Electrocardiographic changes during haemodialysis and the potential impact on subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator eligibility.

INTRODUCTION: Haemodialysis patients who require defibrillator therapy are expected to benefit from the entirely avascular subcutaneous defibrillator (S-ICD), but haemodialysis is associated with dynamic changes in R and T wave amplitude which can impact S-ICD eligibility. A continuous assessment of S-ICD eligibility during haemodialysis has not previously been performed. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Continuous surface ECG recordings were obtained from a cohort of patients undergoing maintenance haemodialysis, but without an indication for an ICD. Automated vector screening was retrospectively performed at one-minute intervals throughout the dialysis session. Variations in S-ICD eligibility were calculated and in vectors with high degrees of variation, the underlying mechanism was identified. RESULTS: 72 vector recordings (mean duration 254.1 ± 6.0 min) were obtained from 24 patients (mean age 64.3 ± 5.5 years, 68% male). At the start of haemodialysis 47 vectors were S-ICD eligible (65.2%). At the end of session, all of these vectors had remained eligible, and an additional 6 vectors had also become eligible (73.6%). High vector score variability was observed in 7 patients and the commonest cause was a progressive change in R:T ratio (71.5%). CONCLUSION: In a haemodialysis population, a single haemodialysis session can be associated with a potential change in S-ICD eligibility in 8.4% of vectors, with up to 12.5% of vectors showing high degrees of variability, most commonly due to variations in R:T ratio. In an S-ICD population with similar characteristics S-ICD screening prior to haemodialysis would be expected to more accurately identify vectors that retain eligibility.

Personalized subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator sensing vectors generated by mathematical rotation increase device eligibility whilst preserving device performance.

AIMS: Approximately 5.7% of potential subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) recipients are ineligible by virtue of their vector morphology, with higher rates of ineligibility observed in some at-risk groups. Mathematical vector rotation is a novel technique that can generate a personalized sensing vector, one with maximal R:T ratio, using electrocardiogram (ECG) signal recorded from the present S-ICD location. METHODS AND RESULTS: A cohort of S-ICD ineligible patients were identified through ECG screening of ICD patients with no ventricular pacing requirement and their personalized vectors were generated using ECG signal from a Holter monitor. Subcutaneous ICD eligibility in this cohort was then recalculated. In a separate cohort, episodes of arrhythmia were recorded in patients undergoing arrhythmia induction, and arrhythmia detection in standard S-ICD vectors was compared to rotated vectors using an S-ICD simulator. Ninety-two participants (mean age 64.9 ± 2.7 years) underwent screening and 5.4% were found to be S-ICD ineligible. Personalized vector generation increased the R:T ratio in these vectors from 2.21 to 7.21 (4.54-9.88, P < 0.001) increasing the cohort eligibility from 94.6% to 100%. Rotated S-ICD vectors also showed high ventricular fibrillation (VF) detection sensitivity (97.8%), low time to VF detection (6.1 s), and excellent tachycardia discrimination (sensitivity 96%, specificity 88%), with no significant differences between rotated and standard vectors. CONCLUSION: In S-ICD ineligible patients, mathematical vector rotation can generate a personalized vector that is associated with a significant increase in R:T ratio, resulting in universal device eligibility in our cohort. Ventricular fibrillation detection efficacy, time to VF detection, and tachycardia discrimination were not affected by vector rotation.

S-ICD screening revisited: do passing vectors sometimes fail?

INTRODUCTION: Pre-implant ECG screening is performed to ensure that S-ICD recipients have at least one suitable sensing vector, yet cardiac over-sensing remains the commonest cause of inappropriate shock therapy in the S-ICD population. One explanation would be the presence of dynamic variations in ECG morphology that result in variations in vector eligibility. METHODS: Adult ICD patients had a 24-h ambulatory ECG performed using a digital Holter positioned to record all three S-ICD vectors. Using an S-ICD simulator, automated screening was then performed at one-minute intervals. In vectors with a mean vector score > 100 (the accepted value for a passing vector when screened on a single occasion), the percentage of all screening assessments that passed, eligible vector time (EVT), was calculated. EVT was compared statistically to QRS duration, corrected time to peak T (pTc) and mean vector score. RESULTS: Ambulatory monitoring was performed in 14 patients (mean age 63.7 ± 5.2 years, 71.4% male) with 42 vectors analysed. In 19 vectors the mean vector score was > 100. Within this "passing" cohort EVT varied between 42.7% and 100%. In 7/19 (37%) the EVT was <75%. A negative correlation was found between QRS duration and EVT (Pearson correlation -.60, p = .007). No correlation was found between EVT and mean vector score or pTc. CONCLUSION: Vector eligibility is dynamic. When "passing" vectors are subjected to repeated screening, 37% are found to be ineligible, more than a quarter of the time. Further investigation is required to determine the clinical significance of these findings.

Prospective blinded evaluation of a novel sensing methodology designed to reduce inappropriate shocks by the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator.

BACKGROUND: Most inappropriate shocks from the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) are caused by cardiac oversensing. A novel sensing methodology, SMART Pass (SP; Boston Scientific Corporation, Natick, MA), aims to reduce cardiac oversensing. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of SP on shocks in ambulatory patients with S-ICD. METHODS: Patients implanted in 2015-2016 and enrolled in a remote patient monitoring system were included and followed for 1 year. Shocks were adjudicated by 3 independent blinded reviewers as appropriate or inappropriate. Shock incidence was calculated for patients with SP programmed enabled or disabled at implantation, censoring patients when SP programming changed or at the last transmission. The SP setting (enabled vs disabled) was modeled as a time-dependent Cox regression variable. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 1984 patients, and a total of 880 shocks were adjudicated. At implantation, SP was enabled in 655 patients (33%) and disabled in 1329 patients (67%). SP reduced the risk for the first inappropriate shock by 50% (P < .001) and the risk for all inappropriate shocks by 68% (P < .001) in multivariate analysis adjusted for age and device programming. The incidence of inappropriate shocks was 4.3% in the SP enabled arm vs 9.7% in the SP disabled arm. The incidence of appropriate shocks was similar (5.2% vs 6.6%; P = .18) along with the time to treat the first appropriate shock (17.4 seconds vs 16.7 seconds; P = .92) for SP enabled vs disabled, respectively. CONCLUSION: This prospective blinded evaluation of the SP filter demonstrates that enabling the SP filter results in a significant reduction of inappropriate shocks by the S-ICD without a negative effect on appropriate shocks.

Sensitivity and specificity of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator pre-implant screening tool.

BACKGROUND: The sensitivity and specificity of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) pre-implant screening tool required clinical evaluation. METHODS: Bipolar vectors were derived from electrodes positioned at locations similar to those employed for S-ICD sensing and pre-implant screening electrodes, and recordings collected through 80-electrode PRIME®-ECGs, in six different postures, from 40 subjects (10 healthy controls, and 30 patients with complex congenital heart disease (CCHD); 10 with Tetralogy of Fallot (TOF), 10 with single ventricle physiology (SVP), and 10 with transposition of great arteries (TGA)). The resulting vectors were analysed using the S-ICD pre-implant screening tool (Boston Scientific) and processed through the sensing algorithm of S-ICD (Boston Scientific). The data were then evaluated using 2 × 2 contingency tables. Fisher exact and McNemar tests were used for a comparison of the different categories of CCHD, and p < 0.05 vs. controls considered to be statistically significant. RESULTS: 57% of patients were male, mean age of 36.3 years. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of the S-ICD screening tool were 95%, 79%, 59% and 98%, respectively, for controls, and 84%, 79%, 76% and 86%, respectively, in patients with CCHD (p = 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The S-ICD screening tool was comparatively more sensitive in normal controls but less specific in both CCHD patients and controls; a possible explanation for the reported high incidence of inappropriate S-ICD shocks. Thus, we propose a pre-implant screening device using the S-ICD sensing algorithm to minimise false exclusion and selection, and hence minimise potentially inappropriate shocks.

A new algorithm to reduce inappropriate therapy in the S-ICD system.

INTRODUCTION: The subcutaneous ICD system (S-ICD) has been shown to be a safe and effective treatment for patients at risk for sudden cardiac death. This device reliably detects ventricular tachyarrhythmias with a low incidence of inappropriate shocks for supraventricular arrhythmias. However, T-wave oversensing (TWOS) is more common with the S-ICD compared with transvenous systems. We developed a novel discrimination algorithm to reduce TWOS without compromising tachyarrhythmia discrimination. METHODS AND RESULTS: The algorithm was developed using a database of recorded episodes, including 244 appropriate therapies for ventricular arrhythmias and 133 episodes with an inappropriate detection due to TWOS, and using a computer model that simulates the S-ICD system. An independent set of data of 161 TWOS episodes, 137 ventricular and 328 supraventricular episodes, was used to validate the algorithm on actual device hardware. The S-ICD performance with the new algorithm was compared with the S-ICD without the new algorithm. Development results showed a decrease in inappropriate charge due to TWOS by 30.7 ± 18%. All ventricular arrhythmias were appropriately detected and the time to appropriate charge initiation was not increased. System validation showed that the new algorithm avoided an inappropriate charge due to TWOS by 39.8 ± 11.4%. No decrease in ventricular arrhythmia sensitivity and no significant change in supraventricular specificity were observed. CONCLUSIONS: A new algorithm that uses correlation of the existing complex to previous complexes reduced TWOS episodes by approximately 40%. The algorithm has potential for a clinically meaningful decrease in inappropriate shocks.