Daniel Hofer1,2, Jan Steffel3, David Hürlimann4, Laurent Haegeli3, Thomas F Lüscher3, Firat Duru5,3,6, Urs Eriksson5,3,6, Nazmi Krasniqi5,3. 1. Division of Cardiology, Zurich Regional Health Center Wetzikon, Spitalstrasse 66, 8620, Wetzikon, Switzerland. daniel-hofer@hotmail.com. 2. Heart Center Zurich, Division of Cardiology and Electrophysiology, University Hospital Zurich, Rämistrasse 100, 8006, Zürich, Switzerland. daniel-hofer@hotmail.com. 3. Heart Center Zurich, Division of Cardiology and Electrophysiology, University Hospital Zurich, Rämistrasse 100, 8006, Zürich, Switzerland. 4. HerzKlinik Hirslanden, Klinik Hirslanden, Witellikerstrasse 40, 8032, Zurich, Switzerland. 5. Division of Cardiology, Zurich Regional Health Center Wetzikon, Spitalstrasse 66, 8620, Wetzikon, Switzerland. 6. Zurich Center for Integrative Human Physiology, Zurich, Switzerland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) are life-saving device therapy, and patients often carry devices for decades with interim pulse generator exchanges. Inappropriate shocks are associated with impaired quality of life and increased mortality, but available data on their incidence and etiology outside of clinical trials is limited and usually restricted to the lifespan of a singular device. We hypothesized that the incidence in clinical practice is underestimated and aimed this study to retrospectively assess the long-term incidence and etiology of inappropriate shocks in a real-world cohort of patients with multiple ICDs over a long follow-up period. METHODS: Patients with ICDs implanted between 1998 and 2012 in two Swiss cardiology departments and at least one device exchange in the same department thereafter were included in this cohort. Retrospective analysis with follow-up until 2016 was conducted to assess incidence and etiology of inappropriate ICD shocks. RESULTS: Two hundred forty-nine ICDs were implanted in 100 patients (mean age: 60.1 ± 11.7; 80% male). Over a mean follow-up time of 11.2 (± 3.6) years, 555 shocks occurred in 55 patients. One hundred twenty-three (22%) shocks in 23 (23%) patients were inappropriate. Supraventricular arrhythmia and oversensing were the most frequent causes of inappropriate shock. Patients with younger age or previous supraventricular arrhythmias were at increased risk of inappropriate shocks. Patients with inappropriate shocks during the lifespan of their first ICD were at increased risk for inappropriate shocks in subsequent devices. CONCLUSIONS: Inappropriate shocks are an underestimated and frequent problem in clinical practice with an incidence that may exceed numbers of previously reported clinical trials with shorter follow-up periods. Patients at increased risk for inappropriate shocks need careful evaluation of potential therapeutic optimization strategies including pharmacological treatment, device programming, electrophysiological ablation, device downgrading, and telemonitoring.
BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) are life-saving device therapy, and patients often carry devices for decades with interim pulse generator exchanges. Inappropriate shocks are associated with impaired quality of life and increased mortality, but available data on their incidence and etiology outside of clinical trials is limited and usually restricted to the lifespan of a singular device. We hypothesized that the incidence in clinical practice is underestimated and aimed this study to retrospectively assess the long-term incidence and etiology of inappropriate shocks in a real-world cohort of patients with multiple ICDs over a long follow-up period. METHODS:Patients with ICDs implanted between 1998 and 2012 in two Swiss cardiology departments and at least one device exchange in the same department thereafter were included in this cohort. Retrospective analysis with follow-up until 2016 was conducted to assess incidence and etiology of inappropriate ICD shocks. RESULTS: Two hundred forty-nine ICDs were implanted in 100 patients (mean age: 60.1 ± 11.7; 80% male). Over a mean follow-up time of 11.2 (± 3.6) years, 555 shocks occurred in 55 patients. One hundred twenty-three (22%) shocks in 23 (23%) patients were inappropriate. Supraventricular arrhythmia and oversensing were the most frequent causes of inappropriate shock. Patients with younger age or previous supraventricular arrhythmias were at increased risk of inappropriate shocks. Patients with inappropriate shocks during the lifespan of their first ICD were at increased risk for inappropriate shocks in subsequent devices. CONCLUSIONS:Inappropriate shocks are an underestimated and frequent problem in clinical practice with an incidence that may exceed numbers of previously reported clinical trials with shorter follow-up periods. Patients at increased risk for inappropriate shocks need careful evaluation of potential therapeutic optimization strategies including pharmacological treatment, device programming, electrophysiological ablation, device downgrading, and telemonitoring.
Authors: Johannes B van Rees; C Jan Willem Borleffs; Mihály K de Bie; Theo Stijnen; Lieselot van Erven; Jeroen J Bax; Martin J Schalij Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2011-02-01 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Arthur J Moss; Wojciech Zareba; W Jackson Hall; Helmut Klein; David J Wilber; David S Cannom; James P Daubert; Steven L Higgins; Mary W Brown; Mark L Andrews Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-03-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Gust H Bardy; Kerry L Lee; Daniel B Mark; Jeanne E Poole; Douglas L Packer; Robin Boineau; Michael Domanski; Charles Troutman; Jill Anderson; George Johnson; Steven E McNulty; Nancy Clapp-Channing; Linda D Davidson-Ray; Elizabeth S Fraulo; Daniel P Fishbein; Richard M Luceri; John H Ip Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-01-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Sue Ann Thomas; Erika Friedmann; Chi-Wen Kao; Pia Inguito; Matthew Metcalf; Frances J Kelley; Steven S Gottlieb Journal: Am J Crit Care Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 2.228
Authors: Michael O Sweeney; Mark S Wathen; Kent Volosin; Ismaile Abdalla; Paul J DeGroot; Mary F Otterness; Alice J Stark Journal: Circulation Date: 2005-05-31 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: F Roosevelt Gilliam; David L Hayes; John P Boehmer; John Day; Paul A Heidenreich; Milan Seth; Paul W Jones; Kenneth M Stein; Leslie A Saxon Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2011-05-31
Authors: James P Daubert; Wojciech Zareba; David S Cannom; Scott McNitt; Spencer Z Rosero; Paul Wang; Claudio Schuger; Jonathan S Steinberg; Steven L Higgins; David J Wilber; Helmut Klein; Mark L Andrews; W Jackson Hall; Arthur J Moss Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2008-04-08 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Alan Kadish; Alan Dyer; James P Daubert; Rebecca Quigg; N A Mark Estes; Kelley P Anderson; Hugh Calkins; David Hoch; Jeffrey Goldberger; Alaa Shalaby; William E Sanders; Andi Schaechter; Joseph H Levine Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-05-20 Impact factor: 91.245
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: Mehmet K Aktaş; Arwa Younis; Wojciech Zareba; Valentina Kutyifa; Helmut Klein; James P Daubert; Mark Estes; Scott McNitt; Bronislava Polonsky; Ilan Goldenberg Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2021-05-25 Impact factor: 27.203
Authors: Isaac L Goldenthal; Marlon S Rosenbaum; Matthew Lewis; Robert R Sciacca; Hasan Garan; Angelo B Biviano Journal: Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc Date: 2020-05-26
Authors: Lucy Bolt; Maria M Wertli; Alan G Haynes; Nicolas Rodondi; Arnaud Chiolero; Radoslaw Panczak; Drahomir Aujesky Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-02-16 Impact factor: 3.240