Search

Background: Outcome comparisons among subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) recipients with nonischemic cardiomyopathies are scarce., Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate differences in device-related outcomes among S-ICD recipients with different structural substrates., Methods: Patients enrolled in the i-SUSI (International SUbcutaneouS Implantable cardioverter defibrillator registry) project were grouped according to the underlying substrate (ischemic vs nonischemic) and subgrouped into dilated cardiomyopathy, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, Brugada syndrome (BrS), arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC). The main outcome of our study was to compare the rates of appropriate and inappropriate shocks and device-related complications., Results: Among 1698 patients, the most common underlying substrate was ischemic (31.7%), followed by dilated cardiomyopathy (20.5%), BrS (10.8%), hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (8.5%), and ARVC (4.4%). S-ICD for primary prevention was more common in the nonischemic cohort (70.9% vs 65.4%; P = .037). Over a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 26.5 (12.6-42.8) months, no differences were observed in appropriate shocks between ischemic and nonischemic patients (4.8%/y vs 3.9%/y; log-rank, P = .282). ARVC (9.0%/y; hazard ratio [HR] 2.492; P = .001) and BrS (1.8%/y; HR 0.396; P = .008) constituted the groups with the highest and lowest rates of appropriate shocks, respectively. Device-related complications did not differ between groups (ischemic: 6.4%/y vs nonischemic: 6.1%/y; log-rank, P = .666), nor among underlying substrates (log-rank, P = .089). Nonischemic patients experienced higher rates of inappropriate shocks than did ischemic S-ICD recipients (4.4%/y vs 3.0%/y; log-rank, P = .043), with patients with ARVC (9.9%/y; P = .001) having the highest risk, even after controlling for confounders (adjusted HR 2.243; confidence interval 1.338-4.267; P = .002)., Conclusion: Most S-ICD recipients were primary prevention nonischemic cardiomyopathy patients. Among those, patients with ARVC tend to receive the most frequent appropriate and inappropriate shocks and patients with BrS the least frequent appropriate shocks., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Gasperetti has received consultant and speaker fees from Boston Scientific. Dr Martinek received speaker’s honoraria from Boston Scientific. Dr Kaiser worked as a proctor for Boston Scientific. Dr Tilz is a consultant for Boston Scientific and received speaker’s honoraria from Boston Scientific. Dr Tondo is a member of Boston Scientific Advisory Board. The other authors do not report disclosures regarding this article., (Copyright © 2023 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) are frequently used for primary and secondary prevention in patients with cardiomyopathies due to different etiologies. However, long-term outcome studies in patients with noncompaction cardiomyopathy (NCCM) are scarce., Objectives: This study summarizes the long-term outcome of ICD therapy in patients with NCCM compared with those with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) or hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM)., Methods: Prospective data from our single-center ICD registry were used to analyze the ICD interventions and survival in patients with NCCM (n = 68) compared with patients with DCM (n = 458) and patients with HCM (n = 158) from January 2005 to January 2018., Results: This NCCM population with an ICD for primary prevention comprised 56 (82%) patients with a median age of 43 years and 52% males, compared with 85% in patients with DCM and 79% in patients with HCM (P = 0.20). During a median follow-up of 5 years (IQR: 2.0-6.9 years), appropriate and inappropriate ICD interventions were not significantly different. Nonsustained ventricular tachycardia during Holter monitoring in patients with NCCM was the only significant risk factor for appropriate ICD therapy in patients with NCCM, with a HR of 5.29 (95% CI: 1.12-24.96). The long-term survival was significantly better in the univariable analysis in the NCCM group. However, there was no difference in multivariable Cox regression analyses between the cardiomyopathy groups., Conclusions: At 5 years of follow-up, the rate of appropriate and inappropriate ICD interventions in NCCM was comparable to that in DCM or HCM. In multivariable analysis, no differences in survival were found between the cardiomyopathy groups., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) are susceptible to arrhythmias and implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) in addition to medical treatments may help prevent sudden cardiac death (SCD) and improve survival in this population., Hypothesis: We aim to investigate the impact of ICD insertion on survival and prognosis of patients with nonischemic DCM., Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from patients with nonischemic DCM treated with medical therapy with or without ICD who referred to our hospital from January 2020 to November 2021. Patients were divided based on the treatment that they had received into two equal groups. Different variables including demographic features, comorbidities, medical treatments, hospitalization rate, function class, and left ventricular ejection fraction before and after treatments were investigated in this study. In addition, variables in survival including overall survival (OS) and SCD were compared between the two groups., Results: A total of 120 patients were investigated in this study. Mean ± SD of age and follow-up time of patients were 64.0 ± 12.7 years old and 61.2 ± 15.9 months, respectively. Ten (16.7%) patients with medical therapy, and seven (11.7%) patients with ICD and medical therapy died during the follow-up period (p = 0.25). However, the two groups had a significant difference regarding SCD (11.7% vs. 1.7%, p = 0.02)., Conclusion: In patients with nonischemic DCM who had undergone ICD insertion in addition to standard medical treatments, SCD was significantly reduced compared with patients receiving just medical treatments. OS had no significant difference between our two studied groups., (© 2023 The Authors. Clinical Cardiology published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC.)

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) and significant ventricular arrhythmias in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) have been markedly reduced over the last couple of decades as a result of the advances in pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment. Primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) plays an important role in the treatment of patients at risk of SCD caused by ventricular arrhythmias. However, the arrhythmic risk stratification in patients with DCM remains extremely challenging, and the decision for primary prevention ICD implantation based on left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) solely appears to be insufficient. This review provides an update on current evidence for primary prevention ICD implantation, arrhythmic risk stratification, and left ventricular reverse remodeling (LVRR) prediction in patients with DCM in addition to most recent guideline recommendations for primary prevention ICD implantation in DCM patients and a proposed multiparametric algorithm based on arrhythmic risk stratification and left ventricular reverse remodeling (LVRR) prediction to better identify patients who are likely to benefit from primary prevention ICD., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Aims: While electrocardiogram (ECG) characteristics have been associated with life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias (LTVA) in dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), they typically rely on human-derived parameters. Deep neural networks (DNNs) can discover complex ECG patterns, but the interpretation is hampered by their 'black-box' characteristics. We aimed to detect DCM patients at risk of LTVA using an inherently explainable DNN., Methods and Results: In this two-phase study, we first developed a variational autoencoder DNN on more than 1 million 12-lead median beat ECGs, compressing the ECG into 21 different factors (F): FactorECG. Next, we used two cohorts with a combined total of 695 DCM patients and entered these factors in a Cox regression for the composite LTVA outcome, which was defined as sudden cardiac arrest, spontaneous sustained ventricular tachycardia, or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator treated ventricular arrhythmia. Most patients were male (n = 442, 64%) with a median age of 54 years [interquartile range (IQR) 44-62], and median left ventricular ejection fraction of 30% (IQR 23-39). A total of 115 patients (16.5%) reached the study outcome. Factors F8 (prolonged PR-interval and P-wave duration, P < 0.005), F15 (reduced P-wave height, P = 0.04), F25 (increased right bundle branch delay, P = 0.02), F27 (P-wave axis P < 0.005), and F32 (reduced QRS-T voltages P = 0.03) were significantly associated with LTVA., Conclusion: Inherently explainable DNNs can detect patients at risk of LTVA which is mainly driven by P-wave abnormalities., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest: None declared., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Practice guidelines suggest the use of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in patients with left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEF) ≤ 35% despite 3 to 6 months of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT). It remains unclear whether this strategy is appropriate for patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), who can experience reverse ventricular remodeling for up to 24 months after the initiation of GDMT. The aim of this study was to assess the longitudinal dynamic relationship between LVEF ≤ 35% and arrhythmic risk in patients with recent-onset nonischemic DCM on GDMT., Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted among patients with recent-onset DCM (≤6 months) and recent initiation of GDMT (≤3 months) consecutively enrolled in a longitudinal registry. Risk for major ventricular arrhythmic events or sudden cardiac death was assessed in relationship to LVEF ≤ 35% at enrollment and 6 and 24 months after initiation of GDMT., Results: Five hundred forty-four patients met the inclusion criteria. LVEF ≤ 35% identified patients with increased risk for major ventricular arrhythmic events or sudden cardiac death starting from 24 months after initiation of GDMT (hazard ratio, 2.126; 95% CI, 1.065-4.245; P = .03). However, LVEF ≤ 35% at presentation or 6 months after enrollment did not have prognostic significance. Sixty-seven percent of 131 patients with LVEF ≤ 35% at 6 months after initiation of GDMT had improved LVEFs (to >35%) by 24 months. This late LVEF improvement correlated with lower arrhythmic risk (P = .012) and was preceded by a reduction of LV dimensions in the first 6 months of GDMT., Conclusions: In patients with DCM, the present findings suggest that risk stratification for major ventricular arrhythmic events or sudden cardiac death on the basis of LVEF ≤ 35% is effective after 2 years of GDMT, but not after 6 months. In selected patients with DCM, it would be appropriate to wait 24 months before primary prevention ICD implantation., (Copyright © 2022 American Society of Echocardiography. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background An increase in beat-to-beat variability of repolarization (BVR) predicts arrhythmia onset in experimental models, but its clinical translation is not well established. We investigated the temporal changes in BVR before nonsustained ventricular tachycardia (nsVT) in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). Methods and Results Patients with nsVT on 24-hour Holter before ICD implantation for ischemic cardiomyopathy (ischemic cardiomyopathy+nsVT, n=43) or dilated cardiomyopathy (dilated cardiomyopathy+nsVT, n=37), matched ICD candidates without nsVT (ischemic cardiomyopathy-nsVT, n=29 and dilated cardiomyopathy-nsVT, n=26), and patients without ICD without structural heart disease (n=50) were studied. Digital Holter recordings from these patients were analyzed using a modified fiducial segment averaging technique to detect the QT interval. The nsVT episodes were semi-automatically identified and QT-BVR was assessed 1-, 5-, and 30-minutes before nsVT, and at rest (at 3:00 am). Resting BVR was higher in ICD patients compared with controls without structural heart disease. In ICD patients with nsVT, BVR increased significantly 1-minute pre-nsVT in ischemic cardiomyopathy (2.21±0.59 ms, versus 5 minutes pre-nsVT: 1.78±0.50 ms, P <0.001) and dilated cardiomyopathy (2.09±0.57 ms, versus 5-minutes pre-nsVT: 1.58±0.51 ms, P <0.001), but not in patients without nsVT. In multivariable Cox regression analysis, pre-nsVT BVR was a significant predictor for appropriate therapy during follow-up. Conclusions Baseline BVR is elevated and temporal changes in BVR predict imminent nsVT events in patients with ICD independent of underlying cause. Real-time BVR monitoring could be used to predict impending ventricular arrhythmia and allow preventive therapy to be incorporated into ICDs.

Dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) is a common yet challenging cardiac disease. Great strides have been made in improving DCM prognosis due to heart failure but sudden cardiac death (SCD) due to ventricular arrhythmias remains significant and challenging to predict. High-risk patients can be effectively managed with implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) but because identification of what is high risk is very limited, many patients unnecessarily experience the morbidity associated with an ICD implant and many others are not identified and have preventable mortality. Current guidelines recommend use of left ventricular ejection fraction and New York Heart Association class as the main markers of risk stratification to identify patients who would be at higher risk of SCD. However, when analysing the data from the trials that these recommendations are based on, the number of patients in whom an ICD delivers appropriate therapy is modest. In order to improve the effectiveness of therapy with an ICD, the patients who are most likely to benefit need to be identified. This review article presents the evidence behind current guideline-directed SCD risk markers and then explores new potential imaging, electrophysiological and genetic risk markers for SCD in DCM., Competing Interests: Competing interests: GAN reports grants from Boston Scientific, grants and personal fees from Abbott, personal fees from Biosense Webster, personal fees from Catheter Precision, personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, outside the submitted work. The University of Leicester has applied for patents for the Regional Restitution Instability Index and Peak ECG Restitution Slope techniques on behalf of WN and GAN., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Primary preventive implantation of implantable defibrillator (ICD) is according to current guidelines indicated in patients with heart failure NYHA (New York Heart Association) class II/III and LVEF <35%. Thanks to advances in heart failure pharmacotherapy, a decrease in mortality could render a benefit of ICD insufficient to justify its implantation in some patients., Methods: Study design: multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled trial evaluating the benefit of implantation of Cardiac Resynchronization and Defibrillator Therapy (CRT-D) or CRT Alone (CRT-P) in non-ischemic patients with reduced left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) and optimal pharmacotherapy without significant mid-wall myocardial fibrosis detected by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). The primary end-point: Re-hospitalization for heart failure, ventricular tachycardia, major adverse cardiac events (MACE). The secondary end-points: Sudden cardiac death, cardiovascular death, resuscitated cardiac arrest or sustained ventricular tachycardia, device-related complications, and change in quality of life. Course of the study: After a pharmacotherapy is optimized and significant mid-wall myocardial fibrosis excluded, patients will be randomized 1:1 to CRT-P or CRT-D implantation., Discussion: If our hypothesis is confirmed, this could provide evidence for the management of these patients with a significant impact on common daily praxis and health care expenditures., Clinicaltrials: gov, NCT04139460., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

Aims: This study aimed to develop and validate a competing risk nomogram for predicting all-cause mortality and heart transplantation (HT) before first appropriate shock in non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) patients receiving implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD)., Methods and Results: A total of 218 consecutive DCM patients implanted with ICD between 2010 and 2019 at our institution were retrospectively enrolled. Cox proportional hazards model was primarily built to identify variables associated with death and HT. Then, a Fine-Gray model, accounting for the appropriate shock as a competing risk, was constructed using these selected variables along with implantation indication (primary vs. secondary). Finally, a nomogram based on the Fine-Gray model was established to predict 1-, 3-, and 5-year probabilities of all-cause mortality and HT before first appropriate shock. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC), Harrell's C-index, and calibration curves were used to evaluate and internally validate the performance of this model. The decision curve analysis was applied to assess its clinical utility. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year cumulative incidence of all-cause mortality and HT without former appropriate shock were 5.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.9-9.9%], 16.6% (95% CI 11-25.0%), and 25.3% (95% CI 17.2-37.1%), respectively. Five variables including implantation indication, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker, and amiodarone treatment were independently associated with it (all P < 0.05) and were used for constructing the nomogram. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year AUC of the nomogram were 0.83 (95% CI 0.73-0.94, P < 0.001), 0.84 (95% CI 0.75-0.93, P < 0.001), and 0.85 (95% CI 0.77-0.94, P < 0.001), respectively. The Harrell's C-index was 0.788 (95% CI 0.697-0.877, P < 0.001; 0.762 for the optimism-corrected C-index), showing the good discriminative ability of the model. The calibration was acceptable (optimism-corrected slope 0.896). Decision curve analysis identified our model was clinically useful within the entire range of potential treatment thresholds for ICD implantation. Three risk groups stratified by scores were significantly different between cumulative incidence curves (P < 0.001). The identified high-risk group composed 17.9% of our population and did not derive long-term benefit from ICD., Conclusions: The proposed nomogram is a simple, useful risk stratification tool for selecting potential ICD recipients in DCM patients. It might facilitate the shared decision-making between patients and clinicians., (© 2022 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator (ICD) therapy is indicated for patients at risk for sudden cardiac death due to ventricular tachyarrhythmia. The most commonly used risk stratification algorithms use Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF) to determine which patients qualify for ICD therapy, even though LVEF is a better marker of total mortality than ventricular tachyarrhythmias mortality. This review evaluates imaging tools and novel biomarkers proposed for better risk stratifying arrhythmic substrate, thereby identifying optimal ICD therapy candidates., (Copyright© Bentham Science Publishers; For any queries, please email at epub@benthamscience.net.)

Although some researches proved the influence of radiation therapy (RT) on pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators, little has been reported on cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators (CRTDs). We experienced a case of RT on CRTD and had a new finding.A patient with CRTD implanted for dilated cardiomyopathy was diagnosed with lung squamous cell carcinoma and started receiving RT. All the implanted devices, including the main body of CRTD, left ventricular lead (LV), right ventricular lead with high-voltage conductor, and right atrial lead, were from the same manufacturer. The radiation targeted the tumor of 67 mm in diameter in the right superior lobe for 5 min per session. The CRTD was outside the radiation field, which is 65 mm, but the leads were inside. Plan 1 used 2 Gy/fr with 8 megavolt photons, and Plan 1 was irradiated at 0° and 180° for 16 RT sessions. The dosage was increased to 3 Gy for Plan 2 for 4 sessions. Plan 3 used 2 Gy with 6 and 8 megavolt photons, and Plan 3 was irradiated at 27.7° and 200.7° for 11 RT sessions. Changes in measured parameters were assessed before and after RT.Changes in impedance of LV and high-voltage lead exceeded prespecified threshold. However, no significant errors were detected in the CRTD on the dosages and energy we used.We hypothesize that the lead insulator could have been affected by radiation.

Aims: Nonsustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT) occurs frequently in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), especially in high-risk patients. The role of rapid-rate NSVT (RR-NSVT) documented by an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) in DCM patients has not been fully explored. This study aimed to determine the relationship between RR-NSVT and the occurrence of ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VTAs) in DCM patients with ICD., Methods: From December 2000 to December 2017, 136 DCM patients received ICD or cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator (CRT-D) implantation for primary or secondary prevention of VTAs. Based on the occurrence of documented RR-NSVT, patients were classified into RR-NSVT (-) or RR-NSVT (+) groups., Result: During the median follow-up of 4.5 years, 50.0% (68/136) patients experienced ≥1 episode, and 25.0% (34/136) patients experienced ≥3 episodes of RR-NSVT. Event-free survival for VTAs was significantly higher in the RR-NSVT (-) group, whereas those for heart failure admission and cardiovascular mortality were comparable between groups. In the multivariate Cox regression analysis, any RR-NSVT showed a positive association with the occurrence of VTAs (hazard ratio: 5.087; 95% confidence interval: 2.374-10.900; P < .001). In RR-NSVT (+) patients, a cluster (≥3 times/6 months) and frequent pattern (≥3 runs/day) of RR-NSVT were observed in 42.6% (29/68) and 30.9% (21/68) patients, respectively, who showed further increased incidence of VTAs., Conclusion: In DCM patients with ICD/CRT-D, 50.0% patients experienced at least one episode of RR-NSVT. RR-NSVT documentation showed a positive association with subsequent occurrence of VTAs, suggesting the importance of constructive arrhythmia management for patients with RR-NSVT., (© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: The performance of the subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD™) has been described in different kinds of heart disease and has been proven to be an important advance in prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD). While positive experiences with the S-ICD™ initially came from collectives of patients without structural heart diseases, positive results have also been collected from cohorts with structural heart disease., Materials and Methods: All S-ICD™ patients with either ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM), dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) or hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) as the main indication for ICD implantation (n = 144 patients) or electrical heart disease/idiopathic ventricular fibrillation (n = 83 patients) in our large-scaled single-center S-ICD™ registry were included in this study. Baseline characteristics, appropriate and inappropriate shocks, and complications were documented in a mean follow-up of 18 ± 15 months., Results: Baseline characteristics were significantly different between the two groups in most categories. In contrast, there was no difference concerning neither appropriate nor inappropriate shock delivery between the two groups. Also other outcome parameters such as need for surgical revisions and all-cause mortality did not differ. There was a significant difference between the first- and second-generation S-ICDs™ in inadequate shocks mainly driven by patients with HCM., Conclusion: In our study, S-ICD™ performance was similar in patients with and without structural heart disease. Decision pro- or contra-S-ICD™ should be made rather on the basis of expected shock rate and probability of the need for future anti-tachycardia or anti-bradycardia pacing than in dependence of the underlying heart disease.

Aims: The clinical effectiveness of primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy is under debate. The EUropean Comparative Effectiveness Research to Assess the Use of Primary ProphylacTic Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators (EU-CERT-ICD) aims to assess its current clinical value., Methods and Results: The EU-CERT-ICD is a prospective investigator-initiated non-randomized, controlled, multicentre observational cohort study performed in 44 centres across 15 European Union countries. We will recruit 2250 patients with ischaemic or dilated cardiomyopathy and a guideline indication for primary prophylactic ICD implantation. This sample will include 1500 patients at their first ICD implantation and 750 patients who did not receive a primary prevention ICD despite having an indication for it (non-randomized control group). The primary endpoint is all-cause mortality; the co-primary endpoint in ICD patients is time to first appropriate shock. Secondary endpoints include sudden cardiac death, first inappropriate shock, any ICD shock, arrhythmogenic syncope, revision procedures, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. At baseline (and prior to ICD implantation if applicable), all patients undergo 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) and Holter ECG analysis using multiple advanced methods for risk stratification as well as detailed documentation of clinical characteristics and laboratory values. Genetic biobanking is also organized. As of August 2018, baseline data of 2265 patients are complete. All subjects will be followed for up to 4.5 years., Conclusions: The EU-CERT-ICD study will provide a necessary update about clinical effectiveness of primary prophylactic ICD implantation. This study also aims for improved risk stratification and patient selection using clinical and ECG risk markers., (© 2018 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) secondary to arrhythmia remains a risk in those with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), an implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) is an effective strategy to prevent SCD. Current guidelines recommend selection for ICD based on ejection fraction (EF) less than 35%, however, most SCD occurs in those with EF>35%. Although meta-analysis has demonstrated a survival benefit for primary prevention ICD in DCM, no randomised trial has shown a significant reduction in overall mortality including the most recent 'Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of ICDs in Patients With Non-Ischemic Systolic Heat Failure on Mortality' study. Clearly, a more sophisticated selection strategy is required. Cardiac MRI (CMR) is an ideal non-invasive imaging technique which allows calculation of EF as well as tissue characterisation with gadolinium contrast, parametric mapping and feature tracking. Late gadolinium enhancement detects mid-wall fibrosis in approximately 30% of those with DCM, three meta-analyses have demonstrated an association between fibrosis in DCM and SCD, and those without fibrosis are at low risk of SCD. T1 mapping and extracellular volume (ECV) calculation are methods of demonstrating diffuse fibrosis in the myocardium. Raised ECV and native T1 have been associated with worse outcomes but the relationship to SCD has not been well studied. Undoubtedly, more research is required but CMR has several tools which offer incremental value above EF to improve risk stratification and consequent outcomes and resource utilisation in those with DCM., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: In patients indicated for cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT), the choice between a CRT-pacemaker (CRT-P) versus defibrillator (CRT-D) remains controversial and indications in this setting have not been well delineated. Apart from inappropriate therapies, which are inherent to the presence of a defibrillator, whether adding defibrillator to CRT in the primary prevention setting impacts risk of other acute and late device-related complications has not been well studied and may bear relevance for device selection., Methods: Observational multicentre European cohort study of 3008 consecutive patients with ischaemic or non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy and no history of sustained ventricular arrhythmias, undergoing CRT implantation with (CRT-D, n=1785) or without (CRT-P, n=1223) defibrillator. Using propensity score and competing risk analyses, we assessed the risk of significant device-related complications requiring surgical reintervention. Inappropriate shocks were not considered except those due to lead malfunction requiring lead revision., Results: Acute complications occurred in 148 patients (4.9%), without significant difference between groups, even after considering potential confounders (OR=1.20, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.00, p=0.47). During a mean follow-up of 41.4±29 months, late complications occurred in 475 patients, giving an annual incidence rate of 26 (95% CI 9 to 43) and 15 (95% CI 6 to 24) per 1000 patient-years in CRT-D and CRT-P patients, respectively. CRT-D was independently associated with increased occurrence of late complications (HR=1.68, 95% CI 1.27 to 2.23, p=0.001). In particular, when compared with CRT-P, CRT-D was associated with an increased risk of device-related infection (HR 2.10, 95% CI 1.18 to 3.45, p=0.004). Acute complications did not predict overall late complications, but predicted device-related infection (HR 2.85, 95% CI 1.71 to 4.56, p<0.001)., Conclusions: Compared with CRT-P, CRT-D is associated with a similar risk of periprocedural complications but increased risk of long-term complications, mainly infection. This needs to be considered in the decision of implanting CRT with or without a defibrillator., Competing Interests: Competing interests: RP received training grant from Boston Scientific and Sorin Group and a Research Grant from Medtronic. SBo received consulting fees from Medtronic, Boston Scientific and Sorin Group. OP received travel support and consulting fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, LivaNova and Medtronic. DK received consultant fees from St. Jude Medical, Medtronic, Sorin Group, Boston Scientific and Biotronik. PD received consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Medtronic, St Jude Medical and LivaNova. DG receiving consulting fees from Boston scientific, Medtronic, Biotronik, Abbot. PM received consulting fees from Biotronik, Boston Scientific and St Jude Medical. NS received consulting fees from Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Sorin Group and St. Jude Medical. J-YLH received consulting fees from Astra Zeneca, Bayer, BMS/Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Meda, Novartis , Sanofi, Servier. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this article to disclose., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

We applied cardiac resynchronization therapy with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator( CRT-D) and with concomitant cardiac surgery to 2 patients with left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction and dyssynchronous ventricular activation. A patient had severe ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy with coronary artery aneurysms (LV ejection fraction 12%, LV diastolic dimension 81 mm, LV systolic dimension 75 mm and atrial fibrillation, with complete left bundle branch block). Another patient had severe dilated cardiomyopathy with mitral valve regurgitation (LV ejection fraction 25%, LV diastolic dimension 75 mm, LV systolic dimension 61 mm atrial fibrillation, and complete left bundle branch block). Both epicardial LV leads were surgically implanted on the posterolateral wall. CRT-D achieved the resynchronization of the LV contraction, and improved cardiac function. The patients had an uneventful postoperative course and were discharged from hospital after operation. A key advantage of surgical epicardial lead placement is that lead placement is not confined to anatomic branches of the LV venous circulation as is the case with transvenous placement. CRT-D combined with cardiac surgery might be available for patients with LV systolic dysfunction.

Rationale: Inadvertent pacemaker/defibrillator lead placement into the left ventricle is an unusual cardiac device-related complication and its diagnosis is not always easy and often misunderstood. Thromboembolic events are frequently associated with this procedural complication. Percutaneous lead extraction should be performed when diagnosis is made early after device implantation while long-life oral anticoagulation is a wise option when the diagnosis is delayed and the lead is not removed., Patient Concerns: A 65-year-old man affected by dilated cardiomyopathy, previously treated with a percutaneous mitral valve repair, with 2 MitraClip devices, and later with dual chamber cardioverter/defibrillator implantation, returned in outpatient clinics 2 months after discharge for deterioration of dyspnea; transthoracic echocardiography revealed that the shock lead had been accidentally placed in the apex of the left ventricle., Diagnoses: The unintentional lead malposition through the iatrogenic atrial septal defect and its presence into the mitral valve orifice, together with the 2 clip devices implanted, generated an acceleration of transvalvular diastolic flow, determining a moderate stenosis of the mitral valve, as well as promoting a worsening of the degree of valvular regurgitation., Interventions: Oral anticoagulation therapy was started and a mechanical lead extraction was percutaneously performed. A new defibrillator lead was later appropriately positioned in the apex of the right ventricle., Outcomes: The patient was discharged 3 days after intervention and the follow-up, performed 1 month after discharge, was uneventful., Lessons: Complex interventional procedures and implantation of multiple devices can increase procedural troubles and the risk of mechanical complications related to pacemaker/defibrillator implantation. Careful observation of the QRS complex morphology on the electrocardiogram (ECG), during paced rhythm, and the achievement of the echocardiographic examination, in the postprocedural phase, allow an early diagnosis of lead malposition.

Introduction and Objectives: To report the findings of the Spanish Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillator Registry for 2016 compiled by the Electrophysiology and Arrhythmias Section of the Spanish Society of Cardiology., Methods: Prospective data were voluntarily recorded on a data collection form and send to the Spanish Society of Cardiology by each implantation team., Results: Overall, 5673 device implantations were reported, representing 85% of the estimated total number of implantations. The reported implantation rate was 122 per million population and the estimated total implantation rate was 143 per million. The proportion of first implantations was 66.8%. Data were received from 177 hospitals (8 more than in 2015). Most implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients were men (81.9%). The mean age was 62.7 ± 13.4 years. Most patients had severe or moderate-to-severe ventricular dysfunction and were in New York Heart Association functional class II. The most frequent underlying cardiac condition was ischemic heart disease, followed by dilated cardiomyopathy. Indications for primary prevention accounted for 62% of first implantations. Overall, 81.2% of devices were implanted by cardiac electrophysiologists., Conclusions: The 2016 Spanish Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillator Registry includes information on 85% of the devices implanted in Spain. The total number of device implantations increased in comparison with the last few years. The percentage of implantations for primary prevention also increased in comparison with the previous year., (Copyright © 2017 Sociedad Española de Cardiología. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Background: There is evidence that the benefit of a primary prophylactic ICD therapy is not equal in all patients., Purpose: To evaluate risk factors of appropriate shocks and all- cause mortality in patients with a primary prophylactic ICD regarding contemporary studies., Data Source: PubMed, LIVIVO, Cochrane CENTRAL between 2010 and 2016., Study Selection: Studies were eligible if at least one of the endpoints of interest were reported., Data Extraction: All abstracts were independently reviewed by at least two authors. The full text of all selected studies was then analysed in detail., Data Synthesis: Our search strategy retrieved 608 abstracts. After exclusion of unsuitable studies, 36 papers with a total patient number of 47282 were included in our analysis. All-cause mortality was significantly associated with increasing age (HR 1.41, CI 1.29-1.53), left ventricular function (LVEF; HR 1.21, CI 1.14-1.29), ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM; HR 1.37, CI 1.14-1.66) and co-morbidities such as impaired renal function (HR 2.30, CI 1.97-2.69). Although, younger age (HR 0.96, CI 0.85-1.09), impaired LVEF (HR 1.26, CI 0.89-1.78) and ischemic cardiomyopathy (HR 2.22, CI 0.83-5.93) were associated with a higher risk of appropriate shocks, none of these factors reached statistical significance., Limitations: Individual patient data were not available for most studies., Conclusion: In this meta-analysis of contemporary clinical studies, all-cause mortality is predicted by a variety of clinical characteristics including LVEF. On the other hand, the risk of appropriate shocks might be associated with impaired LVEF and ischemic cardiomyopathy. Further prospective studies are required to verify risk factors for appropriate shocks other than LVEF to help select appropriate patients for primary prophylactic ICD-therapy.

Impaired left atrial emptying fraction (LAEF) is an important predictor of mortality in patients with heart failure. As it may reflect increased LV wall stress, it might predict ventricular arrhythmia (VA) specifically. This study evaluated the predictive value of LAEF assessed with cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging with respect to appropriate device therapy (ADT) for VA and compared its role with CMR assessed scar size and other risk factors. In total, 229 patients (68% male, 63 ± 10 years, 61% ischemic cardiomyopathy) with LV ejection fraction ≤35% who underwent CMR and implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation for primary prevention in 2005 to 2012 were included. CMR was used to quantify LV volumes and function. LV scar size was quantified when late gadolinium enhancement was available (n = 166). Maximum and minimum left atrial volumes and LAEF were calculated using the biplane area-length method. The occurrence of ADT and mortality was assessed during a median follow-up of 3.9 years. Sixty-two patients (27%) received ADT. Univariable Cox analysis showed that male gender, creatinine level, minimum left atrial volume, LAEF, and total scar size were significant predictors of ADT. In multivariable Cox analysis, LAEF (hazard ratio 0.75 per 10%, p <0.01), and scar size (hazard ratio 1.03 per g, p = 0.03) remained the only independent predictors of ADT. Patients with both LAEF > median and scar size < median were at low risk (13% ADT at 5 years), whereas those with LAEF < median and scar size > median experienced 40% ADT at 5 years (log-rank p = 0.01). In conclusion, LAEF independently predicts ADT in patients with primary prevention ICDs. Combined assessment of LAEF and scar size identifies a group with low risk of ADT. Therefore, LAEF assessment could assist in risk stratification for VA to select patients with the highest benefit from ICD implantation., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is frequent in patients with heart failure due to dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM). Implantable cardioverter/defibrillator (ICD) device therapy is currently used for primary prevention. However, publication of the DANISH trial has recently given reason for doubt, showing no significant improvement in all-cause mortality in comparison to contemporary medical therapy., Methods: We performed a meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials comparing ICD therapy to medical therapy (MT) for primary prevention in DCM. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality; secondary analyses were performed on sudden cardiac death, cardiovascular death and non-cardiac death., Results: Five trials including a total of 2992 patients were included in the pooled analysis. Compared to contemporary medical treatment there was a significant mortality reduction with ICD device therapy [odds ratio (OR) 0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64-0.93; p = 0.006]. SCD was decreased significantly (OR 0.43, CI 0.27-0.69; p = 0.0004), while cardiovascular death and non-cardiac death showed no differences. Sensitivity analyses showed no influence of amiodarone therapy on overall results. Analysis of MT details revealed the DANISH population to adhere the most to current guideline recommendations. In addition, it was the only study including a substantial amount of CRT devices (58%)., Conclusions: Our meta-analysis of all available randomized evidence shows a survival benefit of ICD therapy for primary prevention in DCM. DANISH results suggest an attenuation of this ICD advantage when compared to contemporary medical and cardiac resynchronization therapy. Until larger trials have confirmed this finding, ICD therapy should remain the recommendation for primary prevention of SCD in DCM.

Introduction: Risk stratification for sudden cardiac death in non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy (NIDCM) remains a clinical challenge. Areas covered: Currently, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), severity of heart failure symptoms according to NYHA classification, and morphology and duration of the QRS complex guide device management in these patients with implantation of a cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and/or cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices. Recently, the results of a randomized trial stirred some controversy regarding the utility of ICD in NIDCM patients, however, a subsequent meta-analysis confirmed prior findings of the survival-prolonging benefit of device therapy. Newer risk markers, like late gadolinium enhancement in cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) detecting myocardial fibrosis, are encouraging in improving risk stratification in these patients. Furthermore, resurgence of an old tool, the electrophysiology study (EPS), and technical advances in genetics in identifying high-risk familial NIDCM, appear promising in this direction. Expert commentary: Based on old and new tools, a more individualized approach may be applied in NIDCM patients, whereby CMR, EPS and genetics may provide further guidance, particularly in patients with LVEF>35%. These issues are herein reviewed and a practical algorithm is proposed for risk stratification and device implantation in NIDCM patients with LVEF below and above 35%.

The task of the ICD is to detect ventricular arrhythmias and treatment of its adequate intervention. The task of the CRTD in addition to the above tasks is the treatment of heart failure., Aim: The aim of the study was to assess the predictive parameters of adequate interventions in patients with an ICD and CRTD., Materials and Methods: The study consisted of 273 patients (230 M, mean age 65±11 years) with ICD and/or CRTD. The inclusion criteria were: left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 35%, NYHA class ≥ II, implantation in primary SCD prevention and in case of CRTD additionally LBBB with wide QRS ≥ 120ms. The following data were assessed: age, gender, presence of dilated cardiomyopathy, diabetes, chronic kidney failure, atrial fibrillation (AF), LVEF, NYHA class, device interventions, number of arrhythmias, changes in pharmacotherapy, device parameters and mortality., Results: During observation, which lasted the mean of 770±490 days, 102 patients had adequate device interventions. In the ICD group, adequate interventions appear mainly in the initial observation period (HR 2,01), in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy (HR 2,98) and ventricular arrhythmias (HR 6,78) and not treated with amiodarone (HR 4,31). In the CRTD group, adequate interventions appear mainly in younger patients (HR 1,06), in diabetes (HR 1,68), in NYHA class II, in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (HR 1,09) and ventricular arrhythmias (HR 2,54) and not treated with amiodarone (HR 1,09)., Conclusions: In the ICD group, left ventricular hypertrophy, ventricular arrhythmias is not treated with amiodarone in a significant influence on the risk of adequate intervention. In the Group of CRTD younger age, diabetes, NYHA class II, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, ventricular arrhythmias is not treated with amiodarone in a significant influence on the risk of adequate intervention. In the ICD group, adequate interventions particularly often in the first year of follow-up. Patients with CRTD require special medical care.

Telemetric follow-up (RM) after cardiac devices implantation is not inferior to classic follow-up and enables earlier clinical complications detection., Aim: The aim of the study was to evaluation of the ventricular arrhythmias and interventions of ICD/CRTD in ambulatory and telemetric follow-up in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy., Materials and Methods: Group A (CRT-D+ICD) - retrospective, patients followed-up in outpatient clinic - was consisted with 273 patients (mean age 65±11 years, 230M). In group A 128 patients after CRT-D implantation and 145 patients with ICD were selected. Group B (RM group) - prospective, RM Medtronic Carelink followup - was consisted with 177 patients (mean age 61±13 years, 141M). 35 patients had CRT-D and 142 had ICD implanted. Follow-up of patients from group A was performed in outpatient clinic. Follow-up of patients from group B was monitored daily follow-up using RM system (Medtronic Carelink). Frequency/type of ventricular arrhythmias, device interventions, patient's clinical status, medications, were assessed in both groups. To assess presence of ventricular arrhythmias, device interventions, ICD and CRT-D programming changes, pharmacotherapy changes, patients were randomly chosen from group A, according to age, gender, LVEF value, NYHA class, comorbidities, time of follow-up as a control group to group B (RM group)., Results: In multivariate analysis, it was found that a low ejection fraction <25% (HR 0,929; p<0,001), and diabetes mellitus (HR 7,038; p<0,009) predispose to ventricular arrhythmias. In the RM group, compared to control group, there were significantly less programming changes (5,9 vs 47,1%, p<0,001), time to first events (ventricular arrhythmias - 258 vs 487 d, p<0,001; interventions - 295 vs 775 d, p<0,01) was shorter, while time to first necessary programming (364 vs 304 d, p<0,001) or pharmacotherapy (330 vs 244 days, p<0,001) change was longer. General mortality did not differ significantly between the groups (p=0,130)., Conclusions: Low ejection fraction <25%, and diabetes mellitus predispose to ventricular arrhythmias. Telemetric follow-up of cardiac implantable devices enables quick information transmission in cases of clinical complications (arrhythmias, interventions) and reduces number of ambulatory visits to only necessary ones. Telemetric followup of cardiac implantable devices is a safe. Key words: ventricular arrhythmias, interventions.

Patients with severely depressed left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEFs) receive implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) for the primary prevention of sudden death. However, in some patients, LVEFs may improve or even normalize over time, and these patients would no longer be qualified for ICD implantation based on the original criteria for which they have initially received an ICD. We report a patient with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy whose LVEF recovered to normal values after pharmacological therapy. Meanwhile, the patient had life-threatening ventricular fibrillation, aborted by the ICD. We reflect on the pathological features of left ventricular reverse remodelling and ventricular arrhythmogenesis, where the myocardial substrate appears to play an important role. Also, after LVEF improvement in a patient with a cardiac device, there is still a debate on whether we should perform a battery replacement., (© 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

The assessment of factors influencing occurrence of adequate interventions of cardiac resynchronization therapy with cardioverter-defibrillator implanted in primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in dilative cardiomyopathy and percentage of biventricular pacing., Introduction: The function of cardiac resynchronization therapy with cardioverter-defibrillator (CRT-D) is to treat heart failure (HF) and to treat ventricular arrhythmia, if it occurs, with adequate intervention., Aim: The aim of the study was to find predictors of adequate interventions and in how many patients biventricular pacing percentage decreases during the follow-up., Material and Methods: The study comprised of 228 patients (178 M, mean age 66±10, 31-89 years) with implanted CRTD. The following data were analyzed: age, sex, presence of dilative cardiomyopathy, diabetes mellitus, lowered creatinine clearance, atrial fibrillation (AF), LVEF, NYHA class, adequate interventions, number of arrhythmias, pharmacotherapy modifications, device parameters and mortality., Results: Mean ejection fraction of the left ventricle was 20.9±6.4, (10.0- 35%). During the mean follow up of 770±490 days in 84 (37%) patients adequate interventions of the device occurred. The adequate interventions concerned mainly patients with diabetes mellitus (HR 2.95), in NYHA class II, with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (HR 2.15). In 39 patients (17%) the mean percentage of biventricular pacing was below 90%, and in 18 (8%) below 85%., Conclusions: Diabetes mellitus, NYHA class II, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation have significantly increased the risk of adequate intervention. The most common causes of loss of biventricular pacing were: inappropriate AV delay, supraventricular arrhythmias and premature ventricular complexes. A significant correlation between low biventricular pacing percentage and the occurrence of supraventricular arrhythmias and adequate interventions was observed.

Introduction and Objectives: We present the results of the Spanish Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillator Registry for 2015, as compiled by the Electrophysiology and Arrhythmia Section of the Spanish Society of Cardiology., Methods: Data collection sheets were voluntarily completed by each implantation team and prospectively sent to the Spanish Society of Cardiology., Results: The number of reported implantations was 5465 (85% of the estimated total number of implantations). The implantation rate was 118 per million population while the estimated rate was 138. First implantations comprised 71.8%. Data were obtained from 169 hospitals (7 more than in 2014). Most implantations (82.7%) were performed in men. The mean patient age was 62.8±13.3 years. Most patients showed severe or moderate-to-severe ventricular dysfunction and were in New York Heart Association function class II. The most frequent cardiac condition was ischemic heart disease, followed by dilated cardiomyopathy. Implantations for primary prevention indications comprised 58.2%. Electrophysiologists performed 79.6% of the implantations., Conclusions: The 2015 Spanish Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillator Registry received information on 85% of the implantations performed in Spain. The number of implantations has grown from previous years. The percentage of implantations for primary prevention indications has slightly decreased from the previous registry., (Copyright © 2016 Sociedad Española de Cardiología. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

In patients treated with implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD), prediction of both overall survival and occurrence of shocks is important if improved patient selection is desired. We prospectively studied the predictive value of biomarkers and indexes of cardiac and renal function and spectral microvolt T-wave alternans testing and 24-hour Holter variables in a population who underwent first ICD implantation. Consecutive patients in sinus rhythm with ischemic or dilated cardiomyopathy scheduled for primary or secondary prophylactic ICD implantation were enrolled. Exercise microvolt T-wave alternans and 24-hour Holter for number of ventricular premature contractions (VPCs), deceleration capacity, heart rate variability, and heart rate turbulence were done. Death of any cause and first appropriate ICD shock were defined as end points. Over 33 ± 15 months of follow-up, 36 of 253 patients (14%) received appropriate shocks and 39 of 253 patients (15%) died. Only 3 of 253 patients (1%) died after receiving at least 1 appropriate shock. In univariate analyses, New York Heart Association class, ejection fraction, N-terminal pro brain-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), renal function, ICD indication, deceleration capacity, heart rate variability, and heart rate turbulence were predictive of all-cause mortality and VPC number and deceleration capacity predicted first appropriate shock. NT-proBNP (≥1,600 pg/ml) was identified as the only independent predictor of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 3.0, confidence interval 1.3 to 7.3, p = 0.014). In contrast, VPC number predicted appropriate shocks (hazard ratio 2.3, confidence interval 1.0 to 5.5, p = 0.047) as the only independent risk marker. In conclusion, NT-proBNP is a strong independent predictor of mortality in a typical prospective cohort of newly implanted patients with ICD, among many electrocardiographic and clinical variables studied. Number of VPCs was identified as a predictor of appropriate shocks (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02010515)., (Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The lifesaving benefit of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) has been demonstrated. Their use has increased considerably in the past decade, but related complications have become a major concern., Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess the incidence and effect on outcomes of early (≤30 days) complications after ICD implantation for primary prevention in a large French population., Methods: We analyzed data from 5539 patients from the multicenter French DAI-PP (Défibrillateur Automatique Implantable-Prévention Primaire) registry (2002-2012) who had coronary artery disease or dilated cardiomyopathy and were implanted with an ICD for primary prevention., Results: Overall, early complications occurred in 707 patients (13.5%), mainly related to lead dislodgment or hematoma (57%). Independent factors associated with occurrence of early complications were severe renal impairment (odds ratio [OR] 1.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.17-2.37, P = .02), age ≥75 years (OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.02, P = .03), cardiac resynchronization therapy (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.16-2.17, P = .01), and anticoagulant therapy (OR 1.28, 95% CI 1.02-1.61, P = .03). During a mean ± SD follow-up of 3.1 ± 2.3 years, 824 (15.8%) patients experienced ≥1 late complication (>30 days), and 782 (14.9%) patients died. After adjustment, early complications remained associated with occurrence of late complications (OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.73-2.66, P < .0001) and mortality (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.34-2.17, P = .003)., Conclusion: Early complications are common after ICD implantation for primary prevention, occurring in 1 in 7 patients, and are associated with an increased risk of late complications and overall mortality. Further studies are needed to investigate the underlying mechanisms of such associations., (Copyright © 2016 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The response to antitachycardia pacing can sometimes reveal clues about tachycardia mechanisms. This article discusses a case in which the diagnosis of typical atrioventricular nodal reciprocating tachycardia could be firmly established from the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator interrogation alone., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Remote monitoring of ICD/CRTD is safe, during which evaluates the type of arrhythmia, intervention., Aim: The aim of the study was the assessment of ventricular arrhythmia and ICD/CRTD intervention., Material and Methods: The study included 177 patients (mean age 61,1±13; 23-88 y; Men 141) with an ICD/CRTD implanted. Patients were controlled telemonitoring system, Medtronic Carelink. The following variables were analyzed: age, gender, comorbidities, LVEF value, NYHA class, type of ventricular arrhythmias, device interventions, reprogramming and pharmacotherapy changes., Results: In multivariate analysis, it was found that, diabetes mellitus (HR 3,49), a low ejection fraction <25% (HR 2,51) predispose to ventricular arrhythmias; and a low ejection fraction <25% (HR 1,88), ischemic DCM (HR 1,92), II NYHA class, the lack of Amiodarone (HR 5,01) predispose to device intervention., Conclusions: 1. A low ejection fraction, ischemic dilative cardiomyopathy, II NYHA class, the lack treatment of Amiodarone predispose to ventricular arrhythmias. 2. A low ejection fraction, diabetes mellitus predispose to device intervention. 3. A significant correlation between interventions and ventricular arrhythmias, renal failure, diabetes mellitus, abnormal lipidogram were observed. 4. Telemetric follow-up of cardiac implantable devices is a safe and enables quick information transmission in cases of clinical complications (arrhythmias, interventions).

Background: The modern era of cardiology has changed the population of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) recipients. Identifying predictors of electrical storm (ES) in contemporary ICD patients could improve risk stratification, therapeutic strategies, and mortality., Objective: The purpose of this study was to address these points in a real-world setting., Methods: In 330 consecutive patients (65 ± 11 years, 81% male, left ventricular ejection fraction 29% ± 9%) with ICD implanted because of ischemic (n, 204) or nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy (n, 126), we analyzed the prevalence, predictors, and outcome of ES (≥3 separate VT/VF episodes within 24 hours) therapy., Results: During a median of 21 months (range 17-36 months), 23 patients (7%) had ES. Secondary prevention (61% vs 24%, P <.01), single-chamber devices (57% vs 38%, P = .02), and prior appropriate (96% vs 24%, P < .001) and inappropriate (30% vs 9%, P = .004) therapies were more prevalent in these patients. In ES patients, first appropriate therapy occurred more often in the first year after implantation than in the rest of the cohort (85% vs 45%, P = .008), and mortality was significantly higher (22% vs 2%, P < .001). Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that secondary prevention (hazard ratio [HR] 2.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.21-6.61, P = .016) and prior appropriate (HR 88.99, 95% CI 11.73-675, P < .001) and inappropriate (HR 2.83, 95% CI 1.14-7.0, P = .04) therapies were independent predictors of ES., Conclusion: ES is not uncommon in ICD recipients. A secondary prevention indication and the occurrence of both appropriate and inappropriate ICD therapies increase the risk for ES. Prompt initiation of aggressive treatment, especially catheter ablation, should be considered for these patients., (Copyright © 2015 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Inappropriate ICD shocks are common adverse events; they are mainly due to supraventricular arrhythmias and secondly are related to noise, undersensing, oversensing, device malfunctions. We present a case of inappropriate device therapy due to myopotential oversensing in a patient with a subcutaneous ICD (s-ICD). A 58 years old male with an s-ICD during the device interrogation showed a previous episode of suspected sustained ventricular tachycardia at 210 bpm, which was effectively treated with ICD shock. The patient experienced the electrical shock while holding a big gas-cylinder in his arms. The EGM analysis revealed many irregular ventricular signals of low amplitude lasting for 24 s and interrupted by the shock. The device showed no malfunctions. This is the first case report of inappropriate S-ICD shock related to myopotential over-sensing. By recording intracardiac EGM, we demonstrated that the noise was created by the activity of the pectorals muscles., (Copyright © 2015 Cardiological Society of India. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The true incidence of life-threatening ventricular tachyarrhythmic events and the risk of sudden cardiac death in the early stage of peripartum cardiomyopathy (PPCM) are still unknown. We aimed to assess the usefulness of the wearable cardioverter/defibrillator (WCD) to bridge a potential risk for life-threatening arrhythmic events in patients with early PPCM, severely reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and symptoms of heart failure., Methods and Results: Twelve consecutively admitted women with PPCM were included in this single-centre, prospective observational study between September 2012 and September 2013. Patients with LVEF ≤35% were considered to use the WCD for 3 months or even 6 months when considered necessary for LVEF recovery. Nine of the 12 women had a severely reduced LVEF (mean 18.3%) at the time of study enrollment; seven women received a WCD, while two patients refused to wear a WCD. During a median WCD follow-up of 81 days (range 25-345 days), we observed a total of four events of ventricular fibrillation with appropriate and successful WCD shocks in three of the seven women receiving a WCD. No syncope or sudden arrhythmic deaths occurred in women not using the WCD during a median follow-up of 12 months (range 5-15 months). All women showed impressive improvement of LVEF during follow-up., Conclusion: PPCM patients with severely reduced LVEF have an elevated risk for ventricular tachyarrhythmias early after diagnosis. Therefore, use of the WCD should be considered in all women with early-stage PPCM and severely reduced LVEF during the first 6 months after initiation of heart failure therapy., (© 2014 The Authors European Journal of Heart Failure © 2014 European Society of Cardiology.)