Ability to remotely monitor atrial high-rate episodes using a single-chamber implantable cardioverter-defibrillator with a floating atrial sensing dipole.

AIMS: To allow timely initiation of anticoagulation therapy for the prevention of stroke, the European guidelines on atrial fibrillation (AF) recommend remote monitoring (RM) of device-detected atrial high-rate episodes (AHREs) and progression of arrhythmia duration along pre-specified strata (6 min…<1 h, 1 h…<24 h, ≥ 24 h). We used the MATRIX registry data to assess the capability of a single-lead implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) with atrial sensing dipole (DX ICD system) to follow this recommendation in patients with standard indication for single-chamber ICD. METHODS AND RESULTS: In 1841 DX ICD patients with daily automatic RM transmissions, electrograms of first device-detected AHREs per patient in each duration stratum were adjudicated, and the corresponding positive predictive values (PPVs) for the detections to be true atrial arrhythmia were calculated. Moreover, the incidence and progression of new-onset AF was assessed in 1451 patients with no AF history. A total of 610 AHREs ≥6 min were adjudicated. The PPV was 95.1% (271 of 285) for episodes 6min…<1 h, 99.6% (253/254) for episodes 1 h…<24 h, 100% (71/71) for episodes ≥24 h, or 97.5% for all episodes (595/610). The incidence of new-onset AF was 8.2% (119/1451), and in 31.1% of them (37/119), new-onset AF progressed to a higher duration stratum. Nearly 80% of new-onset AF patients had high CHA2DS2-VASc stroke risk, and 70% were not on anticoagulation therapy. Age was the only significant predictor of new-onset AF. CONCLUSION: A 99.7% detection accuracy for AHRE ≥1 h in patients with DX ICD systems in combination with daily RM allows a reliable guideline-recommended screening for subclinical AF and monitoring of AF-duration progression.

A real-world experience of subcutaneous and transvenous implantable cardiac defibrillators-comparison with the PRAETORIAN study.

Background: PRAETORIAN is the first randomized controlled trial that demonstrated the noninferiority of subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) in comparison with transvenous ICD (TV-ICD). We retrospectively reviewed electronic records of patients with ICD implanted over the past 6 years, with the primary objective to compare our real-world single tertiary center experience with the randomized data from the PRAETORIAN study. Methods: Seventy S-ICD patients were compared with 197 TV-ICD patients, from July 2014 to June 2020 retrospectively, over a median period of 1304 days (296-2451 days). Primary composite endpoints included inappropriate shocks and device-related malfunctions. Results: Patients with S-ICD implantation were younger than those who received TV-ICD (mean, 49.7 years vs 63.9 years, p < .001). About 31.4% of S-ICDs were implanted for secondary prevention, and 58.6% of S-ICD patients had ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) with a median left ventricular ejection fraction of 32.5% (range: 10-67%). S-ICDs and TV-ICD had statistically similar inappropriate shocks (4.3% vs 4.6%, p = .78), device-related complications (11.4% vs 9.1%, p = .93), and the overall primary endpoints (15.7% vs 13.7%, p = .68). The findings remained the same even after age and gender adjustments and time-dependent analysis. Conclusion: Although single-center experience with a small number of S-ICD patients, results of the PRAETORIAN study has been replicated in our real-world experience of S-ICD and TV-ICD implantations across diverse etiologies, indications, and age groups confirming the comparable performance of S-ICD and TV-ICD when implanted in selected patients.

Rationale and study design of the MINERVA study: Multicentre Investigation of Novel Electrocardiogram Risk markers in Ventricular Arrhythmia prediction-UK multicentre collaboration.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study is to assess the ability of two new ECG markers (Regional Repolarisation Instability Index (R2I2) and Peak Electrical Restitution Slope) to predict sudden cardiac death (SCD) or ventricular arrhythmia (VA) events in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy undergoing implantation of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator for primary prevention indication. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Multicentre Investigation of Novel Electrocardiogram Risk markers in Ventricular Arrhythmia prediction is a prospective, open label, single blinded, multicentre observational study to establish the efficacy of two ECG biomarkers in predicting VA risk. 440 participants with ischaemic cardiomyopathy undergoing routine first time implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation for primary prevention indication are currently being recruited. An electrophysiological (EP) study is performed using a non-invasive programmed electrical stimulation protocol via the implanted device. All participants will undergo the EP study hence no randomisation is required. Participants will be followed up over a minimum of 18 months and up to 3 years. The first patient was recruited in August 2016 and the study will be completed at the final participant follow-up visit. The primary endpoint is ventricular fibrillation or sustained ventricular tachycardia >200 beats/min as recorded by the ICD. The secondary endpoint is SCD. Analysis of the ECG data obtained during the EP study will be performed by the core lab where blinding of patient health status and endpoints will be maintained. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted by Research Ethics Committees Northern Ireland (reference no. 16/NI/0069). The results will inform the design of a definitive Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT). Dissemination will include peer reviewed journal articles reporting the qualitative and quantitative results, as well as presentations at conferences and lay summaries. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03022487.

Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: long-term results of the EFFORTLESS study.

AIMS: To report 5-year outcomes of EFFORTLESS registry patients with early generation subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) devices. METHODS AND RESULTS: Kaplan-Meier, trend and multivariable analyses were performed for mortality and late (years 2-5) complications, appropriate shock (AS) and inappropriate shock (IAS) rates. Nine hundred and eighty-four of 994 enrolled patients with diverse diagnoses (28% female, 48 ± 17 years, body mass index 27 ± 6 kg/m2, ejection fraction 43 ± 18%) underwent S-ICD implantation. Median follow-up was 5.1 years (interquartile range 4.7-5.5 years). All-cause mortality was 9.3% (95% confidence interval 7.2-11.3%) at 5 years; 703 patients remained in follow-up on study completion, 171 withdrew including 87 (8.8%) with device explanted, and 65 (6.6%) lost to follow-up. Of the explants, only 20 (2.0%) patients needed a transvenous device for pacing indications. First and final shock efficacy for discrete ventricular arrhythmias was consistent at 90% and 98%, respectively, with storm episode final shock efficacy at 95.2%. Time to therapy remained unaltered. Overall 1- and 5-year complication rates were 8.9% and 15.2%, respectively. Early complications did not predict later complications. There were no structural lead failures. Inappropriate shock rates at 1 and 5 years were 8.7% and 16.9%, respectively. Self-terminating inappropriately sensed episodes predicted late IAS. Predictors of late AS included self-terminating appropriately sensed episodes and earlier AS. CONCLUSION: In this diverse S-ICD registry population, spontaneous shock efficacy was consistently high over 5 years. Very few patients underwent S-ICD replacement with a transvenous device for pacing indications. Treated and self-terminating arrhythmic episodes predict future shock events, which should encourage more personalized device optimization.

Primary Results From the Understanding Outcomes With the S-ICD in Primary Prevention Patients With Low Ejection Fraction (UNTOUCHED) Trial.

BACKGROUND: The subcutaneous (S) implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is safe and effective for sudden cardiac death prevention. However, patients in previous S-ICD studies had fewer comorbidities, had less left ventricular dysfunction, and received more inappropriate shocks (IAS) than in typical transvenous ICD trials. The UNTOUCHED trial (Understanding Outcomes With the S-ICD in Primary Prevention Patients With Low Ejection Fraction) was designed to evaluate the IAS rate in a more typical, contemporary ICD patient population implanted with the S-ICD using standardized programming and enhanced discrimination algorithms. METHODS: Primary prevention patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% and no pacing indications were included. Generation 2 or 3 S-ICD devices were implanted and programmed with rate-based therapy delivery for rates ≥250 beats per minute and morphology discrimination for rates ≥200 and <250 beats per minute. Patients were followed for 18 months. The primary end point was the IAS-free rate compared with a 91.6% performance goal, derived from the results for the ICD-only patients in the MADIT-RIT study (Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial-Reduce Inappropriate Therapy). Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed to evaluate event-free rates for IAS, all-cause shock, and complications. Multivariable proportional hazard analysis was performed to determine predictors of end points. RESULTS: S-ICD implant was attempted in 1116 patients, and 1111 patients were included in postimplant follow-up analysis. The cohort had a mean age of 55.8±12.4 years, 25.6% were women, 23.4% were Black, 53.5% had ischemic heart disease, 87.7% had symptomatic heart failure, and the mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 26.4±5.8%. Eighteen-month freedom from IAS was 95.9% (lower confidence limit, 94.8%). Predictors of reduced incidence of IAS were implanting the most recent generation of device, using the 3-incision technique, no history of atrial fibrillation, and ischemic cause. The 18-month all-cause shock-free rate was 90.6% (lower confidence limit, 89.0%), meeting the prespecified performance goal of 85.8%. Conversion success rate for appropriate, discrete episodes was 98.4%. Complication-free rate at 18 months was 92.7%. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates high efficacy and safety with contemporary S-ICD devices and programming despite the relatively high incidence of comorbidities in comparison with earlier S-ICD trials. The inappropriate shock rate (3.1% at 1 year) is the lowest reported for the S-ICD and lower than many transvenous ICD studies using contemporary programming to reduce IAS. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02433379.

Quality of life, depression, and anxiety in patients with a subcutaneous versus transvenous defibrillator system.

BACKGROUND: Use of the subcutaneous implantable defibrillator (S-ICD) has increased because the device received US Food and Drug Administration approval in 2012, but we still know little about whether the quality of life (QoL) of patients with an S-ICD versus a transvenous ICD (TV-ICD) is comparable. We compared S-ICD patients with TV-ICD patients on QoL, depression, and anxiety up to 12 months' follow-up. METHODS: A matched cohort of S-ICD (N = 167) and TV-ICD patients (N = 167) completed measures on QoL, depression, anxiety, and personality at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months post implant. Data were analyzed using multivariable modeling with repeated measures. RESULTS: In adjusted analyses, we found no statistically significant differences between cohorts on physical and mental QoL and depression (all Ps > .05), while S-ICD patients reported lower anxiety than TV-ICD patients (P = 0.0007). Both cohorts experienced improvements in physical and mental QoL and symptoms of depression and anxiety over time (all Ps < .001), primarily between implant and 3 months. These improvements were similar for both cohorts with respect to physical and mental QoL and anxiety (Ps > .05), while S-ICD patients experienced greater reductions in depressive symptoms (P = .0317). CONCLUSION: The QoL and depression levels were similar in patients with an S-ICD and a TV-ICD up to 12 months' follow-up, while S-ICD patients reported lower anxiety levels and a greater reduction in depression over time as compared to TV-ICD patients. This knowledge may be important for patients and clinicians, if the indication for implantation allows both the S-ICD and the TV-ICD, making a choice possible.

Understanding Outcomes with the EMBLEM S-ICD in Primary Prevention Patients with Low EF Study (UNTOUCHED): Clinical characteristics and perioperative results.

BACKGROUND: The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) has shown favorable outcomes in large registries with broad inclusion criteria. The cohorts reported had less heart disease and fewer comorbidities than standard ICD populations. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to characterize acute performance for primary prevention patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35% (primary prevention ≤35%). METHODS: Primary prevention ≤35% patients with no prior documented sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT), pacing indication, end-stage heart failure, or advanced renal failure were prospectively enrolled. Analyses included descriptive statistics, Kaplan-Meier time to event, and multivariable linear and logistic regression. RESULTS: In 1112 of 1116 patients, an S-ICD was successfully implanted (99.6%). Predictors for longer procedure time included 3-incision technique, higher body mass index (BMI), performing defibrillation testing (DFT), imaging, younger age, black race, and European vs North American centers. Patients undergoing DFT (82%) were successfully converted (99.2%; 93.5% converting at ≤65 J). Higher BMI was predictive of failing DFT at ≤65 J. The rate of 30-day freedom from complications was 95.8%. Most complications involved postoperative healing (45%) or interventions after DFT or impedance check (19%). CONCLUSION: The procedural outcome data of UNTOUCHED reinforce that S-ICD therapy has low perioperative complication rates and high conversion efficacy of induced ventricular fibrillation, even in a higher-risk cohort with low LVEF and more comorbidities than previous S-ICD studies. Higher BMI warrants more careful attention to implant technique.

Propensity score matched comparison of subcutaneous and transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy in the SIMPLE and EFFORTLESS studies.

Aims: Comparison of outcomes between subcutaneous and transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD and TV-ICD) therapy is hampered by varying patient characteristics and complication definitions. The aim of this analysis is to compare clinical outcomes of S-ICD and TV-ICD therapy in a matched cohort. Methods and results: Patients implanted with de novo implantable cardioverter-defibrillators without need for pacing were selected from two studies: SIMPLE (n = 1091 single and n = 553 dual chamber TV-ICDs) and EFFORTLESS (n = 798 S-ICDs). Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients were 1:1 matched on propensity score to TV-ICD patients. Propensity scores were calculated using 15 baseline characteristics including diagnosis. The Kaplan-Meier estimates for complications requiring invasive intervention, appropriate shocks, and inappropriate shocks were calculated at 3 years follow-up. The primary analysis yielded 391 patients pairs with balanced baseline characteristics, with mean age 55 ± 14 years, 49% ischaemic cardiomyopathy, mean left ventricular ejection fraction 40%, 71% primary prevention, and 89% of TV-ICDs were single chamber. Follow-up was mean 2.9 years in the S-ICD arm vs. 3.3 in the TV-ICD arm. All-cause complications occurred in 9.0% of S-ICD vs. 6.5% of TV-ICD patients, P = 0.29. Appropriate shocks occurred in 9.9% of S-ICD vs. 13.8% in TV-ICD patients, P = 0.03 and inappropriate shocks in 11.9% in S-ICD vs. 8.9% in TV-ICD patients (P = 0.07). Total shock burden (20 vs. 31, P = 0.05) and appropriate shock burden per 100 patients years (9 vs. 18, P = 0.02) were lower for S-ICD patients, while inappropriate shock burden was equal (11 vs. 13, P = 0.56). Conclusion: The earliest experience of the S-ICD demonstrates similar outcomes as contemporary TV-ICD therapy in a matched comparison with predominately single-chamber devices at 3 years follow-up.

Implant and Midterm Outcomes of the Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Registry: The EFFORTLESS Study.

BACKGROUND: The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) was developed to defibrillate ventricular arrhythmias, avoiding drawbacks of transvenous leads. The global EFFORTLESS S-ICD (Evaluation oF FactORs ImpacTing CLinical Outcome and Cost EffectiveneSS of the S-ICD) registry is collecting outcomes in 985 patients during a 5-year follow-up. OBJECTIVES: The primary goal of the EFFORTLESS registry is to determine the safety of the S-ICD by evaluating complications and inappropriate shock rate. METHODS: This is the first report on the full patient cohort and study endpoints with follow-up ≥1 year. The predefined endpoints are 30- and 360-day complications, and shocks for atrial fibrillation or supraventricular tachycardia. RESULTS: Patients were followed for 3.1 ± 1.5 years and 82 completed the study protocol 5-year visit. Average age was 48 years, 28% were women, ejection fraction was 43 ± 18%, and 65% had a primary prevention indication. The S-ICD system and procedure complication rate was 4.1% at 30 days and 8.4% at 360 days. The 1-year complication rate trended toward improvement from the first to last quartile of enrollment (11.3% [quartile 1]) to 7.8% [quartile 2], 6.6% [quartile 3], and 7.4% [quartile 4]; quartile 1 vs. quartiles 2 to 4; p = 0.06). Few device extractions occurred due to need for antitachycardia (n = 5), or biventricular (n = 4) or bradycardia pacing (n = 1). Inappropriate shocks occurred in 8.1% at 1 year and 11.7% after 3.1 years. At implant, 99.5% of patients had a successful conversion of induced ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation. The 1- and 5-year rates of appropriate shock were 5.8% and 13.5%, respectively. Conversion success for discrete spontaneous episodes was 97.4% overall. CONCLUSIONS: This registry demonstrates that the S-ICD fulfills predefined endpoints for safety and efficacy. Midterm performance rates on complications, inappropriate shocks, and conversion efficacy were comparable to rates observed in transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator studies. (Evaluation oF Factors ImpacTing CLinical Outcome and Cost EffectiveneSS of the S-ICD [The EFFORTLESS S-ICD Registry]; NCT01085435).

Performance of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in patients with a primary prevention indication with and without a reduced ejection fraction versus patients with a secondary prevention indication.

BACKGROUND: The subcutaneous implantable defibrillator (S-ICD) provides an alternative to the transvenous ICD for the prevention of sudden cardiac death, but has not been well studied in the most commonly treated transvenous ICD patient population, namely, primary prevention (PP) patients with left ventricular dysfunction. OBJECTIVE: The analyses in the present study were designed to compare clinical outcomes for PP patients with and without a reduced ejection fraction (EF) and secondary prevention (SP) patients implanted with the S-ICD. METHODS: All patients 18 years and older from the S-ICD IDE study and the EFFORTLESS Registry with available data as of November 18, 2013, were included (n = 856; mean follow-up duration 644 days). Outcomes were evaluated in 2 analyses: (1) comparing all PP patients (n = 603, 70.4%) with all SP patients (n = 253, 29.6%) and (2) comparing all PP patients with an EF ≤35% (n = 379) with those with an EF >35% (n = 149, 17.4%). RESULTS: No differences were observed in mortality, complications, inappropriate therapy, or ability to convert ventricular tachyarrhythmias between SP and PP patients. However, SP patients had a higher incidence of appropriate therapy than did PP patients (11.9% vs 5.0%; P = .0004). In the PP subanalysis, the cohort with an EF ≤35% had significantly older patients with more comorbidities and higher mortality (3.0% annually vs 0.0%). Despite these differences, device-related complications, conversion efficacy, and incidence of inappropriate shock therapies were not significantly different between PP subgroups. CONCLUSION: The S-ICD performs well in protecting patients with either PP or SP implant indications from sudden cardiac death. Within PP patients, device performance was independent of EF.

A Comparison of the Quality of Life of Patients With an Entirely Subcutaneous Implantable Defibrillator System Versus a Transvenous System (from the EFFORTLESS S-ICD Quality of Life Substudy).

The first clinical results from the Evaluation of Factors Impacting Clinical Outcome and Cost Effectiveness of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (EFFORTLESS S-ICD) Registry on the entirely S-ICD system are promising, but the impact of the S-ICD system on patients' quality of life (QoL) is not known. We evaluated the QoL of patients with an S-ICD against an unrelated cohort with a transvenous (TV)-ICD system during 6 months of follow-up. Consecutively implanted patients with an S-ICD system were matched with patients with a TV-ICD system on a priori selected variables including baseline QoL. QoL was measured with the Short-Form Health Survey at baseline, 3, and 6 months after implant and compared using multivariable modeling with repeated measures. Patients with an S-ICD (n = 167) versus a TV-ICD system (n = 167) did not differ significantly on physical (p = 0.8157) and mental QoL scores (p = 0.9080) across baseline, 3, and 6 months after implantation in adjusted analyses. The evolution in physical (p = 0.0503) and mental scores (p = 0.3772) during follow-up was similar for both cohorts, as indicated by the nonsignificant interaction effect for ICD system by time. Both patients with an S-ICD system and a TV-ICD system experienced significant improvements in physical and mental QoL between time of implant and 3 months (both p's <0.0001) and between time of implant and 6 months (both p's <0.0001) but not between 3 and 6 months (both p's >0.05). In conclusion, these first results show that the QoL of patients with an S-ICD versus TV-ICD system is similar and that patients with either system experience improvements in QoL on the short term.

The learning curve associated with the introduction of the subcutaneous implantable defibrillator.

AIMS: The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) was introduced to overcome complications related to transvenous leads. Adoption of the S-ICD requires implanters to learn a new implantation technique. The aim of this study was to assess the learning curve for S-ICD implanters with respect to implant-related complications, procedure time, and inappropriate shocks (IASs). METHODS AND RESULTS: In a pooled cohort from two clinical S-ICD databases, the IDE Trial and the EFFORTLESS Registry, complications, IASs at 180 days follow-up and implant procedure duration were assessed. Patients were grouped in quartiles based on experience of the implanter and Kaplan-Meier estimates of complication and IAS rates were calculated. A total of 882 patients implanted in 61 centres by 107 implanters with a median of 4 implants (IQR 1,8) were analysed. There were a total of 59 patients with complications and 48 patients with IAS. The complication rate decreased significantly from 9.8% in Quartile 1 (least experience) to 5.4% in Quartile 4 (most experience) (P = 0.02) and non-significantly for IAS from 7.9 to 4.8% (P = 0.10). Multivariable analysis demonstrated a hazard ratio of 0.78 (P = 0.045) for complications and 1.01 (P = 0.958) for IAS. Dual-zone programming increased with experience of the individual implanter (P < 0.001), which reduced IAS significantly in the multivariable model (HR 0.44, P = 0.01). Procedure time decreased from 75 to 65 min (P < 0.001). The complication rate and procedure time stabilized after Quartile 2 (>13 implants). CONCLUSION: There is a short and significant learning curve associated with physicians adopting the S-ICD. Performance stabilizes after 13 implants.

Longevity of the Subcutaneous Implantable Defibrillator: Long-Term Follow-Up of the European Regulatory Trial Cohort.

BACKGROUND: The recent advent of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillators (S-ICDs) has provided investigators with a safe and effective new therapy in patients at risk of sudden cardiac death. At present, no data are available with regard to the longevity of these new devices. This study evaluated the longevity of the S-ICD system. METHODS AND RESULTS: All patients enrolled in the European Regulatory Trial were included in the analysis. During follow-up, time and causes of device replacement or explantation were assessed and categorized. Device longevity was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Fifty-five patients were followed for a median of 5.8 years. During follow-up, 26 (47%) patients underwent device replacement and 5 (9%) underwent device explantation. Median time to replacement was 5.0 years (Q1-Q3, 4.4-5.6 years). Replacement was caused by battery depletion in 25 patients (92%), of which 5 within 1.5 years because of premature battery depletion, and by infection in 1 patient (2%). Replacement for a transvenous ICD system was required in 4 patients (7%) because of ineffective defibrillation in 1 (0.003 per patient-year), need for resynchronization therapy in 2 (0.01 per patient-year), and for antibradycardia pacing in 1 (0.003 per patient-year). At 5 years follow-up, 71% of devices were still in service. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides the first estimate of S-ICD system longevity since its introduction in clinical practice. Median longevity of the first generation S-ICD system was 5.0 years. The majority of devices were replaced because of battery depletion. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01117792.

Inappropriate shocks in the subcutaneous ICD: Incidence, predictors and management.

BACKGROUND: The entirely subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) eliminates the need for transvenous leads, and therefore has the potential to improve lead-longevity and reduce lead-related complications. The S-ICD has a morphology-based sensing algorithm of which inappropriate shocks have been reported. METHODS: We analyzed the incidence, predictors and management of inappropriate shocks in the EFFORTLESS S-ICD Registry, which collects S-ICD implantation information and follow-up data from clinical centers in Europe and New Zealand. RESULTS: During a follow-up of 21 ± 13 months, 48 out of 581 S-ICD patients (71% male, age 49 ± 18 years) experienced 101 inappropriate shocks (8.3%). The most common cause was cardiac signal oversensing (73%), such as T-wave oversensing. Eighteen shocks (18%) were due to supraventricular tachycardias (SVT), of which 15 occurred in the shock-only zone. Cox-proportional hazard modeling using time-dependent covariates demonstrated that patients with a history of atrial fibrillation (HR 2.4) and patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HR 4.6) had an increased risk for inappropriate shocks, while programming the primary vector for sensing (from xyphoid to V6) reduced the risk. Reprogramming or optimization of SVT treatment after the first clinical event of inappropriate shock was successful in preventing further inappropriate shocks for cardiac oversensing and SVT events. CONCLUSIONS: Inappropriate shocks, mainly due to cardiac oversensing, occurred in 8.3% of the S-ICD patients. Patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy or a history of atrial fibrillation were at increased risk, warranting specific attention for sensing and programming in this population.

Safety and Efficacy of the Totally Subcutaneous Implantable Defibrillator: 2-Year Results From a Pooled Analysis of the IDE Study and EFFORTLESS Registry.

BACKGROUND: The entirely subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) is the first implantable defibrillator that avoids placing electrodes in or around the heart. Two large prospective studies (IDE [S-ICD System IDE Clinical Investigation] and EFFORTLESS [Boston Scientific Post Market S-ICD Registry]) have reported 6-month to 1-year data on the S-ICD. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the S-ICD in a large diverse population. METHODS: Data from the IDE and EFFORTLESS studies were pooled. Shocks were independently adjudicated, and complications were measured with a standardized classification scheme. Enrollment date quartiles were used to assess event rates over time. RESULTS: Eight hundred eighty-two patients who underwent implantation were followed for 651±345 days. Spontaneous ventricular tachyarrhythmia (VT)/ventricular fibrillation (VF) events (n=111) were treated in 59 patients; 100 (90.1%) events were terminated with 1 shock, and 109 events (98.2%) were terminated within the 5 available shocks. The estimated 3-year inappropriate shock rate was 13.1%. Estimated 3-year, all-cause mortality was 4.7% (95% confidence interval: 0.9% to 8.5%), with 26 deaths (2.9%). Device-related complications occurred in 11.1% of patients at 3 years. There were no electrode failures, and no S-ICD-related endocarditis or bacteremia occurred. Three devices (0.3%) were replaced for right ventricular pacing. The 6-month complication rate decreased by quartile of enrollment (Q1: 8.9%; Q4: 5.5%), and there was a trend toward a reduction in inappropriate shocks (Q1: 6.9% Q4: 4.5%). CONCLUSIONS: The S-ICD demonstrated high efficacy for VT/VF. Complications and inappropriate shock rates were reduced consistently with strategic programming and as operator experience increased. These data provide further evidence for the safety and efficacy of the S-ICD. (Boston Scientific Post Market S-ICD Registry [EFFORTLESS]; NCT01085435; S-ICD® System IDE Clinical Study; NCT01064076).

Worldwide experience with a totally subcutaneous implantable defibrillator: early results from the EFFORTLESS S-ICD Registry.

AIMS: The totally subcutaneous implantable-defibrillator (S-ICD) is a new alternative to the conventional transvenous ICD system to minimize intravascular lead complications. There are limited data describing the long-term performance of the S-ICD. This paper presents the first large international patient population collected as part of the EFFORTLESS S-ICD Registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: The EFFORTLESS S-ICD Registry is a non-randomized, standard of care, multicentre Registry designed to collect long-term, system-related, clinical, and patient reported outcome data from S-ICD implanted patients since June 2009. Follow-up data are systematically collected over 60-month post-implant including Quality of Life. The study population of 472 patients of which 241 (51%) were enrolled prospectively has a mean follow-up duration of 558 days (range 13-1342 days, median 498 days), 72% male, mean age of 49 ± 18 years (range 9-88 years), 42% mean left ventricular ejection fraction. Complication-free rates were 97 and 94%, at 30 and 360 days, respectively. Three hundred and seventeen spontaneous episodes were recorded in 85 patients during the follow-up period. Of these episodes, 169 (53%) received therapy, 93 being for Ventricular Tachycardia/Fibrillation (VT/VF). One patient died of recurrent VF and severe bradycardia. Regarding discrete VT/VF episodes, first shock conversion efficacy was 88% with 100% overall successful clinical conversion after a maximum of five shocks. The 360-day inappropriate shock rate was 7% with the vast majority occurring for oversensing (62/73 episodes), primarily of cardiac signals (94% of oversensed episodes). CONCLUSION: The first large cohort of real-world data from an International patient S-ICD population demonstrates appropriate system performance with clinical event rates and inappropriate shock rates comparable with those reported for conventional ICDs. Clinical trial registration URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier NCT01085435.

Potential value of automated daily screening of cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator diagnostics for prediction of major cardiovascular events: results from Home-CARE (Home Monitoring in Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy) study.

AIM: To investigate whether diagnostic data from implanted cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators (CRT-Ds) retrieved automatically at 24 h intervals via a Home Monitoring function can enable dynamic prediction of cardiovascular hospitalization and death. METHODS AND RESULTS: Three hundred and seventy-seven heart failure patients received CRT-Ds with Home Monitoring option. Data on all deaths and hospitalizations due to cardiovascular reasons and Home Monitoring data were collected prospectively during 1-year follow-up to develop a predictive algorithm with a predefined specificity of 99.5%. Seven parameters were included in the algorithm: mean heart rate over 24 h, heart rate at rest, patient activity, frequency of ventricular extrasystoles, atrial-atrial intervals (heart rate variability), right ventricular pacing impedance, and painless shock impedance. The algorithm was developed using a 25-day monitoring window ending 3 days before hospitalization or death. While the retrospective sensitivities of the individual parameters ranged from 23.6 to 50.0%, the combination of all parameters was 65.4% sensitive in detecting cardiovascular hospitalizations and deaths with 99.5% specificity (corresponding to 1.83 false-positive detections per patient-year of follow-up). The estimated relative risk of an event was 7.15-fold higher after a positive predictor finding than after a negative predictor finding. CONCLUSION: We developed an automated algorithm for dynamic prediction of cardiovascular events in patients treated with CRT-D devices capable of daily transmission of their diagnostic data via Home Monitoring. This tool may increase patients' quality of life and reduce morbidity, mortality, and health economic burden, it now warrants prospective studies. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00376116.

An entirely subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator.

BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) prevent sudden death from cardiac causes in selected patients but require the use of transvenous lead systems. To eliminate the need for venous access, we designed and tested an entirely subcutaneous ICD system. METHODS: First, we conducted two short-term clinical trials to identify a suitable device configuration and assess energy requirements. We evaluated four subcutaneous ICD configurations in 78 patients who were candidates for ICD implantation and subsequently tested the best configuration in 49 additional patients to determine the subcutaneous defibrillation threshold in comparison with that of the standard transvenous ICD. Then we evaluated the long-term use of subcutaneous ICDs in a pilot study, involving 6 patients, which was followed by a trial involving 55 patients. RESULTS: The best device configuration consisted of a parasternal electrode and a left lateral thoracic pulse generator. This configuration was as effective as a transvenous ICD for terminating induced ventricular fibrillation, albeit with a significantly higher mean (+/-SD) energy requirement (36.6+/-19.8 J vs. 11.1+/-8.5 J). Among patients who received a permanent subcutaneous ICD, ventricular fibrillation was successfully detected in 100% of 137 induced episodes. Induced ventricular fibrillation was converted twice in 58 of 59 patients (98%) with the delivery of 65-J shocks in two consecutive tests. Clinically significant adverse events included two pocket infections and four lead revisions. After a mean of 10+/-1 months, the device had successfully detected and treated all 12 episodes of spontaneous, sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmia. CONCLUSIONS: In small, nonrandomized studies, an entirely subcutaneous ICD consistently detected and converted ventricular fibrillation induced during electrophysiological testing. The device also successfully detected and treated all 12 episodes of spontaneous, sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmia. (ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00399217 and NCT00853645.)