Daniel A Randles1, Nathaniel M Hawkins1, Matthew Shaw1, Ashish Y Patwala2, Stephen J Pettit1, David J Wright3. 1. Institute of Cardiovascular Medicine and Science, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Thomas Drive, Liverpool, L14 3PE, UK. 2. Department of Cardiology, University Hospital of North Staffordshire, Stoke on Trent, ST4 7LN, UK. 3. Institute of Cardiovascular Medicine and Science, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Thomas Drive, Liverpool, L14 3PE, UK David.Wright@lhch.nhs.uk.
Abstract
AIMS: To determine the number of patients with a primary or secondary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) indication who are eligible for subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) implantation according to the S-ICD manufacturer's surface electrocardiogram (ECG) screening template. METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred and ninety-six ICD patients with a non-paced ventricle were assessed using erect and supine ECG limb lead recordings to simulate the three S-ICD sensing vectors. Each ECG lead was scrutinized by two independent observers. Subcutaneous ICD eligibility required two or more leads to satisfy the S-ICD screening template in both erect and supine positions. Overall, 85.2% of patients [95% confidence interval (CI): 80.2-90.2%] fulfilled surface ECG screening criteria. The proportion of patients with 3, 2, 1, and 0 qualifying leads were 37.2% (95% CI: 30.4-44.0%), 48.0% (95% CI: 41.0-55.0%), 11.2% (95% CI: 6.8-15.6%), and 3.6% (95% CI: 1.0-6.2%). The S-ICD screening template was satisfied more often by Lead III (primary vector, 83.7%, 95% CI: 78.5-88.9%) and Lead II (secondary vector, 82.7%, 95% CI: 77.4-88.0%) compared with Lead I (alternate vector, 52.6%, 95% CI: 45.6-59.6%). A prolonged QRS duration was the only baseline characteristic independently associated with ineligibility for S-ICD implantation. There was 92.9% agreement between the two independent observers in assessment of eligibility using the S-ICD screening template. CONCLUSION: About 85.2% of patients with an indication for a primary or secondary prevention ICD have a surface ECG that is suitable for S-ICD implantation when assessed with an S-ICD screening template. There is minor inter-observer variation in assessment of eligibility using the S-ICD screening template. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
AIMS: To determine the number of patients with a primary or secondary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) indication who are eligible for subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) implantation according to the S-ICD manufacturer's surface electrocardiogram (ECG) screening template. METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred and ninety-six ICD patients with a non-paced ventricle were assessed using erect and supine ECG limb lead recordings to simulate the three S-ICD sensing vectors. Each ECG lead was scrutinized by two independent observers. Subcutaneous ICD eligibility required two or more leads to satisfy the S-ICD screening template in both erect and supine positions. Overall, 85.2% of patients [95% confidence interval (CI): 80.2-90.2%] fulfilled surface ECG screening criteria. The proportion of patients with 3, 2, 1, and 0 qualifying leads were 37.2% (95% CI: 30.4-44.0%), 48.0% (95% CI: 41.0-55.0%), 11.2% (95% CI: 6.8-15.6%), and 3.6% (95% CI: 1.0-6.2%). The S-ICD screening template was satisfied more often by Lead III (primary vector, 83.7%, 95% CI: 78.5-88.9%) and Lead II (secondary vector, 82.7%, 95% CI: 77.4-88.0%) compared with Lead I (alternate vector, 52.6%, 95% CI: 45.6-59.6%). A prolonged QRS duration was the only baseline characteristic independently associated with ineligibility for S-ICD implantation. There was 92.9% agreement between the two independent observers in assessment of eligibility using the S-ICD screening template. CONCLUSION: About 85.2% of patients with an indication for a primary or secondary prevention ICD have a surface ECG that is suitable for S-ICD implantation when assessed with an S-ICD screening template. There is minor inter-observer variation in assessment of eligibility using the S-ICD screening template. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
Authors: Pau Alonso; Joaquín Osca; Joaquín Rueda; Oscar Cano; Pedro Pimenta; Ana Andres; María José Sancho; Luis Martinez Journal: Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol Date: 2017-05-15 Impact factor: 1.468
Authors: Vincent C Thomas; Mark Peterson; Martin McDaniel; Humberto Restrepo; Abraham Rothman; Amit Jain Journal: Pediatr Cardiol Date: 2017-05-22 Impact factor: 1.655
Authors: Markus Bettin; Dirk Dechering; Gerrit Frommeyer; Robert Larbig; Andreas Löher; Florian Reinke; Julia Köbe; Lars Eckardt Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2017-12-28 Impact factor: 5.460