Lakshmi Peddareddy1, Faisal M Merchant2, Angel R Leon2, Paige Smith1, Akshar Patel3, Mikhael F El-Chami2. 1. Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA. 2. Emory University School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Section of Electrophysiology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA. 3. Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing is recommended with the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (SICD). OBJECTIVE: To describe first shock efficacy for appropriate SICD therapies stratified by the presence of implant DFT testing. METHODS: We reviewed all patients receiving SICDs at our institution and stratified them based on whether implant DFT testing was performed. Appropriate shocks were reviewed to see if ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF) terminated with a single shock. First shock efficacy was stratified by implant DFT status. RESULTS: 178 patients implanted with SICDs and followed in our center were included in this study. Of these, 135 (76%) underwent DFT testing (DFT (+) group). In the DFT (+), 80 appropriate shocks were needed to treat 69 episodes of VT/VF. The first shock was effective in 61 out of 69 episodes (88.4%), whereas multiple shocks were required to terminate VT/VF in the remaining eight episodes. Among 43 patients without implant DFT testing (DFT (-) group), 20 appropriate shocks to treat 17 episodes of VT/VF occurred in seven patients. VT/VF was successfully terminated with the first shock in 16 out of 17 episodes (first shock efficacy 94.1 %). There was no significant difference in first shock effectiveness between those with and without implant DFT testing (P = 0.97). CONCLUSION: A strategy that omits DFT testing at implant did not appear to compromise the effectiveness of the SICD. These data suggest that routine DFT testing at SICD implant might not be necessary. Randomized trials are needed to confirm this finding.
BACKGROUND: Defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing is recommended with the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (SICD). OBJECTIVE: To describe first shock efficacy for appropriate SICD therapies stratified by the presence of implant DFT testing. METHODS: We reviewed all patients receiving SICDs at our institution and stratified them based on whether implant DFT testing was performed. Appropriate shocks were reviewed to see if ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF) terminated with a single shock. First shock efficacy was stratified by implant DFT status. RESULTS: 178 patients implanted with SICDs and followed in our center were included in this study. Of these, 135 (76%) underwent DFT testing (DFT (+) group). In the DFT (+), 80 appropriate shocks were needed to treat 69 episodes of VT/VF. The first shock was effective in 61 out of 69 episodes (88.4%), whereas multiple shocks were required to terminate VT/VF in the remaining eight episodes. Among 43 patients without implant DFT testing (DFT (-) group), 20 appropriate shocks to treat 17 episodes of VT/VF occurred in seven patients. VT/VF was successfully terminated with the first shock in 16 out of 17 episodes (first shock efficacy 94.1 %). There was no significant difference in first shock effectiveness between those with and without implant DFT testing (P = 0.97). CONCLUSION: A strategy that omits DFT testing at implant did not appear to compromise the effectiveness of the SICD. These data suggest that routine DFT testing at SICD implant might not be necessary. Randomized trials are needed to confirm this finding.
Authors: Ian Crozier; David O'Donnell; Lucas Boersma; Francis Murgatroyd; Jaimie Manlucu; Bradley P Knight; Ulrika Maria Birgersdotter-Green; Christophe Leclercq; Amy Thompson; Robert Sawchuk; Sarah Willey; Christopher Wiggenhorn; Paul Friedman Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2021-08-05 Impact factor: 2.942