Reappraisal on pharmacological and mechanical treatments of heart failure.

Heart failure (HF) is a highly frequent disorder with considerable morbidity, hospitalization, and mortality; thus, it invariably places pressure on clinical and public health systems in the modern world. There have been notable advances in the definition, diagnosis, and treatment of HF, and newly developed agents and devices have been widely adopted in clinical practice. Here, this review first summarizes the current emerging therapeutic agents, including pharmacotherapy, device-based therapy, and the treatment of some common comorbidities, to improve the prognosis of HF patients. Then, we discuss and point out the commonalities and areas for improvement in current clinical studies of HF. Finally, we highlight the gaps in HF research. We are looking forward to a bright future with reduced morbidity and mortality from HF.

Periprocedural hypotension after conscious sedation versus local anesthesia during defibrillator implantation for left ventricular dysfunction: analysis of a national inpatient database in Japan.

The association between periprocedural hypotension and conscious sedation (CS) during defibrillator implantation remains to be elucidated. The aim of the present study was to compare the occurrence of periprocedural hypotension after CS or local anesthesia (LA) during defibrillator implantation in a retrospective cohort study using a national inpatient database. Using the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination database, we retrospectively collected data for adult inpatients who underwent implantation of a cardioverter defibrillator or cardiac resynchronization therapy device from July 2010 to March 2016. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to compare the occurrence of periprocedural hypotension between the CS and LA groups with adjustment for patient background characteristics and hospital factors. Additional analysis was performed after dividing the CS group into each specific anesthetic use. We identified 4842 patients, comprising 1533 patients with CS and 3309 with LA. The CS group had a significantly higher proportion of periprocedural hypotension than the LA group (13.4% versus 9.7%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.19-2.04; p = 0.001). Body mass index < 18.5 kg/m2, New York Heart Association Class IV, and use of cardiac resynchronization therapy device were independently associated with occurrence of periprocedural hypotension. Additionally, ketamine and dexmedetomidine were significantly associated with higher incidence of hypotension than the LA group (adjusted odds ratio, 2.64; 95% confidence interval, 1.32-5.26; p = 0.006; adjusted odds ratio, 1.86; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-3.12; p = 0.019, respectively). Periprocedural hypotension was significantly more likely to occur in the CS group than the LA group, and was associated with CS.

Ventricular electrical delay as a predictor of arrhythmias in patients with cardiac resynchronization implantable cardioverter defibrillator.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular (LV) remodeling and clinical response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is inversely related to electrical dyssynchrony, measured as LV lead electrical delay (QLV). Presence of atrial or ventricular arrhythmia is correlated with worsening heart failure and LV remodeling. OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the association of QLV with arrhythmic events in CRT recipients. METHODS: We identified patients implanted with a CRT device at our center. QLV interval was measured and corrected for baseline QRS (cQLV). We performed multivariable Logistic regression to assess the effect of cQLV on the occurrence of atrial/ventricular arrhythmic events. RESULTS: Sixty-nine patients were included in analyses. The cQLV was significantly shorter in patients with atria tachycardia/supraventricular tachycardia (AT/SVT) events compared to patients without AT/SVT events (43.4 ± 22% vs. 60.3 ± 26.7%, p = .006). In contrast, no significant difference in cQLV was observed between patients with and without ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation (VT/VF) events (46.2 ± 25.4% vs. 56 ± 25.7%, p = .13). cQLV was significantly shorter in patients with new onset AT/SVT events compared to those without (38.3 ± 22.2% vs. 55.7 ± 25.7%, p = .028). In contrast, no significant difference in cQLV was observed between patients with and without new onset VT/VF events (44.2 ± 25.2% vs. 56.3 ± 25.5%, p = .069). Following adjusted analyses, cQLV was a significant predictor of AT/SVT, but not for VT/VF. CONCLUSION: cQLV is a simple measure that can identify a vulnerable cohort of CRT patients at increased risk for atrial tachyarrhythmias, and hence can predict reverse remodeling and clinical response to CRT treatment.

Cardiac implantable electronic device and vascular access: Strategies to overcome problems.

For arrhythmia treatment or sudden cardiac death prevention in hemodialysis patients, there is a frequent need for placement of a cardiac implantable electronic device (pacemaker, implantable cardioverter defibrillator, or cardiac resynchronization device). Leads from a cardiac implantable electronic device can cause central vein stenosis and carry the risk of tricuspid regurgitation or contribute to infective endocarditis. In patients with end-stage kidney disease requiring vascular access and cardiac implantable electronic device, the best strategy is to create an arteriovenous fistula on the contralateral upper limb for a cardiac implantable electronic device and avoidance of central vein catheter. Fortunately, cardiac electrotherapy is moving toward miniaturization and less transvenous wires. Whenever feasible, one should avoid transvenous leads and choose alternative options such as subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator, epicardial leads, and leadless pacemaker. Based on recent reports on the leadless pacemaker/implantable cardioverter defibrillator effectiveness, in patients with rapid progression of chronic kidney disease (high risk of renal failure) or glomerular filtration rate <20 mL/min/1.73 m2, this option should be considered by the implanting cardiologist for future access protection.

Electrophysiology testing for risk stratification of patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy: a call for action.

Current guidelines recommendations, based on the results of primary sudden cardiac death prevention trials, use the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) as a sole criterion for the indication of implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy for primary prevention purposes. In this article, we review the sensitivity and specificity of LVEF for predicting arrhythmic vs. non-arrhythmic cardiac death and examine existing evidence on the use of electrophysiology testing for risk stratification of ischaemic patients with reduced left ventricular function.

Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Therapy in Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Dysplasia/Cardiomyopathy: Predictors of Appropriate Therapy, Outcomes, and Complications.

BACKGROUND: Arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy is characterized by ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death. Once the diagnosis is established, risk stratification to determine whether implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) placement is warranted is critical. METHODS AND RESULTS: The cohort included 312 patients (163 men, age at presentation 33.6±13.9 years) with definite arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy who received an ICD. Over 8.8±7.33 years, 186 participants (60%) had appropriate ICD therapy and 58 (19%) had an intervention for ventricular fibrillation/flutter. Ventricular tachycardia at presentation (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.38-2.49; P<0.001), inducibility on electrophysiology study (HR: 3.14; 95% CI, 1.95-5.05; P<0.001), male sex (HR: 1.62; 95% CI, 1.20-2.19; P=0.001), inverted T waves in ≥3 precordial leads (HR: 1.66; 95% CI, 1.09-2.52; P=0.018), and premature ventricular contraction count ≥1000/24 hours (HR: 2.30; 95% CI, 1.32-4.00; P=0.003) were predictors of any appropriate ICD therapy. Inducibility at electrophysiology study (HR: 2.28; 95% CI, 1.10-4.70; P=0.025) remained as the only predictor after multivariable analysis. The predictors for ventricular fibrillation/flutter were premature ventricular contraction ≥1000/24 hours (HR: 4.39; 95% CI, 1.32-14.61; P=0.016), syncope (HR: 1.85; 95% CI, 1.10-3.11; P=0.021), aged ≤30 years at presentation (HR: 1.76; 95% CI, 1.04-3.00; P<0.036), and male sex (HR: 1.73; 95% CI, 1.01-2.97; P=0.046). Younger age at presentation (HR: 3.14; 95% CI, 1.32-7.48; P=0.010) and high premature ventricular contraction burden (HR: 4.43; 95% CI, 1.35-14.57; P<0.014) remained as independent predictors of ventricular fibrillation/flutter. Complications occurred in 66 participants (21%), and 64 (21%) had inappropriate ICD interventions. Overall mortality was low at 2%, and 4% underwent heart transplantation. CONCLUSION: These findings represent an important step in identifying predictors of ICD therapy for potentially fatal ventricular fibrillation/flutter and should be considered when developing a risk stratification model for arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy.

Impact of Chronic Total Coronary Occlusion on Recurrence of Ventricular Arrhythmias in Ischemic Secondary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Recipients (VACTO Secondary Study): Insights From Coronary Angiogram and Electrogram Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the incidence and clinical effect of coronary chronic total occlusions (CTOs) in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy receiving an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) for secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD). BACKGROUND: CTOs are common in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy, which is the major cause of SCD. However, the impact of CTO in SCD survivors receiving an ICD is unknown. METHODS: A total of 425 patients who had survived an episode of ventricular arrhythmias and underwent ICD implantation for secondary prevention in 8 centers were included. Coronary angiogram, CTO angiographic characteristics, and ventricular arrhythmia pattern were centrally analyzed. Primary and secondary endpoints were appropriate ICD therapies and mortality during a median follow-up of 4.1 years, according to the presence of CTO in the baseline angiogram. RESULTS: Appropriate ICD therapies were higher in patients with CTO (51.7% vs. 36.3%; p = 0.001 at 4 years). Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (p = 0.015) and CTO (p = 0.001) were independent predictors of appropriate ICD therapy. Ventricular arrhythmia onset was associated to a shorter coupling interval and lower prematurity index in CTO patients. Defibrillator therapies were independently associated with worse LVEF (p = 0.046) and renal dysfunction (p = 0.023) among patients with CTO, and a tendency was observed in patients with better collateral flow (p = 0.093). Patients with poorer renal function (p = 0.029), LVEF (p = 0.041), and CTO (p = 0.033) experienced higher mortality rate. CONCLUSIONS: Among ICD recipients for secondary prevention of SCD, coronary CTO conferred a higher risk of VA recurrence and mortality in long-term follow-up. Angiographic and VA patterns could provide insights into the mechanisms of SCD and may have implications for the use of interventions designed to limit ICD shocks in this high-risk population.

Management of functional Sprint Fidelis leads at cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator generator replacement: a novel option for preventing inappropriate shocks from lead failure in fragile patients with high risk of sudden death.

AIMS: In patients with a functional Sprint Fidelis lead at generator replacement, the manufacturer recommended to either continue to use the existing lead or replace it with a new lead. For those patients who continue to use a functional Fidelis lead, the risk of inappropriate shocks remains present if the lead fails in the future. We evaluated the feasibility of an alternative approach at the time of cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D) generator replacement in patients with a functional bipolar left ventricular (LV) lead for prevention of inappropriate shocks from future Fidelis lead failure. METHODS AND RESULTS: During the procedure, the pace/sense IS-1 connection pin of the functional Fidelis lead was intentionally inserted into the LV port of the new CRT-D generator, while the existing bipolar LV lead IS-1 connection pin was inserted into the right ventricular (RV) pace/sense port. After such switching, the existing bipolar LV lead was used for functional LV pacing/sensing, while the Fidelis lead was used for functional RV pacing and high voltage shock only and could no longer be used for the purpose of sensing and detecting. This approach precluded oversensing and inappropriate shocks should the functional Fidelis lead fail in the future. Six fragile patients, who were not considered suitable candidates for lead replacement, underwent the alternative approach. During a follow-up of 35 ± 23 months, the CRT-D system functioned normally in five patients. The Fidelis lead fractured in one patient 7 months after generator replacement. The malfunction was detected promptly and the defected lead was replaced. No inappropriate detections or shock was triggered. CONCLUSIONS: In CRT-D patients with a functional Fidelis lead and a bipolar LV lead, switching of the Fidelis lead pace/sense IS-1 pin with the bipolar LV lead IS-1 pin at generator replacement did not affect normal system function. This novel approach may be valuable in fragile patients with high risk of sudden death for prevention of inappropriate shocks triggered by oversensing from a malfunctioning Fidelis lead.

Sex Differences in Inappropriate ICD Device Therapies: MADIT-II and MADIT-CRT.

INTRODUCTION: Approximately 10-20% of ICD recipients receive inappropriate device therapies. The purpose of this study was to compare the frequency of inappropriate therapies (IT) between men and women enrolled in MADIT II and MADIT-CRT, and assess for potential adverse outcomes. METHODS: The electrograms for each ICD or CRT-D therapy, defined as either ATP or shock, were reviewed by adjudication committees for both studies. ICD therapy was considered inappropriate if it was delivered for reasons other than VT/VF. The rhythm triggering IT was categorized as atrial fibrillation/flutter, SVT, or inappropriate sensing when possible. RESULTS: One thousand nine hundred and fifty-four men and 556 women received ICD or CRT-D devices. The risk of IT was significantly lower in women than men (9.2% vs. 13.5%, P = 0.006). The most common cause of IT in men was atrial fibrillation (38%) and SVT in women (43%). Inappropriate shock was not associated with increased mortality in either women (HR 0.82 [95% CI 0.11-6.08]; P = NS) or men (HR 1.37 [95% CI 0.75-2.48]; P = NS) by multivariate analysis. Conversely, appropriate shock therapy strongly correlated with increased risk of death during subsequent post-shock follow-up in women (HR 5.99 [95% CI 2.75-13.02]; P < 0.0001) and men (HR 2.61 [95% CI 1.82-3.74]; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Women experience significantly less IT than men, partially explained by the increased frequency of atrial fibrillation in men. IT was not associated with increased mortality in either sex. Appropriate shock therapy was a strong predictor of death in both, with women showing a 2-fold higher risk than men during post-shock long-term follow-up.

Apical versus Non-Apical Lead: Is ICD Lead Position Important for Successful Defibrillation?

INTRODUCTION: We aim to compare the acute and long-term success of defibrillation between non-apical and apical ICD lead position. METHODS AND RESULTS: The position of the ventricular lead was recorded by the implanting physician for 2,475 of 2,500 subjects in the Shockless IMPLant Evaluation (SIMPLE) trial, and subjects were grouped accordingly as non-apical or apical. The success of intra-operative defibrillation testing and of subsequent clinical shocks were compared. Propensity scoring was used to adjust for the impact of differences in baseline variables between these groups. There were 541 leads that were implanted at a non-apical position (21.9%). Patients implanted with a non-apical lead had a higher rate of secondary prevention indication. Non-apical location resulted in a lower mean R-wave amplitude (14.0 vs. 15.2, P < 0.001), lower mean pacing impedance (662 ohm vs. 728 ohm, P < 0.001), and higher mean pacing threshold (0.70 V vs. 0.66 V, P = 0.01). Single-coil leads and cardiac resynchronization devices were used more often in non-apical implants. The success of intra-operative defibrillation was similar between propensity score matched groups (89%). Over a mean follow-up of 3 years, there were no significant differences in the yearly rates of appropriate shock (5.5% vs. 5.4%, P = 0.98), failed appropriate first shock (0.9% vs. 1.0%, P = 0.66), or the composite of failed shock or arrhythmic death (2.8% vs. 2.3% P = 0.35) according to lead location. CONCLUSION: We did not detect any reduction in the ICD efficacy at the time of implant or during follow-up in patients receiving a non-apical RV lead.

Effect of ICD Therapies on Mortality in the OMNI Trial.

BACKGROUND: Analyses from primary prevention trials on implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy have shown an association between shocks and increased mortality. Recent data suggest a similar association with antitachycardia pacing (ATP). OBJECTIVE: The OMNI study is an observational study of pacemaker and ICD use. We aim to examine associations between ICD therapies and mortality in this setting. METHODS: A total of 2,255 OMNI patients with ICDs were included. Treated episodes were classified as appropriate or inappropriate. Patients were assigned into 1 of 3 groups depending on whether the episode required ATP only, single shock, or multiple shocks, and then followed for all-cause mortality. Additionally, we aimed to determine the frequency with which inappropriate ATP precipitated ventricular arrhythmias that led to shock, since this has been suggested as a mechanism of harm. RESULTS: Over a mean follow-up of 39 ± 19 months, there were a total of 470 deaths (21%). Compared to patients with no treated episodes, patients with appropriate therapy had greater risk of death. Hazard ratios were 1.46 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-2.02; P = 0.023) for the ATP-only group, 2.11 (95% CI 1.51-2.96; P < 0.001) for the single-shock group, and 2.55 (95% CI 1.43-4.57; P = 0.002) for the multishock group. There was no significant association between any type of inappropriate therapy and increased mortality. We identified only 7 instances of inappropriate ATP precipitating ventricular arrhythmia resulting in shock. CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving appropriate therapy of all types had increased mortality compared to those with no episodes. Furthermore, inappropriate ATP rarely precipitates ventricular arrhythmias.

Clinical impact of defibrillation testing at the time of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator insertion.

BACKGROUND: Ventricular fibrillation is routinely induced during implantable cardioverter-defibrillator insertion to assess defibrillator performance, but this strategy is experiencing a progressive decline. We aimed to assess the efficacy of defibrillator therapies and long-term outcome in a cohort of patients that underwent defibrillator implantation with and without defibrillation testing. METHODS: Retrospective observational series of consecutive patients undergoing initial defibrillator insertion or generator replacement. We registered spontaneous ventricular arrhythmias incidence and therapy efficacy, and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 545 patients underwent defibrillator implantation (111 with and 434 without defibrillation testing). After 19 (range 9-31) months of follow-up, the death rate per observation year (4% vs. 4%; p = 0.91) and the rate of patients with defibrillator-treated ventricular arrhythmic events per observation year (with test: 10% vs. without test: 12%; p = 0.46) were similar. The generalized estimating equations-adjusted first shock probability of success in patients with test (95%; CI 88-100%) vs. without test (98%; CI 96-100%; p = 0.42) and the proportion of successful antitachycardia therapies (with test: 87% vs. without test: 80%; p = 0.35) were similar between groups. There was no difference in the annualized rate of failed first shock per patient and per shocked patient between groups (5% vs. 4%; p = 0.94). CONCLUSIONS: In this observational study, that included an unselected population of patients with a defibrillator, no difference was found in overall mortality, first shock efficacy and rate of failed shocks regardless of whether defibrillation testing was performed or not.

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.

Defibrillation testing in everyday medical practice during implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation in France: analysis from the LEADER registry.

BACKGROUND: Defibrillation testing (DT) is usually performed during implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation. AIMS: We conducted a multicentre prospective study to determine the DT procedures used in everyday practice, to compare the characteristics of patients with or without DT, and to compare severe adverse events in these two populations during implantation and follow-up. METHODS: The LEADER registry enrolled 904 patients included for primo-implantation of a single (n=261), dual (n=230) or triple (n=429) defibrillation system in 42 French centres. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics of patients (62.0 ± 13.5 years; 88% men; primary indication 62%) who underwent ventricular fibrillation (VF) induction (VF induction group, n=810) and those who did not (untested group, n=94, representing 10.4% of the entire study population) revealed that the untested group were older (P<0.01), had a lower left ventricular ejection fraction, a wider QRS complex and a higher New York Heart Association class and were more often implanted for primary prevention (P<0.001 for all). The main reason given for not performing ICD testing was poor haemodynamic condition (59/94). At 1 year, the cumulative survival rate was 95% in tested patients and 85% in untested patients (P<0.001), mainly because of heart failure deaths. There was one sudden cardiac death in the VF induction group and none in the untested group (P=1.000). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, more than 10% of ICD patients were implanted without VF induction. Untested patients appeared to be sicker than tested patients, with a more severe long-term outcome, but without any difference in mortality due to arrhythmic events.

Prophylactic catheter ablation for induced monomorphic ventricular tachycardia in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators as primary prevention.

AIMS: Prophylactic catheter ablation (CA) has been established to reduce the incidence of appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy (anti-tachycardia pacing or shock) in secondary prevention patients. The aim of this study was to determine whether prophylactic CA for induced ventricular tachycardia (VT) reduces the incidence of appropriate ICD therapy in primary prevention patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively investigated 66 consecutive patients with structural heart disease who had undergone ICD implantation as primary prevention and electrophysiological study. Patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy or no inducible monomorphic VT had been excluded, and the remaining 38 patients were divided into two groups; those who had undergone prophylactic CA for induced monomorphic VT (the CA group, n = 18), and those who had not undergone CA (the non-CA group, n = 20). During a mean follow-up of 50 ± 38 months, 1 patient (5%) received appropriate ICD therapy in the CA group and 13 (65%) in the non-CA group. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis revealed a significantly higher event-free survival rates for appropriate ICD therapy in the CA group compared with the non-CA group (P = 0.003). Among the patients, one patient (5%) in the CA group and nine patients (45%) in the non-CA group suffered appropriate shock (P = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic CA for induced monomorphic VT reduces the incidence of appropriate ICD therapy including shock in primary prevention patients. These results indicate that prophylactic CA may be considered for structural heart disease patients who are candidates for ICD implantation as primary prevention.

Role of programmed ventricular stimulation in patients with Brugada syndrome: a meta-analysis of worldwide published data.

AIMS: Brugada syndrome (BS) is an ion channelopathy with the risk of sudden cardiac death. The role of programmed ventricular stimulation (PVS) in risk stratification has been controversially discussed. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis on the prognostic role of PVS in BS. METHODS AND RESULTS: A Medline search until July 2006 documented 822 entries for BS. Only English publications with > 10 patients and a follow-up period were considered (n = 15). Patients [n = 1217; 974 males (80%)] were divided into three groups: survived sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) [n = 222 (18%)], syncope (Syncope) [n = 275 (23%)], and asymptomatic patients (Asympt) [n = 720 (59%)]. PVS was conducted in 1036 patients (85%). In 548 patients (53%), sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) was inducible. During follow-up (34 +/- 40 months), VT/VF occurred in 141 patients. SCA bore the highest chance for a VT/VF occurrence during follow-up [odds ratio (OR) 14.4 compared with asymptomatic patients; P < 0.0005]. However, except for one study, the OR for VT/VF during follow-up in relation to VT/VF inducibility was non-significant (OR 1.5; P = ns). CONCLUSION: The main finding is that we were unable to identify a significant role of PVS with regard to arrhythmic events during follow-up in BS, thus questioning the role of PVS for risk stratification in patients with BS. Patients with BS and survived SCA show the highest chance for VT/VF occurrence during follow-up.