Long-term mortality, cardiovascular events, and bleeding in stable patients 1 year after myocardial infarction: a Danish nationwide study.

AIMS: Outcomes after myocardial infarction (MI) improved during recent decades alongside better risk factor management and implementation of guideline-recommended treatments. However, it is unknown whether this applies to stable patients who are event-free 1 year after MI. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using nationwide Danish registries, we included all patients with first-time MI during 2000-17 who survived 1 year free from bleeding and cardiovascular events (n = 82 108, median age 64 years, 68.2% male). Follow-up started 1 year after MI and continued through January 2022. Crude risks of mortality, cardiovascular events, and bleeding were estimated in consecutive 3-year periods. Standardized risks were calculated with respect to the distribution of age, sex, comorbidities, and treatments in the latter period. Guideline-recommended treatment use increased during the study period: e.g. statins (68.6-92.5%) and percutaneous coronary intervention (23.9-68.2%). The crude 5-year risks of outcomes decreased (all P-trend <0.001): Mortality, 18.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 17.9-19.2) to 12.5% (CI: 11.9-13.1); Recurrent MI, 7.5% (CI: 7.1-8.0) to 5.5% (CI: 5.1-6.0); Bleeding, 3.9% (CI: 3.6-4.3) to 2.7% (CI: 2.4-3.0). Crude 5-year risk of mortality in 2015-17 was as low as 2.6% for patients aged <60 years. Use of guideline-recommended treatments was associated with improved outcomes: After standardization for changes in treatments, 5-year risk of mortality in 2000-02 was 15.5% (CI: 14.9-16.2). CONCLUSIONS: For patients who were event-free 1 year after MI, the long-term risks of mortality, cardiovascular events, and bleeding decreased significantly, along with an improved use of guideline-recommended treatments between 2000 and 2017. In the most recent period, 1 year after MI, the risk of additional events was lower than previously reported.

Risk of first-time major cardiovascular event among individuals with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes: data from Danish registers.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: We aimed to examine whether individuals with initial omission of glucose-lowering drug treatment (GLDT), including those achieving initial remission of type 2 diabetes, may experience a higher risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) compared with well-controlled individuals on GLDT after a new type 2 diabetes diagnosis in real-world clinical practice. Furthermore, we examined whether a higher risk could be related to lower initiation of statins and renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi). METHODS: In this cohort study, we used Danish registers to identify individuals with a first measured HbA1c between 48 and 57 mmol/mol (6.5-7.4%) from 2014 to 2020. Six months later, we divided participants into four groups according to GLDT and achieved HbA1c (<48 vs ≥48 mmol/mol [6.5%]): well-controlled and poorly controlled on GLDT; remission and persistent type 2 diabetes not on GLDT. We reported how much the standardised 5 year risk of MACE could be reduced for each group if initiation of statins and RASi was the same as in the well-controlled group on GLDT. RESULTS: We included 14,221 individuals. Compared with well-controlled participants on GLDT, the 5 year standardised risk of MACE was higher in the three other exposure groups: by 3.3% (95% CI 1.6, 5.1) in the persistent type 2 diabetes group not on GLDT; 2.0% (95% CI 0.4, 3.7) in the remission group not on GLDT; and 3.5% (95% CI 1.3, 5.7) in the poorly controlled group on GLDT. Fewer individuals not on GLDT initiated statins and RASi compared with individuals on GLDT. If initiation of statins and RASi had been the same as in the well-controlled group on GLDT, participants not on GLDT could have reduced their risk of MACE by 2.1% (95% CI 1.2, 2.9) in the persistent type 2 diabetes group and by 1.1% (95% CI 0.4, 1.9) in the remission group. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Compared with well-controlled individuals on GLDT, individuals not on initial GLDT had a higher 5 year risk of MACE, even among those achieving remission of type 2 diabetes. This may be related to lower use of statins and RASi.

Driving following defibrillator implantation: a nationwide register-linked survey study.

AIMS: Patients are restricted from driving following implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation or shock. We sought to investigate how many patients are aware of, and adhere to, the driving restrictions, and what proportion experience an ICD shock or other cardiac symptoms while driving. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a nationwide survey of all living Danish residents 18 years or older who received a first-time ICD between 2013 and 2016 (n = 3913) and linked their responses with nationwide registers. Of 2741 respondents (47% primary prevention, 83% male, median age 67 years), 2513 (92%) held a valid driver's license at ICD implantation, 175 (7%) of whom had a license for professional driving. Many drivers were unaware of driving restrictions: primary prevention 58%; secondary prevention 36%; post-appropriate shock 28%; professional drivers 55%. Almost all (94%) resumed non-professional driving after ICD implantation, more than one-third during the restricted period; 35% resumed professional driving. During a median follow-up of 2.3 years, 5 (0.2%) reported receiving an ICD shock while driving, one of which resulted in a traffic accident. The estimated risk of harm was 0.0002% per person-year. CONCLUSION: In this nationwide study, many ICD patients were unaware of driving restrictions, and more than one third resumed driving during a driving restriction period. However, the rate of reported ICD shocks while driving was very low.

Clinical outcome in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and cancer: a nationwide study.

AIMS: Patients with cancer are insufficiently represented in randomized clinical trials investigating efficacy of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). We aimed to describe outcomes in patients with a pre-existing diagnosis of cancer at time of ICD implantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: We utilized Danish nationwide registries to identify primary and secondary prevention ICD implantations from 2007 to 2012. Multivariable Cox models were used to assess the risk of appropriate ICD therapy and mortality in patients with and without cancer at time of implantation. During a median follow-up of 2.1 years, 2935 primary prevention ICD and 2730 secondary prevention ICD implantations were identified. Out of these [289 (5.1%)] had pre-existing cancer [primary 140 (4.8%), secondary 149 (5.5%)]. No differential risk for appropriate ICD therapy was found between patients with or without cancer, [primary cancer: 19/140, no cancer: 380/2795, hazard ratio (HR) = 1.07 (0.67-1.69)] and [secondary cancer: 42/149, no cancer: 699/2581, HR = 1.28 (0.93-1.75)]. In primary patients, cancer was not associated with higher risk of 1-year [cancer: 10/140, no cancer: 133/2795, HR = 1.20 (0.84-2.28)] or all-time mortality [cancer: 22/140, no cancer: 339/2795, HR = 1.13 (0.74-1.75)]. In secondary patients, cancer was associated with a higher 1-year [cancer: 19/149, no cancer: 108/2581, HR = 2.62 (1.60-4.29)] and all-time mortality [cancer: 44/149, no cancer: 315/2581, HR = 2.36 (1.71-3.24)]. CONCLUSION: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators were implanted in a minority of cancer patients. No difference in risk of appropriate therapy was observed between cancer and non-cancer patients, regardless of implant indication. Cancer was associated with increased mortality in secondary prevention ICD patients, but not in primary prevention ICD patients. In secondary prevention ICD patients, the majority of deaths were attributable to cancer.

Incidence of appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy and mortality after implantable cardioverter-defibrillator generator replacement: results from a real-world nationwide cohort.

AIMS: The safety of omitting implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) generator replacement in patients with no prior appropriate therapy, comorbid conditions, and advanced age is unclear. The aim was to investigate incidence of appropriate ICD therapy after generator replacement. METHODS AND RESULTS: We identified patients implanted with a primary prevention ICD (n = 4630) from 2007 to 2016, who subsequently underwent an elective ICD generator replacement (n = 670) from the Danish Pacemaker and ICD Register. The data were linked to other databases and evaluated the outcomes of appropriate therapy and death. Predictors of ICD therapy were identified using multivariate Cox regression analyses. A total of 670 patients underwent elective ICD generator replacement. Of these, 197 (29.4%) patients had experienced appropriate therapy in their 1st generator period. During follow-up of 2.0 ± 1.6 years, 95 (14.2%) patients experienced appropriate therapy. Predictors of appropriate therapy in 2nd generator period was low initial left ventricular ejection fraction (≤25%) [hazard ratio (HR) 1.87, confidence interval (CI) 1.13-1.95] and appropriate therapy in 1st generator period (HR 3.95, CI 2.57-6.06). For patients with appropriate therapy in 1st generator period, 4-year incidence of appropriate therapy was 50.6% vs. 16.4% in those without (P < 0.001). Among patients >80 years with no prior appropriate therapy 8.8% of patients experienced appropriate therapy after replacement. Comorbidity burden and advanced age were associated with reduced device utilization after replacement and a high competing risk of death without preceding appropriate therapy. CONCLUSION: A significant residual risk of appropriate therapy in the 2nd generator was present even among patients with advanced age and with a full prior generator period without any appropriate ICD events.

The use of guideline recommended beta-blocker therapy in primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillator patients: insight from Danish nationwide registers.

Aims: We aimed to examine the use of guideline recommended beta-blocker therapy prior to and after primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation in a 'real-life' setting. Methods and results: From the Danish Pacemaker and ICD Registry we identified all 1st-time primary prevention ICD and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator (CRT-D) implantations in Denmark from 2007-12 (n = 2935). Use of beta-blocker, type and dose was acquired through the Danish Prescription Registry. According to guideline recommendations, we defined target daily doses as ≥50 mg carvedilol and ≥200 mg metoprolol. Prior to implantation 2427 of 2935 (83%) patients received beta-blocker therapy, with 2166 patients (89%) having initiated treatment 3 months or more prior to implantation. The majority of patients was prescribed carvedilol (52%) or metoprolol (41%). Patients on carvedilol reached target dosages more frequently than patients on metoprolol, with 39% of patients on carvedilol and 26% of patients on metoprolol at the time of implantation (P < 0.001 for all time-points). Increase in proportion of patients reaching target daily doses was observed for both carvedilol and metoprolol after ICD implantation. Carvedilol treatment was a strong predictor for being on target dose of BB at time of implant, as was treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and/or spironolactone, no history of myocardial infarction, younger age and less pronounced heart failure symptoms. Conclusion: In a real-life setting of primary prevention ICD patients, 39% and 26% of patients were titrated to optimal target dose of carvedilol or metoprolol prior to implantation. A higher proportion of patients on carvedilol reached target dose, as compared with metoprolol.

Driving following defibrillator implantation: development and pilot results from a nationwide questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation is associated with driving restrictions which may have profound effects on the patient's life. However, there is limited patient-reported data on the information given about driving restrictions, the adherence to the restrictions, the incidence of arrhythmic symptoms while driving, and the driving restrictions' effect on ICD patients' daily life and quality of life factors. A specific questionnaire was designed to investigate these objectives, intended for use in a nationwide ICD cohort. METHODS: The conceptual framework based on literature review and expert opinion was refined in qualitative semi-structured focus group interviews with ten ICD patients. Content validity was pursued through pre-testing, including expert review and 28 cognitive interviews with patients at all ICD implanting centres in Denmark. Finally, the Danish Pacemaker and ICD registry was used to randomly select 50 ICD patients with a first-time implantation between January 1, 2013 and November 30, 2016 for pilot testing, followed by a test-retest on 25 respondents. Test-retest agreement was assessed using kappa statistics or intraclass correlation coefficients. RESULTS: The pilot test achieved a response rate of 78%, whereof the majority were web-based (69%). Only 49% stated they had been informed about any driving restrictions after ICD implantation, whereas the number was 75% after appropriate ICD shock. Among respondents, 95% had resumed private driving, ranging from 1 to 90 days after ICD implantation. In those informed of a significant (≥ 1 month) driving ban, 55% stated the driving restrictions had impeded with daily life, especially due to limitations in maintaining employment or getting to/from work and 25% admitted they had knowingly been driving during the restricted period. There were six episodes of dizziness or palpitations not necessitating stopping the vehicle. Test-retest demonstrated good agreement of questionnaire items, with 69% of Kappa coefficients above 0.60. CONCLUSIONS: We have developed a comprehensive questionnaire on ICD patients' perspective on driving. Pre-testing and pilot testing demonstrated good content validity, feasible data collection methods, and a robust response rate. Thus, we believe the final questionnaire, distributed to almost 4000 ICD patients, will capture essential evidence to help inform driving guidelines in this population.

Postimplantation ventricular ectopic burden and clinical outcomes in cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator patients: a MADIT-CRT substudy.

BACKGROUND: Frequent ventricular ectopy on preimplantation Holter has been associated with attenuated benefit from cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). However, it is unclear whether ectopic burden measured post-CRT implantation can be utilized to evaluate long-term prognosis. We aimed to describe the association between post-CRT implantation ectopic burden and subsequent risk of clinical outcomes. METHODS: At the 12-month follow-up visit, 24-hour Holter recordings were performed in 698 CRT-D patients from the MADIT-CRT study. The mean number of ventricular premature complexes (VPCs/hour) was calculated. High ectopic burden was defined as >10 VPCs/hour and low burden as ≤10 VPCs/hour. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were utilized to assess the association between 12-month ectopic burden and the risk of the end points of heart failure (HF) or death and ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VT/VF). RESULTS: At 12 months, 282 (40%) patients presented with low ectopic burden and 416 (60%) patients presented with high ectopic burden. The 3-year risk of HF/death and VT/VF was lower in patients with a low burden (7% and 8%) and significantly higher (25% and 24%) in patients with high burden. In multivariate analyses, patients with a high ectopic burden had approximately threefold increased risk of both HF/death (HR=2.76 [1.62-4.70], p < .001) and VT/VF (HR=2.79 [1.69-4.58], p < .001). CONCLUSION: In CRT-D patients with mild heart failure, high ectopic burden at 12-month follow-up was associated with a high 3-year risk of HF/death and VT/VF and threefold increased risk as compared to patients with low burden. Ectopic burden at 12 months may be a valuable approach for evaluating long-term prognosis.

Validation of an automatic diagnosis of strict left bundle branch block criteria using 12-lead electrocardiograms.

AIMS: Strict left bundle branch block (LBBB) criteria were recently proposed to identify LBBB patients to benefit most from cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The aim of our study was to automate identification of strict LBBB in order to facilitate its broader application. METHODS: We developed a series of algorithms to automatically detect and measure parameters required for strict LBBB criteria and proposed a definition of QRS notch detection. The algorithms were developed using training (n = 20) and validation (n = 592) sets consisting of signal-averaged 12-lead ECGs (1,000 Hz sampling) recorded from 612 LBBB patients from Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial-CRT. Four trained clinicians independently performed adjudication on 148 different ECGs for comparing automatic and manually adjudicated results, in addition to 13 ECGs for evaluation of intraobserver variability and 32 ECGs for interobserver variability. We assessed the performance of the automated algorithms using manually adjudicated ECGs as references. RESULTS: Overall sensitivity and specificity for detecting strict LBBB were 95% and 86%, respectively. The mean absolute deviation (MAD) of QRS duration and notch/slur locations for the automated method versus the manual method was below 1 ms, and MAD values were lower than 2 ms for interobserver and intraobserver variability. Sensitivity and specificity for detecting notch and slur locations were 87% and 96% for notches and 78% and 90% for slurs using the automatic method. In addition 95% and 93% agreements for notches and 90% and 88% agreements for slurs were reached for intra- and interobserver. CONCLUSION: The proposed algorithms automatically measure QRS features for the diagnosis of strict LBBB. Our study shows good performance in reference to manual results.

Association of competitive and recreational sport participation with cardiac events in patients with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy: results from the North American multidisciplinary study of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy.

AIMS: It has been proposed that competitive sport increases the risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VTA) and death in patients with arrhythmogenic right-ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC). However, it is unknown whether this only applies to competitive sport or if recreational sports activity also increases the risk of VTA/death. METHODS AND RESULTS: Probands diagnosed with ARVC according to the 2010 task force criteria for ARVC (n = 108) were included in the current analysis. At the time of enrolment, study participants were questioned about exercise level prior to and after ARVC diagnosis, within three categories of sports participation: competitive (n = 41), recreational (n = 48), and inactive (n = 19). Competitive sport was associated with a significantly higher risk of VTA/death when compared with both recreational sport [HR = 1.99 (1.21-3.28), P = 0.007] and inactive patients [HR = 2.05 (1.07-3.91), P = 0.030]. No increased risk of VTA/death was associated with recreational sport when compared with patients who were inactive [HR = 1.03 (0.54-1.97), P = 0.930]. Symptoms developed at an earlier age in patients who participated in competitive sport (30 ± 12 years), when compared with patients who participated in recreational sport (38 ± 17 years) (P = 0.015) and inactive patients (41 ± 11 years) (P = 0.002). No difference in age at first symptom was seen between patients who participated in recreational sport and inactive patients (P = 0.651). CONCLUSION: Competitive sport was associated with a two-fold increased risk of VTA/death, and earlier presentation of symptoms, when compared with inactive patients, and to patients who participated in recreational sport. When compared with inactive patients, recreational sport was not associated with earlier onset of symptoms or increased risk of VTA/death. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00024505.

The association between biventricular pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator efficacy when compared with implantable cardioverter defibrillator on outcomes and reverse remodelling.

AIMS: Previous studies on biventricular (BIV) pacing and cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D) efficacy have used arbitrarily chosen BIV pacing percentages, and no study has employed implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) patients as a control group. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using Kaplan-Meier plots, we estimated the threshold of BIV pacing percentage needed for CRT-D to be superior to ICD on the end-point of heart failure (HF) or death in 1219 left bundle branch block (LBBB) patients in the MADIT-CRT trial. Patients were censored at the time of crossover. In multivariable Cox analyses, no difference was seen in the risk of HF/death between ICD and CRT-D patients with BIV pacing ≤90% [HR = 0.78 (0.47-1.30), P = 0.344], and with increasing BIV pacing the risk of HF/death was decreased [CRT-D BIV 91-96% vs. ICD: HR = 0.63 (0.42-0.94), P = 0.024 and CRT-D BIV ≥97% vs. ICD: HR = 0.32 (0.23-0.44), P < 0.001]. The risk of death alone was reduced by 52% in CRT-D patients with BIV ≥97% (HR = 0.48, P < 0.016), when compared with ICD patients. Within the CRT-D group, for every 1 percentage point increase in BIV pacing, the risk of HF/death and death alone significantly decreased by 6 and 10%, respectively. Increasing BIV pacing percentage was associated with significant reductions in left ventricular volume. CONCLUSION: In patients with LBBB, who were in sinus rhythm at enrolment, BIV pacing exceeding 90% was associated with a benefit of CRT-D in HF/death when compared with ICD patients. Furthermore, BIV pacing ≥97% was associated with an even further reduction in HF/death, a significant 52% reduction in death alone, and increased reverse remodelling. Clinical trials.gov identifier: NCT00180271.

Left ventricular ejection fraction normalization in cardiac resynchronization therapy and risk of ventricular arrhythmias and clinical outcomes: results from the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial With Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (MADIT-CRT) trial.

BACKGROUND: Appropriate guideline criteria for use of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) do not take into account potential recovery of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in patients treated with CRT-defibrillator. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients randomized to CRT-defibrillator from the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial With Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (MADIT-CRT) trial who survived and had paired echocardiograms at enrollment and at 12 months (n=752) were included. Patients were evaluated by LVEF recovery in 3 groups (LVEF ≤35% [reference], 36%-50%, and >50%) on outcomes of ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VTAs), VTA ≥200 bpm, ICD shock, heart failure or death, and inappropriate ICD therapy by multivariable Cox models. A total of 7.3% achieved LVEF normalization (>50%). The average follow-up was 2.2±0.8 years. The risk of VTA was reduced in patients with LVEF >50% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07-0.82; P=0.023) and LVEF of 36% to 50% (HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.28-0.68; P<0.001). Among patients with LVEF >50%, only 1 patient had VTA ≥200 bpm (HR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.02-1.51), none were shocked by the ICD, and 2 died of nonarrhythmic causes. The risk of HF or death was reduced with improvements in LVEF (LVEF >50%: HR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.09-0.97; P=0.045; and LVEF of 36%-50%: HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.28-0.69; P<0.001). For inappropriate ICD therapy, no additional risk reduction for LVEF>50% was seen compared with an LVEF of 36% to 50%. A total of 6 factors were associated with LVEF normalization, and patients with all factors present (n=42) did not experience VTAs (positive predictive value, 100%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who achieve LVEF normalization (>50%) have very low absolute and relative risk of VTAs and a favorable clinical course within 2.2 years of follow-up. Risk of inappropriate ICD therapy is still present, and these patients could be considered for downgrade from CRT-defibrillator to CRT-pacemaker at the time of battery depletion if no VTAs have occurred. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00180271.

Syncope in high-risk cardiomyopathy patients with implantable defibrillators: frequency, risk factors, mechanisms, and association with mortality: results from the multicenter automatic defibrillator implantation trial-reduce inappropriate therapy (MADIT-RIT) study.

BACKGROUND: There is a relative paucity of studies investigating the mechanisms of syncope among heart failure patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, and it is controversial whether nonarrhythmogenic syncope is associated with increased mortality. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial-Reduce Inappropriate Therapy (MADIT-RIT) randomized 1500 patients to 3 different implantable cardioverter-defibrillator programming arms: (1) Conventional programming with therapy for ventricular tachycardia ≥170 bpm; (2) high-rate cutoff with therapy for ventricular tachycardia ≥200 bpm and a monitoring zone at 170 to 199 bpm, and (3) prolonged 60-second delay with a monitoring zone before therapy. Syncope was a prespecified safety end point that was adjudicated independently. Multivariable Cox models were used to identify risk factors associated with syncope and to analyze subsequent risk of mortality. During follow-up, 64 of 1500 patients (4.3%) had syncope. The incidence of syncope was similar across the 3 treatment arms. Prognostic factors for all-cause syncope included the presence of ischemic cardiomyopathy (hazard ratio [HR], 2.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.42-4.34; P=0.002), previous ventricular arrhythmias (HR, 2.99; 95% CI, 1.18-7.59; P=0.021), left ventricular ejection fraction ≤25% (HR, 1.65; 95% CI, 0.98-2.77; P=0.059), and younger age (by 10 years; HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.00-1.52; P=0.046). Syncope was associated with increased risk of death regardless of its cause (arrhythmogenic syncope: HR, 4.51; 95% CI, 1.39-14.64, P=0.012; nonarrhythmogenic syncope: HR, 2.97; 95% CI, 1.07-8.28, P=0.038). CONCLUSIONS: Innovative programming of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators with therapy for ventricular tachycardia ≥200 bpm or a long delay is not associated with increased risk of arrhythmogenic or all-cause syncope, and syncope caused by slow ventricular tachycardias (<200 bpm) is a rare event. The clinical risk factors associated with syncope are related to increased cardiovascular risk profile, and syncope is associated with increased mortality irrespective of the cause. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00947310.

Reduction in Inappropriate ICD Therapy in MADIT-RIT Patients Without History of Atrial Tachyarrhythmia.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data whether history of atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT) modifies the risk of inappropriate ICD therapy, or the efficacy of novel ICD programming to reduce inappropriate ICD therapy events. METHODS: In MADIT-RIT, we investigated the effects of novel ICD programming with high-rate cut-off VT zone ≥ 200 bpm (arm B), or 60-second delayed therapy in the VT zone 170-199 bpm (arm C), compared to conventional programming VT zone>170 bpm (arm A) on first inappropriate ICD therapy in those with or those without AT prior to enrollment. RESULTS: In patients with prior AT (n = 203, 14%) there was a higher risk of inappropriate ICD therapy (HR = 2.10, 95% CI: 1.38-3.20, P < 0.001), and inappropriate ICD shock (HR = 2.56, 95% CI: 1.38-4.74, P = 0.003) compared to those with no prior AT. The effects of innovative programming to reduce inappropriate ICD therapy with either high-rate cut-off or delayed VT therapy were similar in patients with prior AT (arm B vs. A HR = 0.11, P < 0.001, arm C vs. A HR = 0.17, P < 0.001), and also in patients without prior AT before enrollment (arm B vs. A HR = 0.15, P < 0.001, arm C vs. A HR = 0.24, P < 0.001, interaction P-values >0.10 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Novel ICD programming with a high-rate cut-off or delayed therapy is equally beneficial to reduce inappropriate ICD therapy in patients with or without prior AT, despite the lower risk of inappropriate ICD therapy in patients without prior AT.

Circadian distribution of ventricular tachyarrhythmias and association with mortality in the MADIT-CRT trial.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether circadian variation of ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VTA) affects clinical outcome in heart failure patients.  METHODS: A total of 1,790 patients (males 75%) with heart failure, NYHA class I and II and implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) or cardiac resynchronization (CRT-D) enrolled in the MADIT-CRT study were included. Time of first and all VTAs as detected and treated by the device with appropriate ICD therapy (antitachycardia pacing or shock) was evaluated by hours of the day and weekdays and related to all-cause mortality using Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: During a mean follow-up period of 40 months, a total of 3,300 VTA episodes were registered. Of all VTAs recorded, most of them (n = 2977, 90%) occurred in males. Recurrent as well as first VTA episodes were more common in the morning and evening with bimodal peaks from 7:00 to 10:59 (21%) and 18:00-21:59 (23%). VTAs that occurred during morning hours were associated with higher mortality when compared to VTA episodes occurring at other hours (hazard ratios [HR] = 2.07; confidence interval [CI]: 1.135-3.77; P = 0.018) with a significant gender interaction placing females at significantly higher risk of death (HR 6.78; CI 1.55-29.860; P = 0.011) than males (HR 1.79; CI 0.92-3.46; P = 0.086) (interaction P = 0.041) despite an overall lower probability for morning VTA among females (HR 0.32; CI 0.16-0.68; P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The occurrence of VTAs in heart failure patients shows a circadian variation with highest incidence during morning hours that translates into a significant higher risk of all-cause mortality, with significantly higher risk among females than males.

The effect of ICD programming on inappropriate and appropriate ICD Therapies in ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy: the MADIT-RIT trial.

INTRODUCTION: The MADIT-RIT trial demonstrated reduction of inappropriate and appropriate ICD therapies and mortality by high-rate cut-off and 60-second-delayed VT therapy ICD programming in patients with a primary prophylactic ICD indication. The aim of this analysis was to study effects of MADIT-RIT ICD programming in patients with ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy. METHODS AND RESULTS: First and total occurrences of both inappropriate and appropriate ICD therapies were analyzed by multivariate Cox models in 791 (53%) patients with ischemic and 707 (47%) patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy. Patients with ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy had similar incidence of first inappropriate (9% and 11%, P = 0.21) and first appropriate ICD therapy (11.6% and 14.1%, P = 0.15). Patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy had higher mortality rate (6.1% vs. 3.3%, P = 0.01). MADIT-RIT high-rate cut-off (arm B) and delayed VT therapy ICD programming (arm C) compared with conventional (arm A) ICD programming were associated with a significant risk reduction of first inappropriate and appropriate ICD therapy in patients with ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy (HR range 0.11-0.34, P < 0.001 for all comparisons). Occurrence of total inappropriate and appropriate ICD therapies was significantly reduced by high-rate cut-off ICD programming and delayed VT therapy ICD programming in both ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy patients. CONCLUSION: High-rate cut-off and delayed VT therapy ICD programming are associated with significant reduction in first and total inappropriate and appropriate ICD therapy in patients with ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy.

Risk factors and the effect of cardiac resynchronization therapy on cardiac and non-cardiac mortality in MADIT-CRT.

AIMS: To understand modes of death and factors associated with the risk for cardiac and non-cardiac deaths in patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (CRT-D) vs. implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy, which may help clarify the action and limitations of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in relieving myocardial dysfunction. METHODS AND RESULTS: In Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial-Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (MADIT-CRT), during 4 years of follow-up, 169 (9.3%) of 1820 patients died of known causes, 108 (63.9%) deemed cardiac, and 61 (36.1%) non-cardiac. In multivariate analysis, increased baseline creatinine was significantly associated with both cardiac and non-cardiac deaths [hazard ratio (HR) 2.97, P < 0.001; HR 1.80, P = 0.035, respectively], as was diabetes (HR 1.79, P = 0.006; HR 1.73, P = 0.038, respectively), and the worst New York Heart Association Class > II more than 3 months prior to enrolment (HR 1.90, P = 0.012; HR 2.46, P = 0.010, respectively). Baseline left atrial volume index was significantly associated only with cardiac mortality (HR 1.28 per 5 unit increase, P < 0.001). Ischaemic cardiomyopathy was associated only with non-cardiac death (HR 3.54, P = 0.001). CRT-D vs. an ICD-only was associated with a reduced risk for cardiac death in patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) (HR 0.56, P = 0.029) but was associated with an increased risk for non-cardiac death in non-LBBB patients (HR 3.48, P = 0.048). CONCLUSIONS: In MADIT-CRT, two-thirds of the deaths were cardiac and one-third non-cardiac. Many of the same risk factors were associated with both cardiac and non-cardiac mortalities. CRT-D was associated with a reduced risk for cardiac death in LBBB but an increased risk for non-cardiac death in non-LBBB. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Information for the MADIT-CRT main study http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00180271.

Time-dependent risk reduction of ventricular tachyarrhythmias in cardiac resynchronization therapy patients: a MADIT-RIT sub-study.

AIMS: Data on the time-dependent benefit of cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D) compared with a dual-chamber implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) to reduce death or ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) are limited. We aimed to evaluate the time-related risk of death or sustained VT or VF in patients receiving CRT-D vs. ICD in the MADIT-RIT trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: Kaplan-Meier survival analyses and multivariate Cox regression models were utilized to compare the incidence and the risk of death or sustained VT/VF in the CRT-D and ICD subgroups by the elapsed time after device implantation (6 months). Of the ICD (n = 742) and CRT-D (n = 757) patients enrolled, the risk of death was lower in CRT-D vs. in ICD early after device implantation [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.42, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.17-1.03, P = 0.058] and beyond 6 months of follow-up (HR = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.21-0.73, P = 0.004), with the 6-month interaction P = 0.899. The overall risk of sustained VT/VF was reduced in CRT-D vs. ICD patients (HR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.52-1.03, P = 0.07). However, the risk was similar in the first 6 months (HR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.62-1.62, P = 0.988), and a lower risk emerged 6 months after CRT-D implantation (HR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.38-0.88, P = 0.011), with the 6-month interaction P = 0.059. CONCLUSION: The reduced mortality risk of CRT-D compared with an ICD alone began early after device implantation and was sustained during long-term follow-up; the reduced risk for ventricular tachyarrhythmias did not emerge until 6 months after device implantation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00947310.

Association between myocardial substrate, implantable cardioverter defibrillator shocks and mortality in MADIT-CRT.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to assess a possible association between myocardial substrate, implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) shocks, and subsequent mortality. METHODS: Within the multicentre automatic defibrillator implantation trial-cardiac resynchronization therapy (MADIT-CRT) population (n = 1790), we investigated the association between myocardial substrate, ICD shocks and subsequent mortality using multivariate Cox regression analyses and landmark analyses at 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: The 4-year cumulative probability of ICD shocks was 13% for appropriate shock and 6% for inappropriate shock. Compared with patients who never received ICD therapy, patients who received appropriate shock had an increased risk of mortality [HR = 2.3 (1.47-3.54), P < 0.001], which remained increased after adjusting for echocardiographic remodelling at 1 year (HR = 2.8, P = 0.001). Appropriate anti-tachycardia pacing (ATP) only was not associated with increased mortality (P = 0.42). We were not able to show an association between inappropriate shocks (P = 0.53), or inappropriate ATP (P = 0.10) and increased mortality. Advanced myocardial structural disease, i.e. higher baseline echocardiographic volumes and lack of remodelling at 1 year, was present in patients who received appropriate shocks but not in patients who received inappropriate shocks or no shocks. CONCLUSION: In the MADIT-CRT study, receiving appropriate ICD shocks was associated with an increased risk of subsequent mortality. This association was not evident for appropriate ATP only. These findings, along with advanced cardiac structural disease in the patients who received appropriate shocks, suggest that the compromised myocardium is a contributing factor to the increased mortality associated with appropriate ICD shock therapy. Clinical trials.gov identifier: NCT00180271.

Influence of diabetes mellitus on inappropriate and appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy and mortality in the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial-Reduce Inappropriate Therapy (MADIT-RIT) Trial.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between diabetes mellitus and risk of inappropriate or appropriate therapy in patients receiving an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) and resynchronization therapy has not been investigated thoroughly. The effect of innovative ICD programming on therapy delivery in these patients is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial-Reduce Inappropriate Therapy (MADIT-RIT) randomized patients with a primary prophylactic ICD indication to 3 different types of ICD programming: conventional programming with a ventricular tachycardia zone of 170 to 199 bpm (arm A), high-rate cutoff with a ventricular tachycardia zone ≥200 bpm (arm B), or 60-second-delayed therapy (arm C). The end points of inappropriate therapy, appropriate therapy, and death were assessed among 485 patients with and 998 without diabetes mellitus. Innovative ICD programming reduced the risk of inappropriate therapy regardless of diabetes mellitus, although a trend toward a more pronounced effect of high-rate cutoff programming was seen in patients without diabetes mellitus (P for interaction=0.06). Diabetes mellitus was associated with a decreased risk of inappropriate therapy (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.36-0.80; P=0.002) and increased risk of appropriate therapy (hazard ratio, 1.58; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-2.14; P=0.003). In diabetic patients, there was significantly increased risk of death in those who had inappropriate therapy (hazard ratio, 4.17; 95% confidence interval, 1.52-11.40; P=0.005) and appropriate therapy (hazard ratio, 2.49; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-5.87; P=0.037) compared with those who did not. CONCLUSIONS: Innovative high-rate cutoff or delayed ICD programming was associated with a reduction in inappropriate therapy in patients with and without diabetes mellitus. Diabetes mellitus was associated with lower risk of inappropriate therapy but higher risk of appropriate therapy. Appropriate and inappropriate ICD therapy was associated with increased mortality in diabetic patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. UNIQUE IDENTIFIER: NCT00947310.