BACKGROUND: The relationship between shocks, device programming, and atrial fibrillation (AF) with a rapid ventricular rate (AF + RVR) using continuous daily monitoring has not been studied in large number of patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this analysis was to determine the impact of ICD programming and ventricular rate control during AF on ICD shocks. METHODS: An observational cohort analysis was performed with dual-chamber ICD and cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator devices. The primary endpoint was spontaneous all-cause shocked episodes per 100 patient-years. Shock reduction programming strategies were entered into a multivariable model including slowest ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF) detection threshold, number of intervals to detect VF (NID), supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) discriminators ON, antitachycardia pacing (ATP) ON for fast VTs (FVTs) and AF + RVR (AF ≥1 hour for ≥1 day with average ≥110 beats per minute). We also characterized the predictive ability of AF + RVR to identify patients at risk of subsequent shocks. RESULTS: There were 106,513 patients at 2858 institutions, with 2.5 ± 1.4 years of follow-up, 75% being male, age 67 ± 12 years, 59% with dual-chamber ICDs, and 11% with AF + RVR. A total of 22,062 patients (21%) received 82,396 shocks. After adjusting for all variables, AF + RVR, slower VT/VF detection threshold, and shorter VF NID were found to be associated with more shocks (P < .05 for all). Continuous monitoring of AF + RVR identified patients at up to 5-fold increased risk of shocks. CONCLUSIONS: Faster VT/VF detection thresholds, longer detection durations, use of SVT discriminators, and delivery of ATP reduces all-cause ICD shocks. Continuous monitoring of AF + RVR identifies patients at the highest risk of future ICD shocks.
BACKGROUND: The relationship between shocks, device programming, and atrial fibrillation (AF) with a rapid ventricular rate (AF + RVR) using continuous daily monitoring has not been studied in large number of patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this analysis was to determine the impact of ICD programming and ventricular rate control during AF on ICD shocks. METHODS: An observational cohort analysis was performed with dual-chamber ICD and cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator devices. The primary endpoint was spontaneous all-cause shocked episodes per 100 patient-years. Shock reduction programming strategies were entered into a multivariable model including slowest ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF) detection threshold, number of intervals to detect VF (NID), supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) discriminators ON, antitachycardia pacing (ATP) ON for fast VTs (FVTs) and AF + RVR (AF ≥1 hour for ≥1 day with average ≥110 beats per minute). We also characterized the predictive ability of AF + RVR to identify patients at risk of subsequent shocks. RESULTS: There were 106,513 patients at 2858 institutions, with 2.5 ± 1.4 years of follow-up, 75% being male, age 67 ± 12 years, 59% with dual-chamber ICDs, and 11% with AF + RVR. A total of 22,062 patients (21%) received 82,396 shocks. After adjusting for all variables, AF + RVR, slower VT/VF detection threshold, and shorter VF NID were found to be associated with more shocks (P < .05 for all). Continuous monitoring of AF + RVR identified patients at up to 5-fold increased risk of shocks. CONCLUSIONS: Faster VT/VF detection thresholds, longer detection durations, use of SVT discriminators, and delivery of ATP reduces all-cause ICD shocks. Continuous monitoring of AF + RVR identifies patients at the highest risk of future ICD shocks.
Authors: Laura Perrotta; Brunilda Xhaferi; Marco Chiostri; Paolo Pieragnoli; Giuseppe Ricciardi; Luigi Di Biase; Andrea Natale; Ilaria Ricceri; Mazda Biria; Dhanunjay Lakkireddy; Alessandro Valleggi; Michele Emdin; Federica Michelotti; Giosuè Mascioli; Angela Pandozi; Massimo Santini; Luigi Padeletti Journal: Intern Emerg Med Date: 2012-12-19 Impact factor: 3.397
Authors: Nicholas Sunderland; Amit Kaura; Anthony Li; Ravi Kamdar; Ed Petzer; Para Dhillon; Francis Murgatroyd; Paul A Scott Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2016-06-03 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Bruce L Wilkoff; Laurent Fauchier; Martin K Stiles; Carlos A Morillo; Sana M Al-Khatib; Jesœs Almendral; Luis Aguinaga; Ronald D Berger; Alejandro Cuesta; James P Daubert; Sergio Dubner; Kenneth A Ellenbogen; N A Mark Estes; Guilherme Fenelon; Fermin C Garcia; Maurizio Gasparini; David E Haines; Jeff S Healey; Jodie L Hurtwitz; Roberto Keegan; Christof Kolb; Karl-Heinz Kuck; Germanas Marinskis; Martino Martinelli; Mark McGuire; Luis G Molina; Ken Okumura; Alessandro Proclemer; Andrea M Russo; Jagmeet P Singh; Charles D Swerdlow; Wee Siong Teo; William Uribe; Sami Viskin; Chun-Chieh Wang; Shu Zhang Journal: J Arrhythm Date: 2016-02-01
Authors: Mark K Elliott; Vishal S Mehta; Dejana Martic; Baldeep S Sidhu; Steven Niederer; Christopher A Rinaldi Journal: Heart Rhythm O2 Date: 2021-12-17