Regional disparities and risk factors of mortality among patients at high risk of sudden cardiac death in emerging countries: a nonrandomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Comprehensive data on patients at high risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in emerging countries are lacking. The aim was to deepen our understanding of the SCD phenotype and identify risk factors for death among patients at high risk of SCD in emerging countries. METHODS: Patients who met the class I indication for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation according to guideline recommendations in 17 countries and regions underrepresented in previous trials were enrolled. Countries were stratified by the WHO regional classification. Patients were or were not implanted with an ICD at their discretion. The outcomes were all-cause mortality and SCD. RESULTS: We enrolled 4222 patients, and 3889 patients were included in the analysis. The mean follow-up period was 21.6 ± 10.2 months. There were 433 (11.1%) instances of all-cause mortality and 117 (3.0%) cases of SCD. All-cause mortality was highest in primary prevention (PP) patients from Southeast Asia and secondary prevention (SP) patients from the Middle East and Africa. The SCD rates among PP and SP patients were both highest in South Asia. Multivariate Cox regression modelling demonstrated that in addition to the independent predictors identified in previous studies, both geographic region and ICD use were associated with all-cause mortality in patients with high SCD risk. Primary prophylactic ICD implantation was associated with a 36% (HR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.531-0.802, p < 0.0001) lower all-cause mortality risk and an 80% (HR = 0.20, 95% CI = 0.116-0.343, p < 0.0001) lower SCD risk. CONCLUSIONS: There was significant heterogeneity among patients with high SCD risk in emerging countries. The influences of geographic regions on patient characteristics and outcomes were significant. Improvement in increasing ICD utilization and uptake of guideline-directed medical therapy in emerging countries is urgent. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02099721.

Real-world geographic variations in the use of cardiac implantable electronic devices-The PANORAMA 2 observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Currently, several geographies around the world remain underrepresented in medical device trials. The PANORAMA 2 study was designed to assess contemporary region-specific differences in clinical practice patterns of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). METHODS: In this prospective, multicenter, observational, multinational study, baseline and implant data of 4,706 patients receiving Medtronic CIEDs (Medtronic plc, Minneapolis, MN, USA; either de novo device implants, replacements, or upgrades) were analyzed, consisting of: 54% implantable pulse generators (IPGs), 20.3% implantable cardiac defibrillators (ICDs), 15% cardiac resynchronization therapy -defibrillators, and 5.1% cardiac resynchronization therapy -pacemakers, from 117 hospitals in 23 countries across four geographical regions between 2012 and 2016. RESULTS: For all device types, in all regions, there were fewer females than males enrolled, and women were less likely to have ischemic cardiomyopathy. Implant procedure duration differed significantly across the geographies for all device types. Subjects from emerging countries, women, and older patients were less likely to receive a magnetic resonance imaging-compatible device. Defibrillation testing differed significantly between the regions. European patients had the highest rates of atrial fibrillation (AF), and the lowest number of implanted single-chamber IPGs. Evaluation of stroke history suggested that the general embolic risk is more strongly associated with stroke than AF. CONCLUSIONS: We provide comprehensive descriptive data on patients receiving Medtronic CIEDs from several geographies, some of which are understudied in randomized controlled trials. We found significant variations in patient characteristics. Several medical decisions appear to be affected by socioeconomic factors. Long-term follow-up data will help evaluate if these variations require adjustments to outcome expectations.