RESUMO
Background: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillation (ICD) shocks after left ventricular assist device therapy (LVAD) are associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Little is known about the association of pre-LVAD ICD shocks on post-LVAD clinical outcomes and whether LVAD therapy affects the prevalence of ICD shocks. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine whether pre-LVAD ICD shocks are associated with adverse clinical outcomes post-LVAD and to compare the prevalence of ICD shocks before and after LVAD therapy. Methods: Patients 18 years or older with continuous-flow LVADs and ICDs were retrospectively identified within the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center system from 2006-2020. We analyzed the association between appropriate ICD shocks within 1 year pre-LVAD with a primary composite outcome of death, stroke, and pump thrombosis and secondary outcomes of post-LVAD ICD shocks and ICD shock hospitalizations. Results: Among 309 individuals, average age was 57 ± 12 years, 87% were male, 80% had ischemic cardiomyopathy, and 42% were bridge to transplantation. Seventy-one patients (23%) experienced pre-LVAD shocks, and 69 (22%) experienced post-LVAD shocks. The overall prevalence of shocks pre-LVAD and post-LVAD were not different. Pre-LVAD ICD shocks were not associated with the composite outcome. Pre-LVAD ICD shocks were found to predict post-LVAD shocks (hazard ratio [HR] 5.7; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.42-9.48; P <.0001) and hospitalizations related to ICD shocks from ventricular arrhythmia (HR 10.34; 95% CI 4.1-25.7; P <.0001). Conclusion: Pre-LVAD ICD shocks predicted post-LVAD ICD shocks and hospitalizations but were not associated with the composite outcome of death, pump thrombosis, or stroke at 1 year. The prevalence of appropriate ICD shocks was similar before and after LVAD implantation in the entire cohort.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) is common in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), however, many antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) are contraindicated. US guidelines recommend avoiding pure class III antiarrhythmics such as dofetilide in patients with significant LVH due to concern for an increased risk of death, however, clinical data is lacking. We sought to determine if dofetilide use was associated with increased mortality in patients with LVH. METHODS: Patients ≥18 years of age with AF and LVH ≥ 1.4 cm were included. A group of patients treated with dofetilide and a control group of patients without a history of AAD use were propensity matched. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 3 years and secondary outcomes were total number of all-cause hospitalizations and hospitalizations related to AF. RESULTS: There were 359 patients in each of the groups. Baseline variables were well-matched. The primary outcome of all-cause mortality occurred in 7% of patients in the dofetilide group and 12% of patients in the control group (hazard ratio: 0.90, 95% confidence interval: 0.53-1.53). Total all-cause hospitalizations were higher in the control group but hospitalizations for AF were no different. CONCLUSIONS: In a propensity-matched cohort of 718 patients with AF and LVH, dofetilide was not associated with increased mortality at 3 years. Our study adds to prior data demonstrating the safety of dofetilide in this population despite guideline recommendations against its use. Given the limited options for AF management in LVH patients, dofetilide may be reasonable for symptomatic AF management.