Avi Sabbag1, Mahmoud Suleiman2, Avishag Laish-Farkash3, Nimer Samania4, Mark Kazatsker5, Ilan Goldenberg6, Michael Glikson6, Roy Beinart6. 1. The Heart Center, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel. Electronic address: avisabbag@gmail.com. 2. Cardiology Department, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel. 3. The Cardiology Complex, Barzilai Medical Center, Ashkelon, Israel. 4. Cardiology Department , Bani Zion, Haifa, Israel. 5. Heart Institute, Hillel Yaffe Medical Center, Hadera, Israel. 6. The Heart Center, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) have become the mainstay of preventive measures for sudden cardiac death (SCD). However, there are limited data on rates of appropriate life-saving ICD shock therapies in contemporary real-life settings. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the rate of appropriate life-saving ICD shock therapies in a contemporary registry. METHODS: The Israeli ICD Registry includes all implants and other ICD operative procedures nationwide. The present study comprises 2349 consecutive cases who were enrolled in the Registry and prospectively followed up for information regarding survival, hospitalizations, and ICD therapies since 2010. RESULTS: Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that the rate of appropriate ICD shock therapy at 30-month follow-up was 2.6% among patients who received an ICD for primary prevention compared with 7.4% among those who received a device for secondary prevention (log-rank P < .001). Rates of appropriate ICD shocks among primary prevention patients were 1.1% at 1-year of follow-up and 2.6% at 30 months, whereas the corresponding rates in the secondary prevention group were 3.8% at 1 year and 7.4% at 30 months (log-rank P < .001). A total of 253 patients (4.8%) died during follow-up, 65% of noncardiac causes. CONCLUSION: Rates of life-saving appropriate ICD shock therapies among patients implanted with a defibrillator for the primary prevention of SCD in a contemporary real-world setting are lower than reported previously. These findings suggest a need for improved risk stratification and patient selection in this population.
BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) have become the mainstay of preventive measures for sudden cardiac death (SCD). However, there are limited data on rates of appropriate life-saving ICD shock therapies in contemporary real-life settings. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the rate of appropriate life-saving ICD shock therapies in a contemporary registry. METHODS: The Israeli ICD Registry includes all implants and other ICD operative procedures nationwide. The present study comprises 2349 consecutive cases who were enrolled in the Registry and prospectively followed up for information regarding survival, hospitalizations, and ICD therapies since 2010. RESULTS: Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that the rate of appropriate ICD shock therapy at 30-month follow-up was 2.6% among patients who received an ICD for primary prevention compared with 7.4% among those who received a device for secondary prevention (log-rank P < .001). Rates of appropriate ICD shocks among primary prevention patients were 1.1% at 1-year of follow-up and 2.6% at 30 months, whereas the corresponding rates in the secondary prevention group were 3.8% at 1 year and 7.4% at 30 months (log-rank P < .001). A total of 253 patients (4.8%) died during follow-up, 65% of noncardiac causes. CONCLUSION: Rates of life-saving appropriate ICD shock therapies among patients implanted with a defibrillator for the primary prevention of SCD in a contemporary real-world setting are lower than reported previously. These findings suggest a need for improved risk stratification and patient selection in this population.
Authors: Inna Y Gong; Payam Yazdan-Ashoori; Laura Jimenez-Juan; Nigel S Tan; Paul Angaran; Binita Riya Chacko; Saif Al-Mousawy; Sheldon M Singh; Tamar Shalmon; Luciano Folador; Iqwal Mangat; Djeven P Deva; Andrew T Yan Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2021-03-01 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Emily P Zeitler; Sana M Al-Khatib; Daniel J Friedman; Joo Yoon Han; Jeanne E Poole; Gust H Bardy; J Thomas Bigger; Alfred E Buxton; Arthur J Moss; Kerry L Lee; Paul Dorian; Riccardo Cappato; Alan H Kadish; Peter J Kudenchuk; Daniel B Mark; Lurdes Y T Inoue; Gillian D Sanders Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2017-08-23
Authors: Erdal Safak; Lars Eckardt; Werner Jung; Hüseyin Ince; Jochen Senges; Matthias Hochadel; Christian Perings; Stefan Spitzer; Johannes Brachmann; Karlheinz Seidl; Hans Ulrich Hink; Giuseppe D'Ancona Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2019-08-02 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Camila M Urzua Fresno; Luciano Folador; Tamar Shalmon; Faisal Mhd Dib Hamad; Sheldon M Singh; Gauri R Karur; Nigel S Tan; Iqwal Mangat; Anish Kirpalani; Binita Riya Chacko; Laura Jimenez-Juan; Andrew T Yan; Djeven P Deva Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2021-06-10 Impact factor: 5.364