Mehmet K Aktaş1, Arwa Younis2, Wojciech Zareba3, Valentina Kutyifa3, Helmut Klein3, James P Daubert4, Mark Estes5, Scott McNitt3, Bronislava Polonsky3, Ilan Goldenberg3. 1. Clinical Cardiovascular Research Center, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York, USA. Electronic address: mehmet_aktas@urmc.rochester.edu. 2. Clinical Cardiovascular Research Center, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York, USA. Electronic address: https://twitter.com/arwayounis2. 3. Clinical Cardiovascular Research Center, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York, USA. 4. Division of Cardiology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 5. University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are conflicting data on the impact of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shocks on subsequent mortality. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine whether the arrhythmic substrate leading to ICD therapy or the therapy itself increases mortality. METHODS: The study cohort included 5,516 ICD recipients who were enrolled in 5 landmark ICD trials (MADIT-II, MADIT-RISK, MADIT-CRT, MADIT-RIT, RAID). The authors evaluated the association of device therapy with subsequent mortality in 4 separate time-dependent models: model I, type of ICD therapy; model II, type of arrhythmia for which ICD therapy was delivered; model III, combined assessment of all arrhythmia and therapy types during follow-up; and model IV, incremental risk associated with repeated ICD shocks. RESULTS: When analyzed by the type of ICD therapy (model I), a first appropriate ICD shock was associated with increased risk of subsequent mortality with or without concomitant occurrence of inappropriate shock during follow-up (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.78 and 2.31; p < 0.001 and p = 0.12), whereas inappropriate shock alone was not associated with mortality risk (HR: 1.23; p = 0.42). Similarly, ICD therapy for ventricular tachycardia (VT) ≥200 beats/min or ventricular fibrillation (VF) (model II) was associated with increased risk of death with or without concomitant therapy for VT <200 beats/min (HRs: 2.25 and 2.62; both p < 0.001), whereas appropriate therapy for VT <200 beats/min or inappropriate therapy (regardless of etiology) did not reach statistical significance (all p > 0.10). Combined assessment of all therapy and arrhythmia types during follow-up (model III) showed that appropriate ICD shocks for VF, shocks for fast VT (≥200 beats/min) without prior antitachycardia pacing (ATP), as well as shocks for fast VT delivered after failed ATP, were associated with the highest risk of subsequent death (HR: all >2.8; p < 0.001). Finally, 2 or more ICD appropriate shocks were not associated with incremental risk to the first appropriate ICD shock (model IV). CONCLUSION: The combined data from 5 landmark ICD trials suggest that the underlying arrhythmic substrate rather than the ICD therapy is the more important determinant of mortality in ICD recipients.
BACKGROUND: There are conflicting data on the impact of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shocks on subsequent mortality. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine whether the arrhythmic substrate leading to ICD therapy or the therapy itself increases mortality. METHODS: The study cohort included 5,516 ICD recipients who were enrolled in 5 landmark ICD trials (MADIT-II, MADIT-RISK, MADIT-CRT, MADIT-RIT, RAID). The authors evaluated the association of device therapy with subsequent mortality in 4 separate time-dependent models: model I, type of ICD therapy; model II, type of arrhythmia for which ICD therapy was delivered; model III, combined assessment of all arrhythmia and therapy types during follow-up; and model IV, incremental risk associated with repeated ICD shocks. RESULTS: When analyzed by the type of ICD therapy (model I), a first appropriate ICD shock was associated with increased risk of subsequent mortality with or without concomitant occurrence of inappropriate shock during follow-up (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.78 and 2.31; p < 0.001 and p = 0.12), whereas inappropriate shock alone was not associated with mortality risk (HR: 1.23; p = 0.42). Similarly, ICD therapy for ventricular tachycardia (VT) ≥200 beats/min or ventricular fibrillation (VF) (model II) was associated with increased risk of death with or without concomitant therapy for VT <200 beats/min (HRs: 2.25 and 2.62; both p < 0.001), whereas appropriate therapy for VT <200 beats/min or inappropriate therapy (regardless of etiology) did not reach statistical significance (all p > 0.10). Combined assessment of all therapy and arrhythmia types during follow-up (model III) showed that appropriate ICD shocks for VF, shocks for fast VT (≥200 beats/min) without prior antitachycardia pacing (ATP), as well as shocks for fast VT delivered after failed ATP, were associated with the highest risk of subsequent death (HR: all >2.8; p < 0.001). Finally, 2 or more ICD appropriate shocks were not associated with incremental risk to the first appropriate ICD shock (model IV). CONCLUSION: The combined data from 5 landmark ICD trials suggest that the underlying arrhythmic substrate rather than the ICD therapy is the more important determinant of mortality in ICD recipients.
Authors: Maurizio Gasparini; Alessandro Proclemer; Catherine Klersy; Axel Kloppe; Maurizio Lunati; José Bautista Martìnez Ferrer; Ahmad Hersi; Marcin Gulaj; Maurits C E F Wijfels; Elisabetta Santi; Laura Manotta; Angel Arenal Journal: JAMA Date: 2013-05-08 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Takuro Nishimura; Gaurav A Upadhyay; Zaid A Aziz; Andrew D Beaser; Dalise Y Shatz; Hemal M Nayak; Roderick Tung Journal: Circulation Date: 2020-11-10 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Arthur J Moss; Henry Greenberg; Robert B Case; Wojciech Zareba; W Jackson Hall; Mary W Brown; James P Daubert; Scott McNitt; Mark L Andrews; Adam D Elkin Journal: Circulation Date: 2004-12-06 Impact factor: 29.690
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: Brian D Powell; Leslie A Saxon; John P Boehmer; John D Day; F Roosevelt Gilliam; Paul A Heidenreich; Paul W Jones; Matthew J Rousseau; David L Hayes Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-06-27 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Arthur J Moss; Claudio Schuger; Christopher A Beck; Mary W Brown; David S Cannom; James P Daubert; N A Mark Estes; Henry Greenberg; W Jackson Hall; David T Huang; Josef Kautzner; Helmut Klein; Scott McNitt; Brian Olshansky; Morio Shoda; David Wilber; Wojciech Zareba Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-11-06 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Amanda D F Fernandes; Gilson C Fernandes; Caique M P Ternes; Rhanderson Cardoso; Sandra V Chaparro; Jeffrey J Goldberger Journal: Heart Rhythm O2 Date: 2021-12-17
Authors: Diana M Frodi; Maarten Z H Kolk; Joss Langford; Tariq O Andersen; Reinoud E Knops; Hanno L Tan; Jesper H Svendsen; Fleur V Y Tjong; Soeren Z Diederichsen Journal: Cardiovasc Digit Health J Date: 2021-10-13