Design and characteristics of the prophylactic intra-operative ventricular arrhythmia ablation in high-risk LVAD candidates (PIVATAL) trial.

BACKGROUND: The use of a Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD) in patients with advanced heart failure refractory to optimal medical management has progressed steadily over the past two decades. Data have demonstrated reduced LVAD efficacy, worse clinical outcome, and higher mortality for patients who experience significant ventricular tachyarrhythmia (VTA). We hypothesize that a novel prophylactic intra-operative VTA ablation protocol at the time of LVAD implantation may reduce the recurrent VTA and adverse events postimplant. METHODS: We designed a prospective, multicenter, open-label, randomized-controlled clinical trial enrolling 100 patients who are LVAD candidates with a history of VTA in the previous 5 years. Enrolled patients will be randomized in a 1:1 fashion to intra-operative VTA ablation (n = 50) versus conventional medical management (n = 50) with LVAD implant. Arrhythmia outcomes data will be captured by an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) to monitor VTA events, with a uniform ICD programming protocol. Patients will be followed prospectively over a mean of 18 months (with a minimum of 9 months) after LVAD implantation to evaluate recurrent VTA, adverse events, and procedural outcomes. Secondary endpoints include right heart function/hemodynamics, healthcare utilization, and quality of life. CONCLUSION: The primary aim of this first-ever randomized trial is to assess the efficacy of intra-operative ablation during LVAD surgery in reducing VTA recurrence and improving clinical outcomes for patients with a history of VTA.

Effectiveness of high rate and delayed detection ICD programming by race: A MADIT-RIT substudy.

INTRODUCTION: Data on inappropriate and appropriate ICD therapy, and efficacy of ICD programing strategies by race are limited. METHODS: In MADIT-RIT, we evaluated the risk of ICD therapy by race, and the efficacy of high rate cut-off ventricular tachycardia (VT) zone ≥200 beats per minute (bpm) (Arm B), or 60 seconds delay in VT zone 170-199 bpm (Arm C), compared to 2.5 seconds delay at 170 bpm (Arm A) among black and white patients. RESULTS: MADIT-RIT enrolled 272 (20%) black and 1119 (80%) white patients. The risk of inappropriate therapy was similar among blacks and whites, HR 1.25, 95% CI (0.82-1.93), P  =  0.30. High rate cut-off or delayed VT therapy was associated with significant reductions in inappropriate therapy among whites, Arm B versus Arm A, HR 0.15, 95% CI (0.08-0.29), P < 0.0001, Arm C versus Arm A, HR 0.19, 95% CI (0.11-0.33), P < 0.001, and black individuals Arm B versus Arm A, HR 0.24, 95% CI (0.01-0.56), P  =  0.0001, Arm C versus Arm A, HR 0.30, 95% CI (0.13-0.68), P  =  0.004, P interaction > 0.10). However, delayed VT therapy was associated with a trend toward greater reduction in appropriate therapy in black individuals, HR 0.08, 95% CI (0.03-0.27), P < 0.0001 relative to white individuals, HR 0.27, 95% CI (0.16-0.43), P < 0.0001, P interaction  =  0.077. CONCLUSION: In MADIT-RIT, high rate and delayed detection ICD programming provided similar benefit with reductions in both inappropriate therapy and unnecessary appropriate therapy among black and white individuals. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT00947310.

An unusual ECG deflection: Fact or artifact?

Peculiar electrocardiographic findings are not unusual and upon careful review can often be clarified. We present a case of an 85year-old woman with no previous cardiac history, incidentally discovered high grade atrioventricular block, and a puzzling electrocardiographic complex of unclear etiology which defies reasonable physiological explanations. The finding resembled a tiny QRS in a perfectly regular R-R interval following only non-conducted P-waves. The patient declined further work-up, so a definite cause could not be determined, but based on history, complex morphology, and inability to reproduce or explain the findings, we were compelled to accept the finding as an artifact.

Effects of implantable cardioverter/defibrillator shock and antitachycardia pacing on anxiety and quality of life: A MADIT-RIT substudy.

Effects of implantable cardioverter/defibrillator (ICD) shocks and antitachycardia pacing (ATP) on anxiety and quality of life (QoL) in ICD patients are poorly understood. METHODS: We evaluated changes in QoL from baseline to 9-month follow-up using the EQ-5D questionnaire in patients enrolled in the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial-Reduce Inappropriate Therapy (MADIT-RIT) (n=1,268). We assessed anxiety levels using the Florida Shock Anxiety Scale (1-10 score) in patients with appropriate or inappropriate shocks or ATP compared to those with no ICD therapy during the first 9 months postimplant. The analysis was stratified by number of ATP or shocks (0-1 vs ≥2) and adjusted for covariates. RESULTS: In MADIT-RIT, 15 patients (1%) had ≥2 appropriate shocks, 38 (3%) had ≥2 appropriate ATPs. Two or more inappropriate shocks were delivered in 16 patients (1%); ≥2 inappropriate ATPs, in 70. In multivariable analysis, patients with ≥2 appropriate shocks had higher levels of shock-related anxiety than those with ≤1 appropriate shock (P<.01). Furthermore, ≥2 inappropriate shocks produced more anxiety than ≤1 inappropriate shock (P=.005). Consistently, ≥2 appropriate ATPs resulted in more anxiety than ≤1 (P=.028), whereas the number of inappropriate ATPs showed no association with anxiety levels (P=.997). However, there was no association between QoL and appropriate or inappropriate ATP/shock (all P values > .05). CONCLUSIONS: In MADIT-RIT, ≥2 appropriate or inappropriate ICD shocks and ≥2 appropriate ATPs are associated with more anxiety at 9-month follow-up despite no significant changes in the assessment of global QoL by the EQ-5D questionnaire. Innovative ICD programming reducing inappropriate therapies may help deal with patient concerns about the device.

Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial-Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (MADIT S-ICD): Design and clinical protocol.

Patients with diabetes mellitus, prior myocardial infarction, older age, and a relatively preserved left ventricular ejection fraction remain at risk for sudden cardiac death that is potentially amenable by the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator with a good risk-benefit profile. The launched MADIT S-ICD study is designed to test the hypothesis that post-myocardial infarction diabetes patients with relatively preserved ejection fraction of 36%-50% will have a survival benefit from a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator.

Heart failure severity, inappropriate ICD therapy, and novel ICD programming: a MADIT-RIT substudy.

BACKGROUND: The effects of heart failure (HF) severity on risk of inappropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy have not been thoroughly investigated. We aimed to study the association between HF severity and inappropriate ICD therapy in MADIT-RIT. METHODS: MADIT-RIT randomized 1,500 patients to three ICD programming arms: conventional (Arm A), high-rate cut-off (Arm B: ≥200 beats/min), and delayed therapy (Arm C: 60-second delay for ≥170 beats/min). We evaluated the association between New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III (n = 256) versus class I-II (n = 251) and inappropriate ICD therapy in Arm A patients with ICD-only and cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D). We additionally assessed benefit of novel ICD programming in Arms B and C versus Arm A by NYHA classification. RESULTS: In Arm A, the risk of inappropriate therapy was significantly higher in those with NYHA III versus NYHA I-II for both ICD (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.55, confidence interval [CI]: 1.51-4.30, P < 0.001) and CRT-D patients (HR = 3.73, CI: 1.14-12.23, P = 0.030). This was consistent for inappropriate ATP and inappropriate ICD therapy < 200 beats/min, but not for inappropriate shocks. Novel ICD programming significantly reduced inappropriate therapy in patients with both NYHA III (Arm B vs Arm A: HR = 0.08, P < 0.001; Arm C vs Arm A: HR = 0.17, P < 0.001) and NYHA I-II (Arm B vs Arm A: HR = 0.25, P < 0.001; Arm C vs Arm A: HR = 0.28, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients with more severe HF are at increased risk for inappropriate ICD therapy, particularly ATP due to arrhythmias < 200 beats/min. Novel programming with high-rate cut-off or delayed detection reduces inappropriate ICD therapies in both mild and moderate HF.

Reduction in inappropriate therapy and mortality through ICD programming.

BACKGROUND: The implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is highly effective in reducing mortality among patients at risk for fatal arrhythmias, but inappropriate ICD activations are frequent, with potential adverse effects. METHODS: We randomly assigned 1500 patients with a primary-prevention indication to receive an ICD with one of three programming configurations. The primary objective was to determine whether programmed high-rate therapy (with a 2.5-second delay before the initiation of therapy at a heart rate of ≥200 beats per minute) or delayed therapy (with a 60-second delay at 170 to 199 beats per minute, a 12-second delay at 200 to 249 beats per minute, and a 2.5-second delay at ≥250 beats per minute) was associated with a decrease in the number of patients with a first occurrence of inappropriate antitachycardia pacing or shocks, as compared with conventional programming (with a 2.5-second delay at 170 to 199 beats per minute and a 1.0-second delay at ≥200 beats per minute). RESULTS: During an average follow-up of 1.4 years, high-rate therapy and delayed ICD therapy, as compared with conventional device programming, were associated with reductions in a first occurrence of inappropriate therapy (hazard ratio with high-rate therapy vs. conventional therapy, 0.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.13 to 0.34; P<0.001; hazard ratio with delayed therapy vs. conventional therapy, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.40; P<0.001) and reductions in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio with high-rate therapy vs. conventional therapy, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.85; P=0.01; hazard ratio with delayed therapy vs. conventional therapy, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.30 to 1.02; P=0.06). There were no significant differences in procedure-related adverse events among the three treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Programming of ICD therapies for tachyarrhythmias of 200 beats per minute or higher or with a prolonged delay in therapy at 170 beats per minute or higher, as compared with conventional programming, was associated with reductions in inappropriate therapy and all-cause mortality during long-term follow-up. (Funded by Boston Scientific; MADIT-RIT ClinicalTrials.gov number, 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.

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.

Sex-Related Differences in Ventricular Tachyarrhythmia Events in Patients With Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator and Prior Ventricular Tachyarrhythmias.

BACKGROUND: Data on the risk of ventricular tachycardia (VT), ventricular fibrillation (VF), and death by sex in patients with prior VT/VF are limited. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess sex-related differences in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD)-treated VT/VF events and death in patients implanted for secondary prevention or primary prevention ICD indications who experienced VT/VF before enrollment in the RAID (Ranolazine Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator) trial. METHODS: Sex-related differences in the first and recurrent VT/VF requiring antitachycardia pacing or ICD shock and death were evaluated in 714 patients. RESULTS: There were 124 women (17%) and 590 men observed during a mean follow-up of 26.81 ± 14.52 months. Compared to men, women were at a significantly lower risk of VT/VF/death (HR: 0.67; P = 0.029), VT/VF (HR: 0.68; P = 0.049), VT/VF treated with antitachycardia pacing (HR: 0.59; P = 0.019), and VT/VF treated with ICD shock (HR: 0.54; P = 0.035). The risk of recurrent VT/VF was also significantly lower in women (HR: 0.35; P < 0.001). HR for death was similar to the other endpoints (HR: 0.61; P = 0.162). In comparison to men, women presented with faster VT rates (196 ± 32 beats/min vs 177 ± 30 beats/min, respectively; P = 0.002), and faster shock-requiring VT/VF rates (258 ± 56 beats/min vs 227 ± 57 beats/min, respectively; P = 0.30). There was a significant interaction for the risk of VT/VF by race (P = 0.013) with White women having significantly lower risk than White men (HR: 0.36; P < 0.001), whereas Black women had a similar risk to Black men (HR: 1.06; P = 0.851). CONCLUSIONS: Women with a history of prior VT/VF experienced a lower risk recurrent VT/VF requiring ICD therapy when compared to men. Black Women had a risk similar to men, whereas the lower risk for VT/VF in women was observed primarily in White women. (Ranolazine Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Trial; NCT01215253).

Failure to deliver therapy by a Riata Lead with internal wire externalization and normal electrical parameters during routine interrogation.

We present a case of failure to deliver a shock by a St. Jude Medical defibrillator involving a Riata lead that was discovered incidentally while the device was attempting to deliver inappropriate therapy. Routine interrogation, including high voltage (HV) impedance, failed to reveal any abnormality. Failure to deliver therapy was confirmed during DFT testing, which revealed extremely low HV impedance only while attempting to deliver therapy. Fluoroscopy indicated moderate externalization of internal wires. This case highlights an under-recognized issue with St. Jude Medical systems, namely the possibility that therapy may not be delivered despite the presence of normal electrical parameters during routine surveillance.

Primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillator in cardiac resynchronization therapy recipients with advanced chronic kidney disease.

Introduction: The implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is effective for the prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). The benefit of the ICD in patients with advanced CKD, remains elusive. Moreover, the benefit of the ICD in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) and HFrEF who are cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) recipients may be attenuated. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that patients with CKD who are CRT recipients may derive less benefit from the ICD due to the competing risk of dying prior to experiencing an arrhythmia. Methods: The study population included 1,015 patients receiving CRT with defibrillator (CRT-D) device for primary prevention of SCD who were enrolled in either (Multicenter Automated Defibrillator Implantation Trial) MADIT-CRT trial or the Ranolazine in High-Risk Patients with Implanted Cardioverter Defibrillator (RAID) trial. The cohort was divided into two groups based on the stage of CKD: those with Stage 1 to 3a KD, labeled as (S1-S3a)KD. The second group included patients with Stage 3b to stage 5 kidney disease, labeled as (S3b-S5)KD. The primary endpoint was any ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) (Any VT/VF). Results: The cumulative incidence of Any VT/VF was 23.5% in patients with (S1-S3a)KD and 12.6% in those with (S3b-S5)KD (p < 0.001) The incidence of Death without Any VT/VF was 6.6% in patients with (S1-S3a)KD and 21.6% in patients with (S3b-S5)KD (p < 0.001). A Fine and Gray multivariate competing risk regression model showed that Patients with (S3b-S5)KD had a 43% less risk of experiencing Any VT/VF when compared to those with (S1-S3a)KD (HR = 0.56, 95% CI [0.33-0.94] p = 0.03. After two years of follow up, there was almost a 5-fold increased risk of Death without Any VT/VF among patients with (S3b-S5)KD when compared to those with (S1-S3a)KD [HR = 4.63, 95% CI (2.46-8.72), p for interaction with time = 0.012]. Conclusion: Due to their lower incidence of arrhythmias and higher risk of dying prior to experiencing an arrhythmia, the benefit of the ICD may be attenuated in CRT recipients with advanced CKD. Future prospective trials should evaluate whether CRT without a defibrillator may be more appropriate for these patients.

ISHNE/EHRA expert consensus on remote monitoring of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs).

We are in the midst of a rapidly evolving era of technology-assisted medicine. The field of telemedicine provides the opportunity for highly individualized medical management in a way that has never been possible before. Evolving medical technologies using cardiac implantable devices (CIEDs) with capabilities for remote monitoring permit evaluation of multiple parameters of cardiovascular physiology and risk, including cardiac rhythm, device function, blood pressure values, the presence of myocardial ischaemia, and the degree of compensation of congestive heart failure. Cardiac risk, device status, and response to therapies can now be assessed with these electronic systems of detection and reporting. This document reflects the extensive experience from investigators and innovators around the world who are shaping the evolution of this rapidly expanding field, focusing in particular on implantable pacemakers (IPGs), implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs), devices for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) (both, with and without defibrillation properties), loop recorders, and haemodynamic monitoring devices. This document covers the basic methodologies, guidelines for their use, experience with existing applications, and the legal and reimbursement aspects associated with their use. To adequately cover this important emerging topic, the International Society for Holter and Noninvasive Electrocardiology (ISHNE) and the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) combined their expertise in this field. We hope that the development of this field can contribute to improve care of our cardiovascular patients.

ISHNE/EHRA expert consensus on remote monitoring of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs).

We are in the midst of a rapidly evolving era of technology-assisted medicine. The field of telemedicine provides the opportunity for highly individualized medical management in a way that has never been possible before. Evolving medical technologies using cardiac implantable devices with capabilities for remote monitoring permit evaluation of multiple parameters of cardiovascular physiology and risk, including cardiac rhythm, device function, blood pressure values, the presence of myocardial ischaemia, and the degree of compensation of congestive heart failure. Cardiac risk, device status, and response to therapies can now be assessed with these electronic systems of detection and reporting. This document reflects the extensive experience from investigators and innovators around the world who are shaping the evolution of this rapidly expanding field, focusing in particular on implantable pacemakers, implantable cardioverter defibrillators, devices for cardiac resynchronization therapy (both with and without defibrillation properties), loop recorders, and hemodynamic monitoring devices. This document covers the basic methodologies, guidelines for their use, experience with existing applications, and the legal and reimbursement aspects associated with their use. To adequately cover this important emerging topic, the International Society for Holter and Noninvasive Electrocardiology and the European Heart Rhythm Association combined their expertise in this field. We hope that the development of this field can contribute to improve care of our cardiovascular patients.

Multicenter automatic defibrillator implantation trial: reduce inappropriate therapy (MADIT-RIT): background, rationale, and clinical protocol.

The implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is highly effective in reducing mortality due to cardiac arrhythmias in high-risk cardiac patients. However, inappropriate therapies caused predominantly by supraventricular tachyarrhythmias (SVTs) remain a significant side effect of ICD therapy despite medical treatment, affecting 8-40% of patients. The MADIT-RIT is a global, prospective, randomized, nonblinded, three-arm, multicenter clinical investigation to be performed in the Unites States, Europe, Canada, Israel and Japan, and will utilize approximately 90 centers with plan to enroll 1500 patients programmed to three treatment arms. The objective of the MADIT-RIT trial is to determine if dual-chamber ICD or CRT-D devices with high rate cutoff (MADIT-RIT-Arm B) and/or long delay in combination with detection enhancements (MADIT-RIT-Arm C) are associated with fewer patients experiencing inappropriate therapies than standard programming (MADIT-RIT-Arm A) during postimplant follow-up of patients with indication for primary prevention device therapy. This paper describes design and analytic plan for the MADIT-RIT trial.

Response to preventive cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with ischaemic and nonischaemic cardiomyopathy in MADIT-CRT.

AIMS: There are no data regarding the differential response to cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D) by the aetiology of cardiomyopathy in mildly symptomatic patients. We evaluated the outcome of patients enrolled in MADIT-CRT by ischaemic and non-ischaemic aetiology of cardiomyopathy (ICM and non-ICM, respectively). METHODS AND RESULTS: The clinical response to CRT-D was assessed among ICM (n = 1046) and non-ICM (n = 774) patients enrolled in MADIT-CRT during an average follow-up of 2.4 years, and echocardiographic response was assessed at 1 year. Cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator vs. ICD therapy was associated with respective 34% (P = 0.001) and 44% (P = 0.002) reductions in the risk of heart failure or death among ICM and non-ICM patients (P for interaction = 0.455). In the ICM group, CRT-D was associated with mean (±SD) 29 ± 14% and 18 ± 10% reductions in left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) and left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV), respectively. In the non-ICM group, CRT-D was associated with significantly greater volume reductions compared with the ICM group [37 ± 16% and 24 ± 12% reductions in LVESV and LVEDV, respectively (P < 0.001 for all)]. Risk subsets in the ICM group that showed a favourable clinical response to CRT-D included patients with QRS ≥150 ms, systolic blood pressure <115 mmHg, and left bundle branch block (LBBB), whereas in the non-ICM group females, patients with diabetes mellitus, and LBBB, displayed a favourable clinical response. CONCLUSION: Mildly symptomatic ICM and non-ICM patients show significant differences in the echocardiographic response to CRT-D and in the clinical benefit within risk subsets suggesting that risk assessment for CRT-D in this population should be aetiology-specific.

Effect of Novel Programming on Inappropriate Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Therapy in Patients With Very Low Ejection Fraction (from A MADIT-RIT).

The Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial - Reduce Inappropriate Therapy showed a significant reduction in the risk of inappropriate therapy in patients with a programmed high-rate cutoff ≥200 beats per minute or delayed therapy for events ≥170 beats per minute compared with conventional programming. We aimed to characterize outcomes by left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ranges for patients with high-rate, delayed, or conventional implantable cardioverter-defibrillator programming. We assessed the effect of LVEF (LVEF <15%, LVEF 15% to 25%, LVEF >25%) on the risk of inappropriate conventional implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy and death in Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial - Reduce Inappropriate Therapy. Inappropriate therapies and death were independently evaluated by the adjudication committee. Statistical methods involved Kaplan-Meier time-to-event graphs and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses. The study involved 140 patients (9%) with LVEF 15%, 585 with LVEF 15% to 25% (39%), and 774 with LVEF >25% (52%). High-rate or delayed programming significantly reduced the risk of inappropriate therapy compared with conventional programming in patients with all LVEFs (p <0.001 for all LVEF). Patients with LVEF <15% had an exceptional 97% lower risk of inappropriate therapy, with high-rate programming than conventional programming (hazard ratio 0.028, p = 0.001), without an increase in mortality. High-rate and delayed programming is superior to conventional programming in all LVEF ranges, without adverse effects.

Infection in patients with subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: Results of the S-ICD Post Approval Study.

BACKGROUND: Early subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) studies included atypical cohorts of patients who were younger with fewer comorbidities. Recent S-ICD studies included patient populations with more comorbidities. OBJECTIVES: The goals of this study were to determine the incidence and predictors of S-ICD-related infection over a 3-year follow-up period and to use these results to develop an infection risk score. METHODS: The S-ICD Post Approval Study is a US prospective registry of 1637 patients. Baseline demographic characteristics and outcomes with 3-year postimplantation follow-up were compared between patients with and without device-related infection. A risk score was derived from multivariable proportional hazards analysis of 22 variables. RESULTS: Infection was observed in 55 patients (3.3%), with 69% of infections occurring within 90 days and a vast majority (92.7%) within 1 year of implantation. Late infections more likely involved device erosion; no infections occurred after year 2. The annual mortality rate postinfection was 0.6%/y. No lead extraction complications or bacteremia related to infection were observed. An infection risk score was created with diabetes, age, prior transvenous ICD implant, and ejection fraction as predictors. Patients with a risk score of ≥3 had an 8.8 hazard ratio (95% confidence interval 2.8-16.3) of infection compared with a 0 risk score. CONCLUSION: Infection rates in the S-ICD Post Approval Study were similar to other S-ICD populations and not associated with systemic blood-borne infections. Late infection (>1 year) is uncommon and associated with system erosion. A high-risk infection cohort can be identified that may facilitate preventive measures.

Strategies for pacemaker programming in acute heart failure.

In the past decade, cardiac pacing devices (either permanent pacemakers or Implanted Cardioverter Defibrillators) have become increasingly common in patients with heart failure. The manner in which the device is programmed to pace the heart can have significant implications on cardiac hemodynamics, both positive and negative. As such, in patients hospitalized with acute heart failure who have cardiac pacing devices, the clinician should note whether the programming of the device could be contributing to the patient's symptoms, and whether further programming changes could be made to improve the patient's clinical status. As of this date, there are no consensus guidelines available for the management of pacemaker programming in acute heart failure. This review article will discuss the physiologic implications of several parameters of pacemaker programming on heart failure, including the degree of RV pacing, the programmed atrioventricular (AV) interval, and the programmed interventricular pacing delay in patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices. Based on the available data on the above parameters, this article will then propose a general algorithmic approach to the evaluation and management of patients with pacing devices who are hospitalized with acute heart failure.