used in combination with other data (genetic and magnetic resonance imaging results).

Personalized screening before subcutaneous cardioverter-defibrillator implantation: Usefulness and outcomes in clinical practice-the S-ICD screening SIS prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Electrocardiographic screening before subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) implantation is unsuccessful in around 10% of cases. A personalized screening method, by slightly moving the electrodes, to obtain a better R/T ratio has been described to overcome traditional screening failure. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of the SIS study were to assess to what extent a personalized screening method improves eligibility for S-ICD implantation and to evaluate the inappropriate shock rate after such screening success. METHODS: All consecutive patients eligible for an S-ICD implantation were prospectively recruited across 20 French centers between December 2019 and January 2022. In case of traditional screening failure, patients received a second personalized screening. If at least 1 vector was positive, the personalized screening was considered successful, and the patient was eligible for implantation. RESULTS: The study included 474 patients (mean age, 50.4 ± 14.1 years; 77.4% men). Traditional screening was successful in 456 (96.2%) cases. This figure rose to 98.3% (n = 466; P = .002) when personalized screening was performed. All patients implanted after successful personalized screening had correct signal detection on initial device interrogation. Nevertheless, after 1-year follow-up, 3 of the 7 patients (43%) implanted with personalized screening experienced inappropriate shock vs 18 of the 427 patients (4.2%) with traditional screening and S-ICD implantation (P = .003). CONCLUSION: Traditional S-ICD screening was successful in our study in a high proportion of patients. Considering the small improvement in success of screening and a higher rate of inappropriate shock, a strategy of personalized screening cannot be routinely recommended. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT04101253.

A Modular Communicative Leadless Pacing-Defibrillator System.

BACKGROUND: The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is associated with fewer lead-related complications than a transvenous ICD; however, the subcutaneous ICD cannot provide bradycardia and antitachycardia pacing. Whether a modular pacing-defibrillator system comprising a leadless pacemaker in wireless communication with a subcutaneous ICD to provide antitachycardia and bradycardia pacing is safe remains unknown. METHODS: We conducted a multinational, single-group study that enrolled patients at risk for sudden death from ventricular arrhythmias and followed them for 6 months after implantation of a modular pacemaker-defibrillator system. The safety end point was freedom from leadless pacemaker-related major complications, evaluated against a performance goal of 86%. The two primary performance end points were successful communication between the pacemaker and the ICD (performance goal, 88%) and a pacing threshold of up to 2.0 V at a 0.4-msec pulse width (performance goal, 80%). RESULTS: We enrolled 293 patients, 162 of whom were in the 6-month end-point cohort and 151 of whom completed the 6-month follow-up period. The mean age of the patients was 60 years, 16.7% were women, and the mean (±SD) left ventricular ejection fraction was 33.1±12.6%. The percentage of patients who were free from leadless pacemaker-related major complications was 97.5%, which exceeded the prespecified performance goal. Wireless-device communication was successful in 98.8% of communication tests, which exceeded the prespecified goal. Of 151 patients, 147 (97.4%) had pacing thresholds of 2.0 V or less, which exceeded the prespecified goal. The percentage of episodes of arrhythmia that were successfully terminated by antitachycardia pacing was 61.3%, and there were no episodes for which antitachycardia pacing was not delivered owing to communication failure. Of 162 patients, 8 died (4.9%); none of the deaths were deemed to be related to arrhythmias or the implantation procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The leadless pacemaker in wireless communication with a subcutaneous ICD exceeded performance goals for freedom from major complications related to the leadless pacemaker, for communication between the leadless pacemaker and subcutaneous ICD, and for the percentage of patients with a pacing threshold up to 2.0 V at a 0.4-msec pulse width at 6 months. (Funded by Boston Scientific; MODULAR ATP ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04798768.).

Predictive value of the PRAETORIAN score for defibrillation test success in patients with subcutaneous ICD: A subanalysis of the PRAETORIAN-DFT trial.

BACKGROUND: The PRAETORIAN score estimates the risk of failure of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) therapy by using generator and lead positioning on bidirectional chest radiographs. The PRospective randomized compArative trial of subcutanEous implanTable cardiOverter-defibrillatoR ImplANtation with and without DeFibrillation Testing (PRAETORIAN-DFT) investigates whether PRAETORIAN score calculation is noninferior to defibrillation testing (DFT) with regard to first shock efficacy in spontaneous events. OBJECTIVE: This prespecified subanalysis assessed the predictive value of the PRAETORIAN score for defibrillation success in induced ventricular arrhythmias. METHODS: This multicenter investigator-initiated trial randomized 965 patients between DFT and PRAETORIAN score calculation after de novo S-ICD implantation. Successful DFT was defined as conversion of induced ventricular arrhythmia in <5 seconds from shock delivery within 2 attempts. Bidirectional chest radiographs were obtained after implantation. The predictive value of the PRAETORIAN score for DFT success was calculated for patients in the DFT arm. RESULTS: In total, 482 patients were randomized to undergo DFT. Of these patients, 457 (95%) underwent DFT according to protocol, of whom 445 (97%) had successful DFT and 12 (3%) had failed DFT. A PRAETORIAN score of ≥90 had a positive predictive value of 25% for failed DFT, and a PRAETORIAN score of <90 had a negative predictive value of 99% for successful DFT. A PRAETORIAN score of ≥90 was the strongest independent predictor for failed DFT (odds ratio 33.77; confidence interval 6.13-279.95; P < .001). CONCLUSION: A PRAETORIAN score of <90 serves as a reliable indicator for DFT success in patients with S-ICD, and a PRAETORIAN score of ≥90 is a strong predictor for DFT failure.

Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators in Patients With Congenital Heart Disease.

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).

Rapid ventricular tachycardia in patients with tetralogy of Fallot and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: Insights from the DAI-T4F nationwide registry.

BACKGROUND: In repaired tetralogy of Fallot (TOF), little is known about characteristics of patients with rapid ventricular tachycardia (VT). Also, whether patients with a first episode of nonrapid VT may subsequently develop rapid VT or ventricular fibrillation (VF) has not been addressed. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to compare patients with rapid VT/VF with those with nonrapid VT and to assess the evolution of VT cycle lengths (VTCLs) overtime. METHODS: Data were analyzed from a nationwide registry including all patients with TOF and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) since 2000. Patients with ≥1 VT episode with VTCL ≤250 ms (240 beats/min) formed the rapid VT/VF group. RESULTS: Of 144 patients (mean age 42.0 ± 12.7 years; 104 [72%] men), 61 (42%) had at least 1 VT/VF episode, including 28 patients with rapid VT/VF (46%), during a median follow-up of 6.3 years (interquartile range 2.2-10.3 years). Compared with patients in the nonrapid VT group, those in the rapid VT/VF group were significantly younger at ICD implantation (35.2 ± 12.6 years vs 41.5 ± 11.2 years; P = .04), had more frequently a history of cardiac arrest (8 [29%] vs 2 [6%]; P = .02), less frequently a history of atrial arrhythmia (11 [42%] vs 22 [69%]; P = .004), and higher right ventricular ejection fraction (43.3% ± 10.3% vs 36.6% ± 11.2%; P = .04). The median VTCL of VT/VF episodes was 325 ms (interquartile range 235-429 ms). None of the patients with a first documented nonrapid VT episode had rapid VT/VF during follow-up. CONCLUSION: Patients with TOF and rapid VT/VF had distinct clinical characteristics. The relatively low variation of VTCL over time suggests a room for catheter ablation without a backup ICD in selected patients with well-tolerated VT.

Sex Differences in Outcomes of Tetralogy of Fallot Patients With Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators.

BACKGROUND: Women with congenital heart disease at high risk for sudden cardiac death have been poorly studied thus far. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess sex-related differences in patients with tetralogy of Fallot (TOF) and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). METHODS: Data were analyzed from the DAI-T4F (French National Registry of Patients With Tetralogy of Fallot and Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator) cohort study, which has prospectively enrolled all patients with TOF with ICDs in France since 2010. Clinical events were centrally adjudicated by a blinded committee. RESULTS: A total of 165 patients (mean age 42.2 ± 13.3 years) were enrolled from 40 centers, including 49 women (29.7%). Among the 9,692 patients with TOF recorded in the national database, the proportion of women with ICDs was estimated to be 1.1% (95% CI: 0.8%-1.5%) vs 2.2% (95% CI: 1.8%-2.6%) in men (P < 0.001). The clinical profiles of patients at implantation, including the number of risk factors for ventricular arrhythmias, were similar between women and men. During a median follow-up period of 6.8 years (IQR: 2.5-11.4 years), 78 patients (47.3%) received at least 1 appropriate ICD therapy, without significant difference in annual incidences between women (12.1%) and men (9.9%) (HR: 1.22; 95% CI: 0.76-1.97; P = 0.40). The risk for overall ICD-related complications was similar in women and men (HR: 1.33; 95% CI: 0.81-2.19; P = 0.30), with 24 women (49.0%) experiencing at least 1 complication. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that women with TOF at high risk for sudden cardiac death have similar benefit/risk balance from ICD therapy compared with men. Whether ICD therapy is equally offered to at-risk women vs men warrants further evaluation in TOF as well as in other congenital heart disease populations. (French National Registry of Patients With Tetralogy of Fallot and Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator [DAI-T4F]; NCT03837574).

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.

Impact of Pulmonary Valve Replacement on Ventricular Arrhythmias in Patients With Tetralogy of Fallot and Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the impact of pulmonary valve replacement (PVR) on ventricular arrhythmias burden in a population of tetralogy of Fallot (TOF) patients with continuous cardiac monitoring by implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). BACKGROUND: Sudden cardiac death is a major cause of death in TOF, and right ventricular overload is commonly considered to be a potential trigger for ventricular arrhythmias. METHODS: Data were analyzed from a nationwide French ongoing study (DAI-T4F) including all TOF patients with an ICD since 2000. Survival data with recurrent events were used to compare the burden of appropriate ICD therapies before and after PVR in patients who underwent PVR over the study period. RESULTS: A total of 165 patients (mean age 42.2 ± 13.3 years, 70.1% male) were included from 40 centers. Over a median follow-up period of 6.8 (interquartile range: 2.5 to 11.4) years, 26 patients (15.8%) underwent PVR. Among those patients, 18 (69.2%) experienced at least 1 appropriate ICD therapy. When considering all ICD therapies delivered before (n = 62) and after (n = 16) PVR, the burden of appropriate ICD therapies was significantly lower after PVR (HR: 0.21; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.08 to 0.56; p = 0.002). Respective appropriate ICD therapies rates per 100 person-years were 44.0 (95% CI: 35.7 to 52.5) before and 13.2 (95% CI: 7.7 to 20.5) after PVR (p < 0.001). In the overall cohort, PVR before ICD implantation was also independently associated with a lower risk of appropriate ICD therapy in primary prevention patients (HR: 0.29 [95% CI: 0.10 to 0.89]; p = 0.031). CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of high-risk TOF patients implanted with an ICD, the burden of appropriate ICD therapies was significantly reduced after PVR. While optimal indications and timing for PVR are debated, these findings suggest the importance of considering ventricular arrhythmias in the overall decision-making process. (French National Registry of Patients With Tetralogy of Fallot and Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator [DAI-T4F]; NCT03837574).

Usefulness of remote monitoring for the early detection of back-up mode in implantable cardioverter defibrillators.

BACKGROUND: Reversion of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) to back-up mode degrades the operating capabilities of the device, puts patients at risk and requires rapid intervention by a manufacturer's technician. AIM: To illustrate the usefulness of remote monitoring of ICDs for the early detection of reversion to back-up mode. METHODS: In our centre, all patients implanted with an ICD, with or without resynchronisation, were offered remote monitoring as soon as the technology became available. Alerts triggered by the remote monitoring system were included prospectively in a register. During a mean follow-up of 5.7±1.3 years, a total of 1594 patients with an ICD (441 with resynchronisation function) followed with remote monitoring were included in the register. RESULTS: Among 15,874 alerts, only 10 were related to a reversion to back-up mode. Among those, seven reversions were caused by radiotherapy, two were fake events and one was caused by magnetic resonance imaging. Except for the two fake events, the eight other patients had an emergency admission for the resetting and reprogramming of their ICD. None of the reversion to back-up mode alerts was followed by a clinical alert (i.e. a shock alert) before the ICD problem was resolved. CONCLUSIONS: Reversion to back-up mode is a very rare event, accounting for 0.06% of total alerts; remote monitoring facilitates the early detection of this critical event to resolve the problem faster than the next scheduled follow-up. Remote monitoring can prevent serious damage to the patient and avoids systematic ambulatory control of the ICD after each radiotherapy session.

Exploring a New Systematic Route for Left Ventricular Pacing in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Frequency and distribution of left ventricular (LV) venous collaterals were studied in vivo to evaluate the ease and feasibility of implanting a new ultra-thin LV quadripolar microlead for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).Methods and Results:Evaluable venograms were analyzed to define the prevalence of venous collaterals (>0.5 mm diameter) between: (1) different LV segments; and (2) different major LV veins in: unselected patients who underwent CRT from 2008 to 2012 at Rouen Hospital, France (retrospective); and CRT patients from the Axone Acute pilot study in 2018 (prospective). In prospective patients with evaluable venograms, LV microlead implantation was attempted. Thirty-six (21/65 retrospective, 15/20 prospective) patients had evaluable venograms with ≥1 visible venous collaterals. Collaterals were found between LV veins in all CRT patients with evaluable venograms. Regionally, prevalence was highest between: the apical inferior and apical lateral (42%); and mid inferior and mid inferolateral (42%) segments. Collateral connections were most prevalent between: the inferior interventricular vein (IIV) and lateral vein (64% [23/36]); and IIV and infero-lateral vein (36% [13/36]). Cross-vein microlead implantation was possible in 18 patients (90%), and single-vein implantation was conducted in the other 2 patients (10%). CONCLUSIONS: Venous collaterals were found in vivo between LV veins in all CRT patients with evaluable venograms, making this network an option for accessing multiple LV sites using a single LV microlead.

Predictors of Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Shocks and Prognostic Impact in Patients With Structural Heart Disease.

BACKGROUND: In this study we aimed to assess long-term outcomes in subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) recipients with structural heart disease by focussing especially on shock incidence, predictors, and associated prognoses. METHODS: In this multicenter registry‒based study, we retrospectively included all patients who underwent S-ICD implantation at 3 tertiary centers. The prognostic impact of S-ICD shock was assessed with a composite outcome that included all-cause death and hospitalisation for heart failure. RESULTS: A total of 351 patients with underlying cardiomyopathy were included in the investigation. Using multivariable Fine and Gray regression models, secondary prevention, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), conditional shock threshold, and QRS duration appeared to be independent predictors of appropriate S-ICD shock occurrence. In the multivariate Cox regression model adjusted for age, baseline LVEF, underlying cardiomyopathy subtype, New York Heart Association class, and appropriate shocks were significantly associated with increased composite prognostic outcome risk (hazard ratio [HR], 2.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21-5.65; P = 0.014), whereas inappropriate shocks were not (HR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.75-4.48; P = 0.18). The analysis of each component of the composite prognostic outcome highlighted that the occurrence of appropriate shocks was associated with an increased risk of hospitalisation for heart failure (HR, 3.10; 95% CI, 1.26-7.58; P = 0.013) and a trend for mortality (HR, 2.19; 95% CI, 0.78-6.16; P = 0.14). CONCLUSIONS: Appropriate S-ICD shocks were associated with a 3-fold increase in acute heart failure admission, whereas inappropriate shocks were not. Conditional shock threshold programming is an independent predictor of S-ICD shock, and its prognostic impact should be investigated further in patients with structural heart disease.

FRAGILE: FRench Attitude reGistry in case of ICD LEad replacement.

AIMS: FRench Attitude reGistry in case of ICD LEad replacement (FRAGILE) registry was set-up to describe the attitude in different French institutions in case of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) lead replacement, extraction, or abandonment and to compare outcomes in both groups. METHODS AND RESULTS: Prospective observational study comparing two attitudes in case of ICD lead replacement, extraction, or abandonment. Primary endpoint describes the attitude in different French centres, collect parameters that may influence the decision. Secondary endpoint compares early and mid-term (2 years) complications in both groups.Between April 2013 and April 2017, 552 patients were included in 32 centres. 434 (78.6%) were male, mean patient's age was 60.3 ± 14.4 years. In 56.9% of the cases, the decision was to explant the lead. Patients in the extraction group were younger than in the abandonment group (56.7 ± 14.5 vs. 65 ± 12.7 P < 0.0001) and less likely to have comorbidities (46.5% vs. 58.3% of the patients P = 0.022). The mean lead dwelling time was significantly longer in the abandonment group as compared with the extraction group (7.6 ± 3.9 vs. 5.2 ± 3.1 years, P < 0.0001). There was no statistical difference between both groups concerning early and 2 years complications. CONCLUSION: In this registry, the strategy in case of non-infected ICD lead replacement was mainly influenced by patient's age and comorbidities and lead dwelling time. No difference was observed in outcomes in both strategies.

Long-Term Follow-Up of Patients With Tetralogy of Fallot and Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator: The DAI-T4F Nationwide Registry.

BACKGROUND: Tetralogy of Fallot (TOF) is the most common cyanotic congenital heart disease, and sudden cardiac death represents an important mode of death in these patients. Data evaluating the implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) in this patient population remain scarce. METHODS: A Nationwide French Registry including all patients with tetralogy of Fallot with an ICD was initiated in 2010 by the French Institute of Health and Medical Research. The primary time to event end point was the time from ICD implantation to first appropriate ICD therapy. Secondary outcomes included ICD-related complications, heart transplantation, and death. Clinical events were centrally adjudicated by a blinded committee. RESULTS: A total of 165 patients (mean age, 42.2±13.3 years, 70.1% males) were included from 40 centers, including 104 (63.0%) in secondary prevention. During a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 6.8 (2.5-11.4) years, 78 (47.3%) patients received at least 1 appropriate ICD therapy. The annual incidence of the primary outcome was 10.5% (7.1% and 12.5% in primary and secondary prevention, respectively; P=0.03). Overall, 71 (43.0%) patients presented with at least 1 ICD complication, including inappropriate shocks in 42 (25.5%) patients and lead dysfunction in 36 (21.8%) patients. Among 61 (37.0%) patients in primary prevention, the annual rate of appropriate ICD therapies was 4.1%, 5.3%, 9.5%, and 13.3% in patients with, respectively, 0, 1, 2, or ≥3 guidelines-recommended risk factors. QRS fragmentation was the only independent predictor of appropriate ICD therapies (hazard ratio, 3.47 [95% CI, 1.19-10.11]), and its integration in a model with current criteria increased the 5-year time-dependent area under the curve from 0.68 to 0.81 (P=0.006). Patients with congestive heart failure or reduced left ventricular ejection fraction had a higher risk of nonarrhythmic death or heart transplantation (hazard ratio, 11.01 [95% CI, 2.96-40.95]). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with tetralogy of Fallot and an ICD experience high rates of appropriate therapies, including those implanted in primary prevention. The considerable long-term burden of ICD-related complications, however, underlines the need for careful candidate selection. A combination of easy-to-use criteria including QRS fragmentation might improve risk stratification. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03837574.

Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Lead Extraction: First Multicenter French Experience.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this multicenter study was to characterize the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (S-ICDs) lead extraction procedures. BACKGROUND: S-ICDs have been developed to limit lead-related complications inherent to transvenous ICD devices. To date, no study has specifically investigated the safety and feasibility of S-ICD lead extraction procedures. METHODS: Patients requiring S-ICD lead extraction between February 1, 2014, and February 28, 2019, were retrospectively included in 10 centers. The primary endpoint of the study was procedural success, defined as the removal of all the lead and lead material from the subcutaneous space. Secondary endpoints included procedural complications and the need for specific extraction tools. RESULTS: S-ICD lead extraction procedures were performed in 32 patients (mean age 45.7 ± 13.8 years, 75.0% men, 65.6% in primary prevention). The median time from S-ICD lead implantation was 9.3 months (5.4 to 17.5 months). The primary endpoint, that is, complete removal of the material, was achieved in 96.9% of the patients, and only 1 procedural failure occurred (3.1%). Simple traction of the S-ICD lead was successful in 19 patients (59.4%), whereas 3 patients (9.4%) needed an additional incision and 9 patients (28.1%) required mechanical sheath to remove lead adhesions around the coil. No procedure-related complications occurred. Patients with successful simple traction extraction were implanted more recently (7.1 months [2.8 to 12.2 months] vs. 16.5 months [7.5 to 20.8 months]; p = 0.04) and had less prior history of sternotomy (2 [10.5%] vs. 5 [38.5%] patients; p = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: S-ICD lead extraction is an efficient and safe procedure, but may require some specific tools like mechanical sheath, specifically when fibrotic adhesions developed around the parasternal coil.

Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator indication in prevention of sudden cardiac death in difficult clinical situations: A French expert position paper.

The introduction of a new technology always raises questions about its place compared with the reference technology. The use of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator to prevent sudden cardiac death is now a widely proven technique, with a clear statement of its indication in the guidelines. More recently, a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator has been introduced, and appears to be an attractive technique as it removes the need to implant a lead inside the right ventricle to treat the patient, which should dramatically decrease the risk of complications over time. Currently, only one model of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator is available on the market; its indications are the same as for transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillators, except for patients who need stimulation because of conduction disorders or ventricular tachycardias that can potentially be treated effectively by antitachycardia pacing. The different technical characteristics of transvenous versus subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillators therefore raise the question of which to choose in different clinical settings. The experts who participated in the preparation of this manuscript had three meetings, organized by the company Boston Scientific. Each expert prepared the draft of a section corresponding to a clinical situation. The choice between transvenous versus subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator was then voted on by all the experts. The results of the votes are presented in this manuscript, as it seemed important to us to show the disparities of opinion that can exist in certain situations. The votes were cast independently and anonymously.

Rationale and design of the PRAETORIAN-DFT trial: A prospective randomized CompArative trial of SubcutanEous ImplanTable CardiOverter-DefibrillatoR ImplANtation with and without DeFibrillation testing.

In transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (TV-ICD) implants, routine defibrillation testing (DFT) does not improve shock efficacy or reduce arrhythmic death but patients are exposed to the risk of complications related to DFT. The conversion rate of DFT in subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) is high and first shock efficacy is similar to TV-ICD efficacy rates. STUDY DESIGN: The PRAETORIAN-DFT trial is an investigator-initiated, randomized, controlled, multicenter, prospective two-arm trial designed to demonstrate non-inferiority of omitting DFT in patients undergoing S-ICD implantation in which the S-ICD system components are optimally positioned. Positioning of the S-ICD will be assessed with the PRAETORIAN score. The PRAETORIAN score is developed to systematically evaluate implant position of the S-ICD system components which determine the defibrillation threshold on post-operative chest X-ray. A total of 965 patients, scheduled to undergo a de novo S-ICD implantation without contra-indications for either DFT strategy, will be randomized to either standard of care S-ICD implantation with DFT, or S-ICD implantation without DFT but with evaluation of the implant position using the PRAETORIAN score. The study is powered to claim non-inferiority of S-ICD implantation without DFT in de novo S-ICD patients in respect to the primary endpoint of first shock efficacy in spontaneous arrhythmia episodes. Patients with a high PRAETORIAN score (≥90) in the interventional arm of this study will undergo DFT according to the same DFT protocol as in the control arm. CONCLUSION: The PRAETORIAN-DFT trial is a randomized trial that aims to gain scientific evidence to safely omit a routine DFT after S-ICD implantation in patients with correct device positioning.