A review regarding the article 'Health inequalities in cardiopulmonary resuscitation and use of automated electrical defibrillators in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest'.

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is a major cause of mortality worldwide, with a high incidence and low survival rate. Prompt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and automated external defibrillator (AED) use are major contributors in the "chain of survival" for OHCA. the response of a community plays a key role in determining the outcomes in OHCA. The outcomes of OHCA are affected by health inequalities in bystander CPR and AED use, due to factors such as differences in sex, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status amongst others. Literature shows patients from lower socio-economic backgrounds are more likely to have risk factors for a cardiac arrest and are therefore more likely to have OHCA. Studies have also reported lower rates of bystander AED use in females compared to males. Targeting deprived areas with tailored training and access to AEDs can be beneficial in improving CPR outcomes in communities. Due to the physical nature of CPR maneuvers, age and frailty of the patient can both impact the outcome of the resuscitation. Environmental factors affecting AED use include availability, visibility, accessibility, support, extra equipment, training materials, staffing, and awareness. Education should focus on areas such as conducting BLS on both male and female patients, recognizing cardiac arrest, tailoring BLS to difference ages as well as provision for training in different languages, including sign language. Like some other countries, CPR training is now being implemented in the school curriculum.

Comparative Effectiveness of Implantable Defibrillators for Asymptomatic Brugada Syndrome: A Decision-Analytic Model.

Background Optimal management of asymptomatic Brugada syndrome (BrS) with spontaneous type I electrocardiographic pattern is uncertain. Methods and Results We developed an individual-level simulation comprising 2 000 000 average-risk individuals with asymptomatic BrS and spontaneous type I electrocardiographic pattern. We compared (1) observation, (2) electrophysiologic study (EPS)-guided implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), and (3) upfront ICD, each using either subcutaneous or transvenous ICD, resulting in 6 strategies tested. The primary outcome was quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), with cardiac deaths (arrest or procedural-related) as a secondary outcome. We varied BrS diagnosis age and underlying arrest rate. We assessed cost-effectiveness at $100 000/QALY. Compared with observation, EPS-guided subcutaneous ICD resulted in 0.35 QALY gain/individual and 4130 cardiac deaths avoided/100 000 individuals, and EPS-guided transvenous ICD resulted in 0.26 QALY gain and 3390 cardiac deaths avoided. Compared with observation, upfront ICD reduced cardiac deaths by a greater margin (subcutaneous ICD, 8950; transvenous ICD, 6050), but only subcutaneous ICD improved QALYs (subcutaneous ICD, 0.25 QALY gain; transvenous ICD, 0.01 QALY loss), and complications were higher. ICD-based strategies were more effective at younger ages and higher arrest rates (eg, using subcutaneous devices, upfront ICD was the most effective strategy at ages 20-39.4 years and arrest rates >1.37%/year; EPS-guided ICD was the most effective strategy at ages 39.5-51.3 years and arrest rates 0.47%-1.37%/year, and observation was the most effective strategy at ages >51.3 years and arrest rates <0.47%/year). EPS-guided subcutaneous ICD was cost-effective ($80 508/QALY). Conclusions Device-based approaches (with or without EPS risk stratification) can be more effective than observation among selected patients with asymptomatic BrS. BrS management should be tailored to patient characteristics.

Health status measured by Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-12 in primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillator patients with heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Self-reported health status as measured by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) in patients with primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) has mainly been reported from randomized trials. However, these studies are often limited to short follow-up and are subject to selection bias. The aim of this study was to assess KCCQ-12 in patients with primary prevention ICD due to either ischemic or nonischemic heart failure. METHODS: This cross-sectional observational study included all patients in Region Gävleborg, Sweden, who because of primary prevention due to heart failure, had an ICD or underwent device replacement between 2007 and 2017. After validation using medical records patients were sent and returned the KCCQ-12 by regular mail. RESULTS: A total of 118 questionnaires were analyzed (response rate 71.1%). The mean age was 70.9 ± 9.8 years, and a minority was female (n = 20, 16.9%). The mean overall summary score was 71.5 ± 22.4, there was no significant difference between ischemic and nonischemic heart failure (69.5 ± 23.1 vs. 74.4 ± 21.3; p = 0.195). Atrial fibrillation at baseline was associated with lower score for the domains Symptom frequency (70.2 ± 23.2 vs. 82.2 ± 19.2; p = 0.006) and Social limitation (62.1 ± 26.0 vs. 75.6 ± 26.6; p = 0.006) as well as the overall summary score (63.9 ± 21.3 vs. 74.8 ± 22.2; p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: In a real-world setting, primary prevention ICD patients with heart failure report an acceptable disease-specific health status at long-term follow-up. Ischemic and nonischemic etiology showed similar health status whereas atrial fibrillation was associated with worse outcome.

Assessment of the knowledge level and experience of healthcare personnel concerning CPR and early defibrillation: an internal survey.

BACKGROUND: In-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) is a major public health problem with significant mortality. Rapid cardiopulmonary resuscitation and early defibrillation is extremely connected to patient outcome. In this study, we aimed to assess the effects of a basic life support and defibrillation course in improving knowledge in IHCA management. METHODS: We performed a prospective observational study recruiting healthcare personnel working at Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Italy. Study consisted in the administration of two questionnaires before and after BLS-D course. The course was structured as an informative meeting and it was held according to European Resuscitation Council guidelines. RESULTS: 78 participants completed pre- and post-course questionnaires. Only 31.9% of the participants had taken part in a BLS-D before our study. After the course, we found a significative increase in the percentage of participants that evaluated their skills adequate in IHCA management (17.9% vs 42.3%; p < 0.01) and in the correct use of defibrillator (38.8% vs 67.9% p < 0.001). However, 51.3% of respondents still consider their preparation not entirely appropriate after the course. Even more, we observed a significant increase in the number of corrected responses after the course, especially about sequence performed in case of absent vital sign, CPR maneuvers and use of defibrillator. CONCLUSIONS: The training course resulted in significant increase in the level of knowledge about the general management of IHCA in hospital staff. Therefore, a simple intervention such as an informative meetings improved significantly the knowledge about IHCA and, consequently, can lead to a reduction of morbidity and mortality.

[The unmet needs of sudden cardiac death. The role of the wearable cardioverter defibrillator when the risk is transient or uncertain]. / "Unmet needs" in tema di morte cardiaca improvvisa. Quando il rischio è transitorio o incerto: ruolo potenziale del defibrillatore indossabile.

Sudden cardiac death is defined as a natural death due to termination of cardiac activity associated with loss of consciousness, spontaneous breathing and circulation. Nowadays, the prevention of sudden cardiac death represents a major issue and many areas of uncertainty are not met by current evidences. Among those, reliable tools for risk stratification are still lacking, as well as solution for patients in which the risk of sudden cardiac death is due to a transient or correctable condition.The concept of the wearable cardioverter defibrillator is based on a potential solution for such grey areas. It merges long-term monitoring capabilities, shockable rhythm discrimination and shock delivery without the need for bystander assistance or invasive procedures. The present review aims to summarize current problems in dealing with this insidious condition, and to discuss potential options for patients in whom sudden cardiac death could be prevented more safely and cost-effectively.

Cost-effectiveness of ablation of ventricular tachycardia in ischaemic cardiomyopathy: limitations in the trial evidence base.

Objective: Catheter ablation is an important treatment for ventricular tachycardia (VT) that reduces the frequency of episodes of VT. We sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of catheter ablation versus antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) therapy. Methods: A decision-analytic Markov model was used to calculate the costs and health outcomes of catheter ablation or AAD treatment of VT for a hypothetical cohort of patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy and an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. The health states and input parameters of the model were informed by patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQL) data using randomised clinical trial (RCT)-level evidence wherever possible. Costs were calculated from a 2018 UK perspective. Results: Catheter ablation versus AAD therapy had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £144 150 (€161 448) per quality-adjusted life-year gained, over a 5-year time horizon. This ICER was driven by small differences in patient-reported HRQL between AAD therapy and catheter ablation. However, only three of six RCTs had measured patient-reported HRQL, and when this was done, it was assessed infrequently. Using probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the likelihood of catheter ablation being cost-effective was only 11%, assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30 000 used by the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Conclusion: Catheter ablation of VT is unlikely to be cost-effective compared with AAD therapy based on the current randomised trial evidence. However, better designed studies incorporating detailed and more frequent quality of life assessments are needed to provide more robust and informed cost-effectiveness analyses.

Impact of defibrillation threshold testing on burden of heart failure hospitalizations.

Background: Defibrillation threshold testing (DT) following implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation has not shown to improve mortality. However, the impact of DT on burden of heart failure (HF) hospitalisations has not been well defined.Methods: We studied retrospectively consecutive patients who underwent ICD implantation or generator change between 2008 and 2014. Primary outcome was burden of HF hospitalisations within 30 days following implantation. Secondary outcomes were mortality, stroke, and ICD shock within 30 days and one-year mortality.Results: Three hundred and eleven of 501 patients (62%) were in DT+ group versus 190 (38%) were in DT- group. The percentage of new implantations was higher in DT+ group than in DT- group (69% vs 39%, p < .001) but the distributions of NYHA function classes were similar between two groups. The burden of HF hospitalisations at 30-days was significantly higher in DT+ group than in DT- group (17.4% vs 4.7%, HR 0.842, 95% CI 0.774-0.915, p < .0001). No difference in mortality, stroke or ICD shocks was found between two groups at 30 days and mortality at 1 year.Conclusions: DT after new ICD or generator replacement was associated with increased HF hospitalisation rates at 30 days after ICD implant in a non-trial HF population. However, there was no association between DT and mortality, stroke and ICD shocks at 30 days or mortality at 1 year. The increased burden of HF hospitalisation in this observational study requires validation by randomised studies.

Availability of automated external defibrillators in Hamilton, New Zealand.

BACKGROUND: Last year, there were 2,000 out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA) in New Zealand, 74% received CPR but only 5.1% accessed an automated external defibrillator (AED). The average survival rate of OHCA is 13%. The aim of this study was to visit all 50 AED locations shown on www.hamiltoncentral.co.nz to assess their true availability and visibility to the public in the event of an OHCA. METHOD: All premises were visited and the first staff member encountered was asked if they were aware an AED was onsite, its location, hours of availability, if restricted access applied and whether it had been used. RESULTS: Of the 50 locations, three sites no longer exist and two AEDs were listed twice. Therefore, only 45 AEDs exist. Two sites had grossly inaccurate locations. Three AEDs (7%) were continuously available. Nine AEDs were accessible after 6pm at least one day of the week. Thirteen AEDs were available on weekends; however, five required swipe card access. None of the AEDs were located outdoors. CONCLUSION: Far fewer than 50 listed AEDs are freely available to the public, especially after 6pm and on weekends. Lack of signposting and restrictions to access would lead to delayed defibrillation. This important health issue needs addressing.

Potential cost-effectiveness of wearable cardioverter-defibrillator for patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator explant in a high-income city of China.

INTRODUCTION: Wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) is recommended for patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) removal. This study aimed to investigate the potential cost-effectiveness of WCD for patients with ICD explant in a high-income city of China. METHODS AND RESULTS: A 5-year decision-analytic model was developed to simulate outcomes of three strategies during the period between ICD explant and reimplantation: discharge-to-home without WCD (home group), discharge-to-home with WCD (WCD group), and stay-in-hospital (hospital group). Outcome measures were mortality rates (during the period between ICD explant and reimplantation), direct medical costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost per QALY saved (ICER). Model inputs were derived from literature and public data. Base-case analysis was performed at four cost levels of WCD. Robustness of model results was examined by sensitivity analyses. In base-case analysis, the 8-week mortality rates of WCD, hospital, and home groups were 7.3%, 8.1%, and 9.4%, respectively. WCD group gained the highest QALYs (3.0990 QALYs), followed by hospital group (3.0553 QALYs) and home group (3.0132 QALYs). The WCD group was the cost-effective option with ICERs less than willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold (57 315 USD/QALY) at WCD daily cost ≤USD48. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the WCD group at daily cost of USD24, USD48, USD72, and USD96 were cost-effective in 100%, 94.16%, 22.08%, and 0.16% of 10 000 Monte Carlo simulations, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Use of WCD during the period between ICD explant and reimplantation is likely to save life and gain higher QALYs. Cost-effectiveness of WCD is highly subject to the daily cost of WCD in China.

Clinical and organizational management of cardiac implantable electronic device replacements: an Italian Survey promoted by AIAC (Italian Association of Arrhythmology and Cardiac Pacing).

AIMS: The aim of this survey was to assess the management and organization of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) replacement in Italy. METHODS: A questionnaire consisting of 24 questions on organizational aspects and on the peri-procedural management of anticoagulant therapies and antibiotic prophylaxis was sent via the Internet to 154 Italian arrhythmia centers. RESULTS: A total of 103 out of 154 centers completed the questionnaire (67% response rate). In 43% of the centers, the procedures were performed under day-case admission, in 40% under ordinary admission, and in 17% under either day-case or ordinary admission. The most frequent reason (66%) for choosing ordinary admission rather than day-case admission was to obtain full reimbursement. Although warfarin therapy was continued in 73% of the centers, nonvitamin K oral anticoagulants were discontinued, without bridging, 24 h or less prior to replacement procedures in 88%. Prophylactic antibiotic therapy was systematically administered in all centers; in 97%, the first antibiotic dose was administered 1-2 h prior to procedures. Local antibacterial envelopes were also used in 43% of the centers in patients with a higher risk of device infection. CONCLUSION: This survey provides a representative picture of how CIED replacements are organized and managed in current Italian clinical practice. The choice of the type of hospitalization (short versus ordinary) was more often motivated by economic reasons (reimbursement of the procedure) than by clinical and organizational factors. Peri-procedural management of anticoagulation and prophylactic antibiotic therapy was consistent with current scientific evidence.

Association of Physician Specialty With Long-Term Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Complication and Reoperations Rates.

Background Patients undergoing implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantations have high rates of long-term device-related complications and reoperations. Whether physician specialty training is associated with differences in long-term outcomes following ICD implantation is unclear. Methods and Results We linked data from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry with Medicare fee-for-service claims to identify physicians who performed ≥10 index ICDs from 2006 to 2009. We used data from the American Board of Medical Specialties to group the specialty of the implanting physician into mutually exclusive categories: electrophysiologists, interventional cardiologists, general cardiologists, thoracic surgeons, and other specialties. Primary outcomes were long-term device-related complications requiring reoperations or hospitalizations and reoperations for reasons other than complications. We compared the cumulative incidence rates and case-mix adjusted rates of long-term outcomes of index ICD implantations across physician specialties. Our analysis had a median follow-up of 47 months and included 107 966 index ICD implantations. Electrophysiologists had the lowest rates of incident long-term device-related complications (14.1%; interventional cardiologists, 15.3%; general cardiologists, 15.4%; thoracic surgeons, 16.4%; other specialists, 15.2%; P<0.001) and reoperations for reasons other than complications (electrophysiologists, 16.7%; interventional cardiologists, 17.0%; general cardiologists, 18.0%; thoracic surgeons, 18.4%; other specialists, 18.0%; P<0.001). Compared with patients whose ICDs were implanted by electrophysiologists, patients with implantations performed by nonelectrophysiologists were at higher risk of having long-term device-related complications (relative risk for interventional cardiologists: 1.16 [95% CI, 1.08-1.25]; general cardiologists: 1.13 [1.08-1.18]; thoracic surgeons: 1.20 [1.06-1.37]; all P<0.001, but not other specialists: 1.08 [0.99-1.17]; P=0.07). Compared to patients with implantations performed by electrophysiologists, patients with implantations performed by general cardiologists and thoracic surgeons were at higher risk of reoperation for noncomplication causes (relative risk for general cardiologists: 1.10 [1.05-1.15]; thoracic surgeons: 1.16 [1.00-1.33]; both P<0.05). Conclusions Patients with ICD implantations performed by electrophysiologists had the lowest risks of having long-term device-related complications and reoperations for noncomplication causes. Consideration of physician specialty before ICD implantation may represent an opportunity to minimize long-term adverse outcomes.

Cardiac Resynchronization Defibrillator Therapy for Nonspecific Intraventricular Conduction Delay Versus Right Bundle Branch Block.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in patients with non-left bundle branch block (LBBB) conduction abnormality have not been fully explored. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate clinical outcomes among Medicare-aged patients with nonspecific intraventricular conduction delay (NICD) versus right bundle branch block (RBBB) in patients eligible for implantation with a CRT with defibrillator (CRT-D). METHODS: Using the National Cardiovascular Data Registry implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) registry data between 2010 and 2013, the authors compared outcomes in CRT-eligible patients implanted with CRT-D versus ICD-only therapy among patients with NICD and RBBB. Also, among all CRT-D-implanted patients, the authors compared outcomes in those with NICD versus RBBB. Survival curves and multivariable adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were used to assess outcomes including hospitalization and death. RESULTS: In 11,505 non-LBBB CRT-eligible patients, after multivariable adjustment, among patients with RBBB, CRT-D was not associated with better outcomes, compared with ICD alone, regardless of QRS duration. Among patients with NICD and a QRS ≥150 ms, CRT-D was associated with decreased mortality at 3 years compared with ICD alone (HR: 0.602; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.416 to 0.871; p = 0.0071). Among 5,954 CRT-D-implanted patients, after multivariable adjustment NICD compared with RBBB was associated with lower mortality at 3 years in those with a QRS duration of ≥150 ms (HR: 0.757; 95% CI: 0.625 to 0.917; p = 0.0044). CONCLUSIONS: Among non-LBBB CRT-D-eligible patients, CRT-D implantation was associated with better outcomes compared with ICD alone specifically in NICD patients with a QRS duration of ≥150 ms. Careful patient selection should be considered for CRT-D implantation in patients with non-LBBB conduction.

Outcomes and costs of remote patient monitoring among patients with implanted cardiac defibrillators: An economic model based on the PREDICT RM database.

BACKGROUND: Remote monitoring of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators has been associated with reduced rates of all-cause rehospitalizations and mortality among device recipients, but long-term economic benefits have not been studied. METHODS AND RESULTS: An economic model was developed using the PREDICT RM database comparing outcomes with and without remote monitoring. The database included patients ages 65 to 89 who received a Boston Scientific device from 2006 to 2010. Parametric survival equations were derived for rehospitalization and mortality to predict outcomes over a maximum time horizon of 25 years. The analysis assessed rehospitalization, mortality, and the cost-effectiveness (expressed as the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year) of remote monitoring versus no remote monitoring. Remote monitoring was associated with reduced mortality; average life expectancy and average quality-adjusted life years increased by 0.77 years and 0.64, respectively (6.85 life years and 5.65 quality-adjusted life years). When expressed per patient-year, remote monitoring patients had fewer subsequent rehospitalizations (by 0.08 per patient-year) and lower hospitalization costs (by $554 per patient year). With longer life expectancies, remote monitoring patients experienced an average of 0.64 additional subsequent rehospitalizations with increased average lifetime hospitalization costs of $2784. Total costs of outpatient and physician claims were higher with remote monitoring ($47 515 vs $42 792), but average per patient-year costs were lower ($6232 vs $6244). The base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $10 752 per quality-adjusted life year, making remote monitoring high-value care. CONCLUSION: Remote monitoring is a cost-effective approach for the lifetime management of patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators.

Mobile health and implantable cardiac devices: Patients' expectations.

BACKGROUND: Mobile computing and communication technologies in health services and information (so-called mHealth) have modified the traditional approach in the follow-up of patients with implantable cardiac devices, increased patient engagement and empowerment, reduced healthcare costs and improved patients' outcome. Recent developments in mobile technology, with the introduction of smartphone-compatible devices that can measure various health parameters and transfer automatically generated data, have increased the potential application of remote monitoring and the interest towards mHealth. However, little is known about the patients' interest and expectations of this new technology. OBJECTIVE: The patients' interest in the possibility of receiving data from their implantable cardiac device, clinical and health advice via remote monitoring on their smartphones were investigated. METHODS: A questionnaire entitled 'Expectations for future possibility of self-management of device data' (Likert scale scored) was submitted to 300 consecutive implantable cardiac device outpatients. The questionnaire was focused on collecting patients' expectations in receiving direct information regarding their implantable cardiac device status (item 1, five questions), their own clinical status (item 2, seven questions) and advice on healthy lifestyle promotion (item 3, nine questions). Patient characteristics associated with greater interest towards mHealth were also investigated. RESULTS: Questionnaires were completed by 268 patients (221 men, aged 69 ± 14 years). The Cronbach test reported an alpha value of 0.98 for item 1, 0.94 for item 2 and 0.97 for item 3. Patients declared to be mainly interested in the device interventions (62%) and in severe arrhythmia occurrence (61%), followed by data on heart failure severity (54%) and their performed physical activity (48%). Patients showed very little interest in ECG tracing (37%), but the lowest interest was expressed towards healthy lifestyle promotion advice (<40%). A higher education degree and the presence of the caregiver positively affected the interest towards remote monitoring information ( P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The patients' interests were mainly directed at receiving information related to technical data of the implantable cardiac device and not to the overall management of the disease, underlying the insufficient awareness of patients towards the key role of self-control health status and the promotion of a healthy lifestyle.

A Decision Tree-Based Survival Analysis of Patients with a History of Inappropriate Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Therapy.

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) improve survival in patients who are at risk of sudden death. However, inappropriate therapy is commonly given to ICD recipients, and this situation may be associated with an increased risk of death. This study aimed to construct a risk stratification scheme by using decision tree analysis in patients who received inappropriate ICD therapy.Mortality was calculated from a retrospective data analysis of a multicenter cohort involving 417 ICD recipients. Inappropriate therapy was defined as therapy for nonventricular arrhythmias, including sinus tachycardia, supraventricular tachycardia, atrial fibrillation/flutter, oversensing, and lead failure. Inappropriate therapy included antitachycardia pacing, cardioversion, and defibrillation. The prognostic factors were identified by a Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, and we constructed a decision tree.During an average follow-up of 5.2 years, 48 patients (12%) had all-cause death. A multivariate Cox hazard model revealed that the age (hazard ratio [HR] 1.06, P < 0.001), ln B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) (HR 1.47, P = 0.02), nonsinus rhythm at implantation (HR 2.70, P < 0.05), and inappropriate therapy occurring during sedentary/awake conditions (HR 3.51, P = 0.001) correlated with an increased risk of mortality. An inappropriate therapy due to abnormal sensing (HR 0.16, P = 0.04) decreased the risk of mortality. Furthermore, a decision tree analysis stratified the patients well by using 4 covariates: BNP, activity at the time of inappropriate therapy, mechanism of inappropriate therapy, and baseline rhythm at ICD implantation (log-rank test, P < 0.0001).We identified the predictors of mortality in inappropriate ICD therapy recipients and constructed a risk stratification scheme by using decision tree analysis.

Sex Differences in Advanced Heart Failure Therapies.

This in-depth review of sex differences in advanced heart failure therapy summarizes the existing literature on implantable cardioverter defibrillators, biventricular pacemakers, mechanical circulatory support, and transplantation with a focus on utilization, efficacy/clinical effectiveness, adverse events, and controversies. One will learn about the controversies regarding efficacy/clinical effectiveness of implantable cardioverter defibrillators and understand why these devices should be implanted in women even if there are sex differences in appropriate shocks. Individuals will learn about the sex differences with biventricular pacemakers with respect to ventricular remodeling and reduction in heart failure hospitalizations/mortality, as well as, possible mechanisms. We will demonstrate sex differences in heart transplantation and waitlist survival. Despite similar survival for women and men with left ventricular assist devices, there are sex differences in adverse events. These devices do successfully bridge women and men to transplant, yet women are less likely than men to have a left ventricular assist at time of listing and time of transplantation. Finally, one will learn about the concerns regarding poor outcome for men who receive female donor hearts and discover this may not be due to sex, but rather size. More research is needed to better understand sex differences and further improve advanced heart failure therapy for both women and men.