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).

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.

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.

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.

Assessment of primary prevention patients receiving an ICD - Systematic evaluation of ATP: APPRAISE ATP.

BACKGROUND: The value of antitachycardia pacing (ATP) in the overall cohort of primary prevention patients who receive implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) remains uncertain. ATP success reported in prior trials potentially included a large number of patients receiving unnecessary ATP for arrhythmias that may have self-terminated owing to the prematurity of the intervention. Although some patients derive benefit from initial ATP in terminating rapid ventricular arrhythmias and thereby preventing shocks, there are limited data allowing us to identify those patients a priori. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of APPRAISE ATP is to understand the role of ATP in primary prevention patients currently indicated for ICD therapy in a large prospective randomized controlled trial with modern programming parameters. METHODS: The study is a global, prospective, randomized, multicenter clinical trial conducted at up to 150 sites globally, enrolling approximately 2600 subjects The primary endpoint of the trial is time to first all-cause shock in a 2-arm study with an equivalent study design in which the incidence of all-cause shocks will be compared between primary prevention subjects programmed with shocks only vs subjects programmed to standard therapy (ATP and shock). RESULTS: An Electrogram and Device Interrogation Core Laboratory will review interrogation data to determine primary endpoints that occur in APPRAISE ATP. Their decisions are based on independent physician review of the data from device interrogation. CONCLUSION: The ultimate purpose of the study is to aid clinicians in the selection of ICD technologies based on hard endpoint evidence across the spectrum of indications for primary prevention implantation.

Reassessing the role of antitachycardia pacing in fast ventricular arrhythmias in primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients: Results from MADIT-RIT.

BACKGROUND: In Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial - Reduce Inappropriate Therapy (MADIT-RIT), high-rate cutoff (arm B) and delayed therapy (arm C) reduced the risk of inappropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) interventions when compared with conventional programming (arm A); however, appropriate but unnecessary therapies were not evaluated. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the value of antitachycardia pacing (ATP) for fast ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) ≥ 200 beats/min in patients with primary prevention ICD. METHODS: We compared ATP only, ATP and shock, and shock only rates in patients in MADIT-RIT treated for VAs ≥ 200 beats/min. The only difference between these randomized groups was the time delay between ventricular tachycardia detection and therapy (3.4 seconds vs 4.9 seconds vs 14.4 seconds). RESULTS: In arm A, 11.5% patients had events, the initial therapy was ATP in 10.5% and shock in 1%, and the final therapy was ATP in 8% and shock in 3.5%. In arm B, 6.6% had events, 4.2% were initially treated with ATP and 2.4% with shock, and the final therapy was ATP in 2.8% and shock in 3.8%. In arm C, 4.7% had events, 2.5% were initially treated with ATP and 2.3% with shock, and the final therapy was ATP in 1.4% and shock in 3.3%. The final shock rate was similar in arm A vs arm B (3.5% vs 3.8%; P = .800) and in arm A vs arm C (3.5% vs 3.3%; P = .855) despite the marked discrepancy in initial ATP therapy utilization. CONCLUSION: In MADIT-RIT, there was a significant reduction in ATP interventions with therapy delays due to spontaneous termination, with no difference in shock therapies, suggesting that earlier interventions for VAs ≥ 200 beats/min are likely unnecessary, leading to an overestimation of the value of ATP in primary prevention ICD recipients.

Influence of Multimorbidity on Burden and Appropriateness of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Therapies.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether burden of multiple chronic conditions (MCCs) influences the risk of receiving inappropriate vs appropriate device therapies. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Seven US healthcare delivery systems. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with left ventricular systolic dysfunction receiving an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) for primary prevention. MEASUREMENTS: Data on 24 comorbid conditions were captured from electronic health records and categorized into quartiles of comorbidity burden (0-3, 4-5, 6-7 and 8-16). Incidence of ICD therapies (shock and antitachycardia pacing [ATP] therapies), including appropriateness, was collected for 3 years after implantation. Outcomes included time to first ICD therapy, total ICD therapy burden, and risk of inappropriate vs appropriate ICD therapy. RESULTS: Among 2235 patients (mean age = 69 ± 11 years, 75% men), the median number of comorbidities was 6 (interquartile range = 4-8), with 98% having at least two comorbidities. During a mean 2.2 years of follow-up, 18.3% of patients experienced at least one appropriate therapy and 9.9% experienced at least one inappropriate therapy. Higher comorbidity burden was associated with an increased risk of first inappropriate therapy (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.94 [95% confidence interval {CI} = 1.14-3.31] for 4-5 comorbidities; HR = 2.25 [95% CI = 1.25-4.05] for 6-7 comorbidities; and HR = 2.91 [95% CI = 1.54-5.50] for 8-16 comorbidities). Participants with 8-16 comorbidities had a higher total burden of ICD therapy (adjusted relative risk [RR] = 2.12 [95% CI = 1.43-3.16]), a higher burden of inappropriate therapy (RR = 3.39 [95% CI = 1.67-6.86]), and a higher risk of receiving inappropriate vs appropriate therapy (RR = 1.74 [95% CI = 1.07-2.82]). Comorbidity burden was not significantly associated with receipt of appropriate ICD therapies. Patterns were similar when separately examining shock or ATP therapies. CONCLUSIONS: In primary prevention ICD recipients, MCC burden was independently associated with an increased risk of inappropriate but not appropriate device therapies. Comorbidity burden should be considered when engaging patients in shared decision making about ICD implantation.

Ranolazine in High-Risk Patients With Implanted Cardioverter-Defibrillators: The RAID Trial.

BACKGROUND: Ventricular tachycardia (VT) and ventricular fibrillation (VF) remain a challenging problem in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine whether ranolazine administration decreases the likelihood of VT, VF, or death in patients with an ICD. METHODS: This was double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial in which high-risk ICD patients with ischemic or nonischemic cardiomyopathy were randomized to 1,000 mg ranolazine twice a day or placebo. The primary endpoint was VT or VF requiring appropriate ICD therapy or death, whichever occurred first. Pre-specified secondary endpoints included ICD shock for VT, VF, or death and recurrent VT or VF requiring ICD therapy. RESULTS: Among 1,012 ICD patients (510 randomized to ranolazine and 502 to placebo) the mean age was 64 ± 10 years and 18% were women. During 28 ± 16 months of follow-up there were 372 (37%) patients with primary endpoint, 270 (27%) patients with VT or VF, and 148 (15%) deaths. The blinded study drug was discontinued in 199 (39.6%) patients receiving placebo and in 253 (49.6%) patients receiving ranolazine (p = 0.001). The hazard ratio for ranolazine versus placebo was 0.84 (95% confidence interval: 0.67 to 1.05; p = 0.117) for VT, VF, or death. In a pre-specified secondary analysis, patients randomized to ranolazine had a marginally significant lower risk of ICD therapies for recurrent VT or VF (hazard ratio: 0.70; 95% confidence interval: 0.51 to 0.96; p = 0.028). There were no other significant treatment effects in other pre-specified secondary analyses, which included individual components of the primary endpoint, inappropriate shocks, cardiac hospitalizations, and quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: In high-risk ICD patients, treatment with ranolazine did not significantly reduce the incidence of the first VT or VF, or death. However, the study was underpowered to detect a difference in the primary endpoint. In prespecified secondary endpoint analyses, ranolazine administration was associated with a significant reduction in recurrent VT or VF requiring ICD therapy without evidence for increased mortality. (Ranolazine Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Trial [RAID]; NCT01215253).

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.

Device Therapies Among Patients Receiving Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators in the Cardiovascular Research Network.

BACKGROUND: Primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) reduce mortality in selected patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction by delivering therapies (antitachycardia pacing or shocks) to terminate potentially lethal arrhythmias; inappropriate therapies also occur. We assessed device therapies among adults receiving primary prevention ICDs in 7 healthcare systems. METHODS AND RESULTS: We linked medical record data, adjudicated device therapies, and the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry. Survival analysis evaluated therapy probability and predictors after ICD implant from 2006 to 2009, with attention to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Coverage With Evidence Development subgroups: left ventricular ejection fraction, 31% to 35%; nonischemic cardiomyopathy <9 months' duration; and New York Heart Association class IV heart failure with cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator. Among 2540 patients, 35% were <65 years old, 26% were women, and 59% were white. During 27 (median) months, 738 (29%) received ≥1 therapy. Three-year therapy risk was 36% (appropriate, 24%; inappropriate, 12%). Appropriate therapy was more common in men (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.43-2.35). Inappropriate therapy was more common in patients with atrial fibrillation (adjusted HR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.68-2.87), but less common among patients ≥65 years old versus younger (adjusted HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.54-0.95) and in recent implants (eg, in 2009 versus 2006; adjusted HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.46-0.95). In Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Coverage With Evidence Development analysis, inappropriate therapy was less common with cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator versus single chamber (adjusted HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.36-0.84); therapy risk did not otherwise differ for Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Coverage With Evidence Development subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: In this community cohort of primary prevention patients receiving ICD, therapy delivery varied across demographic and clinical characteristics, but did not differ meaningfully for Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Coverage With Evidence Development subgroups.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Long-Term Success of Irrigated Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation of Sustained Ventricular Tachycardia: Post-Approval THERMOCOOL VT Trial.

BACKGROUND: Radiofrequency catheter ablation is used to treat recurrent ventricular tachycardia (VT). OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated long-term safety and effectiveness of radiofrequency catheter ablation using an open-irrigated catheter. METHODS: Patients with sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia associated with coronary disease were analyzed for cardiovascular-specific adverse events within 7 days of treatment, hospitalization duration, 6-month sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia recurrence, quality of life measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, long-term (1-, 2-, and 3-year) survival, symptomatic VT control, and amiodarone use. RESULTS: Overall, 249 patients, mean age 67.4 years, were enrolled. The cardiovascular-specific adverse events rate was 3.9% (9 of 233) with no strokes. Noninducibility of targeted VT was achieved in 75.9% of patients. Post-ablation median hospitalization was 2 days. At 6 months, 62.0% (114 of 184) of patients had no sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia recurrence; the proportion of patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks decreased from 81.2% to 26.8% (p < 0.0001); the frequency of VT in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients with recurrences was reduced by ≥50% in 63.8% of patients; and the proportion with normal Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale scores increased from 48.8% to 69.1% (p < 0.001). Patient-reported VT remained steady for 1, 2, and 3 years at 22.7%, 29.8%, and 24.1%, respectively. Amiodarone use and hospitalization decreased from 55% and 77.2% pre-ablation to 23.3% and 30.7%, 18.5% and 36.7%, 17.7% and 31.3% at 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Radiofrequency catheter ablation reduced implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks and VT episodes and improved quality of life at 6 months. A steady 3-year nonrecurrence rate with reduced amiodarone use and hospitalizations indicate improved long-term outcomes. (NaviStar ThermoCool Catheter for Endocardial RF Ablation in Patients With Ventricular Tachycardia [THERMOCOOL VT]; NCT00412607).

Novel ICD Programming and Inappropriate ICD Therapy in CRT-D Versus ICD Patients: A MADIT-RIT Sub-Study.

BACKGROUND: The Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial-Reduce Inappropriate therapy (MADIT-RIT) trial showed a significant reduction in inappropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy in patients programmed to high-rate cut-off (Arm B) or delayed ventricular tachycardia therapy (Arm C), compared with conventional programming (Arm A). There is limited data on the effect of cardiac resynchronization therapy with a cardioverter defibrillator (CRT-D) on the effect of ICD programming. We aimed to elucidate the effect of CRT-D on ICD programming to reduce inappropriate ICD therapy in patients implanted with CRT-D or an ICD, enrolled in MADIT-RIT. METHODS AND RESULTS: The primary end point of this study was the first inappropriate ICD therapy. Secondary end points were inappropriate anti-tachycardia pacing and inappropriate ICD shock. The study enrolled 742 (49%) patients with an ICD and 757 (51%) patients with a CRT-D. Patients implanted with a CRT-D had 62% lower risk of inappropriate ICD therapy than those with an ICD only (hazard ratio [HR] =0.38, 95% confidence interval: 0.25-0.57; P<0.001). High-rate cut-off or delayed ventricular tachycardia therapy programming significantly reduced the risk of inappropriate ICD therapy compared with conventional ICD programming in ICD (HR=0.14 [B versus A]; HR=0.21 [C versus A]) and CRT-D patients (HR=0.15 [B versus A]; HR=0.23 [C versus A]; P<0.001 for all). There was a significant reduction in inappropriate anti-tachycardia pacings in both group and a significant reduction in inappropriate ICD shock in CRT-D patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients implanted with a CRT-D have lower risk of inappropriate ICD therapy than those with an ICD. Innovative ICD programming significantly reduces the risk of inappropriate ICD therapy in both ICD and CRT-D patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT00947310.