Successful defibrillation testing in patients undergoing elective subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator generator replacement.

AIMS: After implantation of a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD), a defibrillation test (DFT) is performed to ensure that the device can effectively detect and terminate the induced ventricular arrhythmia. Data on DFT efficacy at generator replacement are scarce with a limited number of patients and conflicting results. This study evaluates conversion efficacy during DFT at elective S-ICD generator replacement in a large cohort from our tertiary centre. METHODS AND RESULTS: Retrospective data of patients who underwent an S-ICD generator replacement for battery depletion with subsequent DFT between February 2015 and June 2022 were collected. Defibrillation test data were collected from both implant and replacement procedures. PRAETORIAN scores at implant were calculated. Defibrillation test was defined unsuccessful when two conversions at 65 J failed. A total of 121 patients were included. The defibrillation test was successful in 95% after the first and 98% after two consecutive tests. This was comparable with success rates at implant, despite a significant rise in shock impedance (73 ± 23 vs. 83 ± 24 Ω, P < 0.001). Both patients with an unsuccessful DFT at 65 J successfully converted with 80 J. CONCLUSION: This study shows a high DFT conversion rate at elective S-ICD generator replacement, which is comparable to conversion rates at implant, despite a rise in shock impedance. Evaluating device position before generator replacement may be recommended to optimize defibrillation success at generator replacement.

Intraprocedural PRAETORIAN score for early assessment of S-ICD implantation: A proof-of-concept study.

INTRODUCTION: The PRAETORIAN score (PS) was developed to assess the implant position and predict defibrillation success of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillators (S-ICD). The main critique moved to the routine use of PS has been its postprocedural timing, that limits its usefulness on procedure guidance. The aim of this proof-of-concept study was to assess the feasibility of an intraprocedural use of PS. METHODS: Forty consecutive patients undergoing S-ICD implantation were enrolled. Intraprocedural PS (IP-PS) obtained with fluoroscopy before closure of the pocket and postprocedural PS (PP-PS) obtained with two-views chest X-ray were compared. Intraprocedural data and PS were compared with the historic cohorts of the involved institutions. RESULTS: When assessing IP-PS and PP-PS, a complete overall agreement was observed (100%, 1.00-κ; p < .001). When assessing a per-step agreement, a very high-degree of concordance in evaluating Step 1 of the PS was observed (95%, 0.81-κ; p < .001). A complete agreement in Step 2-3 (100%, 1.00-κ; p < .001) of the PS was reported. In comparison with our historical cohort, procedural time in the IP-PS cohort did not increase (45 [41-52] vs. 45 [39-49] min; p = .351) while the expected increase in fluoroscopy time resulted scarce (15 [10-15] s). CONCLUSION: An IP-PS can be reliably obtained using fluoroscopy guidance during S-ICD implantation, without a significant increase in procedural duration and may serve as guidance for implanting physicians, to avoid postprocedural S-ICD repositioning, leading to patient discomfort and significantly enhancing infective risks. IP-PS showed a very high agreement with the PP-PS obtained from two-views chest X-ray.

Complications related to elective generator replacement of the subcutaneous implantable defibrillator.

AIMS: To guarantee uninterrupted function of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD), the pulse generator needs to be surgically replaced before the battery is depleted. The risks related to this replacement substantially impact long-term outcome for S-ICD recipients, as the majority will undergo one or several of these procedures in their lifetime. We aim to describe the procedural characteristics of the replacement procedure and to provide an insight in the complications associated with these replacements. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this retrospective analysis, data from replacement procedures and follow-up visits were collected from all patients who underwent elective S-ICD generator replacement in our tertiary centre from June 2014 until November 2019. Original device position was assessed using the PRAETORIAN score. Complications were defined as those requiring surgical intervention, systemic antibiotic treatment, or device extraction. Seventy-two patients were included, with a median follow-up of 1.9 years (IQR 0.6-3.3 years) after replacement. Battery depletion occurred after 5.9 ± 0.7 years. The pulse generator was repositioned in patients with a PRAETORIAN score ≥90 to minimize the defibrillation threshold. Although there was an increase in impedance compared to the implant procedure, first shock conversion rate during defibrillation testing was 91.4% with a success rate of 100% after multiple attempts. Two patients developed a complication after, respectively, 9 and 21 months, resulting in a complication rate of 1.4% per year. CONCLUSION: With a median follow-up of 1.9 years, this study shows a low complication rate after S-ICD replacement, with a first shock conversion rate of 91.4%.

Implantation technique and optimal subcutaneous defibrillator chest position: a PRAETORIAN score-based study.

AIMS: The traditional technique for subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) implantation involves three incisions and a subcutaneous pocket. Recently, a two-incision and intermuscular (IM) technique has been adopted. The PRAETORIAN score is a chest radiograph-based tool that predicts S-ICD conversion testing. We assessed whether the S-ICD implantation technique affects optimal position of the defibrillation system according to the PRAETORIAN score. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analysed consecutive patients undergoing S-ICD implantation. The χ2 test and regression analysis were used to determine the association between the PRAETORIAN score and implantation technique. Two hundred and thirteen patients were enrolled. The S-ICD generator was positioned in an IM pocket in 174 patients (81.7%) and the two-incision approach was adopted in 199 (93.4%). According to the PRAETORIAN score, the risk of conversion failure was classified as low in 198 patients (93.0%), intermediate in 13 (6.1%), and high in 2 (0.9%). Patients undergoing the two-incision and IM technique were more likely to have a low (<90) PRAETORIAN score than those undergoing the three-incision and subcutaneous technique (two-incision: 94.0% vs. three-incision: 78.6%; P = 0.004 and IM: 96.0% vs. subcutaneous: 79.5%; P = 0.001). Intermuscular plus two-incision technique was associated with a low-risk PRAETORIAN score (hazard ratio 3.76; 95% confidence interval 1.01-14.02; P = 0.04). Shock impedance was lower in PRAETORIAN low-risk patients than in intermediate-/high-risk categories (66 vs. 96 Ohm; P = 0.001). The PRAETORIAN score did not predict shock failure at 65 J. CONCLUSION: In this cohort of S-ICD recipients, combining the two-incision technique and IM generator implantation yielded the lowest PRAETORIAN score values, indicating optimal defibrillation system position. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ Identifier: NCT02275637.

Effect of posture on position of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator.

BACKGROUND: The PRAETORIAN score was developed as an alternative for defibrillation testing after subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation to assess 3 aspects of implant position on a bidirectional chest radiograph. The score is validated on a standard standing chest radiograph with arms elevated in the lateral view. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the effect of different anatomic positions on the PRAETORIAN score. METHODS: Thirty patients with a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator underwent standard posterior-anterior and lateral chest radiography, including additional lateral views in 2 positions: standing with arms down and supine with arms alongside the body. PRAETORIAN score and weighted κ coefficient were calculated for each position. RESULTS: In 8 of 30 patients, the PRAETORIAN score was ≥90 in standard position. The agreement in PRAETORIAN score was substantial (κ = 0.677) for the position with the arms down and fair (κ = 0.399) for the supine position. With the arms down, the PRAETORIAN score decreased in 10 patients (33%), 4 of whom changed to a lower risk category. In supine position, the PRAETORIAN score decreased in 16 patients (53%), 7 of whom changed to a lower risk category, 1 from high to low risk. CONCLUSION: A supine or arms-down position during chest radiography can result in lower PRAETORIAN scores and underestimation of associated risk on defibrillation testing failure. This emphasizes the importance of correct anatomic positioning (arms up) during chest radiography when the PRAETORIAN score is used.

Predictive value of the PRAETORIAN score for defibrillation test success in patients with subcutaneous ICD: A subanalysis of the PRAETORIAN-DFT trial.

BACKGROUND: The PRAETORIAN score estimates the risk of failure of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) therapy by using generator and lead positioning on bidirectional chest radiographs. The PRospective randomized compArative trial of subcutanEous implanTable cardiOverter-defibrillatoR ImplANtation with and without DeFibrillation Testing (PRAETORIAN-DFT) investigates whether PRAETORIAN score calculation is noninferior to defibrillation testing (DFT) with regard to first shock efficacy in spontaneous events. OBJECTIVE: This prespecified subanalysis assessed the predictive value of the PRAETORIAN score for defibrillation success in induced ventricular arrhythmias. METHODS: This multicenter investigator-initiated trial randomized 965 patients between DFT and PRAETORIAN score calculation after de novo S-ICD implantation. Successful DFT was defined as conversion of induced ventricular arrhythmia in <5 seconds from shock delivery within 2 attempts. Bidirectional chest radiographs were obtained after implantation. The predictive value of the PRAETORIAN score for DFT success was calculated for patients in the DFT arm. RESULTS: In total, 482 patients were randomized to undergo DFT. Of these patients, 457 (95%) underwent DFT according to protocol, of whom 445 (97%) had successful DFT and 12 (3%) had failed DFT. A PRAETORIAN score of ≥90 had a positive predictive value of 25% for failed DFT, and a PRAETORIAN score of <90 had a negative predictive value of 99% for successful DFT. A PRAETORIAN score of ≥90 was the strongest independent predictor for failed DFT (odds ratio 33.77; confidence interval 6.13-279.95; P < .001). CONCLUSION: A PRAETORIAN score of <90 serves as a reliable indicator for DFT success in patients with S-ICD, and a PRAETORIAN score of ≥90 is a strong predictor for DFT failure.

Validation of the PRAETORIAN score in a large subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator collective: Usefulness in clinical routine.

BACKGROUND: To assess the risk of unsuccessful conversion of ventricular fibrillation during defibrillation testing (DFT) with the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD), the PRAETORIAN score has been proposed. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to validate the PRAETORIAN score in a large S-ICD collective. METHODS: A retrospective single-center analysis of S-ICD patients receiving intraoperative DFT was performed. DFT was performed using a stepwise protocol with 65-J standard polarity, change of polarity, increase to 80 J, and repositioning if necessary. If all DFTs failed, we switched to a transvenous ICD. RESULTS: Overall, 398 patients were analyzed (268 male [67.3%]; mean age 42.4 ± 15.9 years; mean body mass index [BMI] 25.9 ± 4.8 kg/m2). Successful DFT with the first ICD shock was observed in 264 patients (66.3%). One hundred fourteen patients were defibrillated with the second (n = 104) or third (n = 10) DFT after changing shock polarity and/or shock energy. Overall, 20 patients needed at least 3 DFT (ie, 80 J and/or re-positioning). The majority (n = 88 [65.7%]) of DFT failures occurred before 2015 with the first-generation S-ICD. PRAETORIAN score was an independent predictor of DFT failure (odds ratio [OR] 1.007; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.003-1.011 P ≤.001), while whereas BMI alone was not (P = .31). Presence of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) (OR 2.6; 95% CI 1.3-4.4; P = .004) was predictive for at least 1 unsuccessful DFT in our multivariate regression analysis. CONCLUSION: PRAETORIAN score proved to be a useful and valid predictive tool for successful DFT, whereas BMI only had a limited role. Patients with HCM were at increased risk for DFT failure or needed higher DFT energy.

Characterization of the PRAETORIAN score in Japanese patients undergoing subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation.

BACKGROUND: The PRAETORIAN score was developed to evaluate the implant position and predict defibrillation success in patients implanted with a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD). However, usefulness of the PRAETORIAN score for Japanese patients is unknown. METHODS: We evaluated usefulness of this score, which was determined by width of sub-coil fat, sub-generator fat, and anterior positioning of the S-ICD generator by post-operative chest X-ray, in consecutive 100 Japanese S-ICD implanted patients [78 men, median age 59 (IQR 46.5-67.0) years, median body mass index (BMI) 24.2 (21.3-27.2) kg/m2]. RESULTS: The median PRAETORIAN score was 30 (30-45) and 93 patients were classified as a low risk of conversion failure. The remaining seven were at an intermediate risk. Almost all patients were classified as an optimal pulse-generator position in the second and third steps of the PRAETORIAN score. The only difference observed was in the width of sub-coil fat in the first step. To further evaluate its significance, patients were divided into the Thicker group (sub-coil fat >1 coil width, n = 19) and the Thinner group (sub-coil fat ≤1 coil width, n = 81). BMI and post-shock impedance were both higher in the Thicker group than in the Thinner group [27.1 (25.6-31.6) versus 23.1 (20.9-25.7) kg/m2, p < 0.001, and 75 (68-88) versus 63 (55-74) Ω, p = 0.003, respectively]. During the median follow-up periods of 888 (523-1418) days, 7 patients experienced appropriate shock therapy for spontaneous ventricular tachyarrhythmias, who were all at a low risk. No conversion failure was observed. Inappropriate shock (IAS) occurred in 11 patients, and there was no difference in IAS rate between the Thicker group (n = 2) and the Thinner group (n = 9) (p = 0.747 by log-rank test). CONCLUSIONS: Most Japanese patients were classified as at low risk of conversion failure. The PRAETORIAN score may be useful for the evaluation of conversion failure in Japanese S-ICD implanted patients.

Real-Life Inter-Rater Variability of the PRAETORIAN Score Values.

(1) Background: The PRAETORIAN score is a tool developed for postoperative evaluation of the position of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator systems. The aim of our study was to evaluate the real-life inter-rater variability of the PRAETORIAN score, based on chest radiographs of S-ICD patients reviewed by independent clinical raters. (2) Methods: Postoperative chest X-rays of patients that underwent S-ICD implantation were evaluated by five clinical raters who gave values of the PRAETORIAN score. Ratings were then compared in a fully crossed manner to determine the inter-rater variability of the attributed scores. (3) Results: In total, 87 patients were included in the study. In the case of the most important final risk category of the PRAETORIAN score, the mean Light's kappa was 0.804, the Fleiss' kappa was 0.249, and the intraclass correlation was 0.38. The final risk category was identically determined by all five raters in 75.86% of patients, by four raters in 14.94%, and by three raters in 9.20% of patients. (4) Conclusions: The overall inter-rater variability of the PRAETORIAN score in a group of electrophysiologists experienced in S-ICD implantation, yet previously naive to the PRAETORIAN score, and self-trained in its utilization, was only modest in our study. Appropriate use of the score might require training of clinical raters.

Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and defibrillation testing: A propensity-matched pilot study.

BACKGROUND: To date, only a few comparisons between subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) patients undergoing and those not undergoing defibrillation testing (DT) at implantation (DT+ vs DT-) have been reported. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare long-term clinical outcomes of 2 propensity-matched cohorts of DT+ and DT- patients. METHODS: Among consecutive S-ICD patients implanted across 17 centers from January 2015 to October 2020, DT- patients were 1:1 propensity-matched for baseline characteristics with DT+ patients. The primary outcome was a composite of ineffective shocks and cardiovascular mortality. Appropriate and inappropriate shock rates were deemed secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Among 1290 patients, a total of 566 propensity-matched patients (283 DT+; 283 DT-) served as study population. Over median follow-up of 25.3 months, no significant differences in primary outcome event rates were found (10 DT+ vs 14 DT-; P = .404) as well as for ineffective shocks (5 DT- vs 3 DT+; P = .725). At multivariable Cox regression analysis, DT performance was associated with a reduction of neither the primary combined outcome nor ineffective shocks at follow-up. A high PRAETORIAN score was positively associated with both the primary outcome (hazard ratio 3.976; confidence interval 1.339-11.802; P = .013) and ineffective shocks alone at follow-up (hazard ratio 19.030; confidence interval 4.752-76.203; P = .003). CONCLUSION: In 2 cohorts of strictly propensity-matched patients, DT performance was not associated with significant differences in cardiovascular mortality and ineffective shocks. The PRAETORIAN score is capable of correctly identifying a large percentage of patients at risk for ineffective shock conversion in both cohorts.

Defibrillation failure in patients undergoing replacement of subcutaneous defibrillator pulse generator.

BACKGROUND: Defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing is commonly performed in patients undergoing subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) implantation. Growing evidence indicates that successful DFT testing correlates with the technique used for implantation of the defibrillation lead and pulse generator. However, evidence on whether DFT testing should be performed in patients undergoing S-ICD pulse generator replacement is lacking. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the outcome of DFT testing in patients undergoing replacement of an S-ICD pulse generator. METHODS: A total of 357 S-ICD implantations were performed between November 2010 and July 2019. Twenty-five consecutive patients underwent S-ICD replacement between 2015 and 2019. Clinical data, perioperative medication, technical measurements, and PRAETORIAN score were assessed and grouped according to the outcome of DFT testing. RESULTS: In 5 of 25 patients (20%), induced ventricular fibrillation was not successfully terminated after the first or second 65-J shock after pulse generator replacement with need for external defibrillation. Repositioning of the pulse generator and/or capsulectomy at the pocket site were necessary to achieve effective DFT with 65 J in all cases. Shock impedance increased in all patients at the time of pulse generator replacement compared to first implantation and was significantly higher in patients with ineffective DFT (119 ± 17 Ω vs 93 ± 26 Ω; P = .03). Otherwise, no differences in clinical characteristics, comorbidities, body mass index, intraoperative medication, or PRAETORIAN score were predictive of defibrillation failure. CONCLUSION: The high proportion of patients with DFT failure after S-ICD pulse generator replacement indicates that DFT testing is mandatory to ensure safe function of the S-ICD.