Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillator Recipients Research Articles

Assessment of Antitachycardia Pacing in Primary Prevention Patients

The emergence of novel programming guidelines that reduce premature and inappropriate therapies along with the availability of new implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) technologies lacking traditional endocardial antitachycardia pacing (ATP) capabilities requires the reevaluation of ATP as a first strategy in terminating fast ventricular tachycardias (VTs) in primary prevention ICD recipients. To assess the role of ATP in terminating fast VTs in primary prevention ICD recipients with contemporary programming. This global, prospective, double-blind, randomized clinical trial had an equivalence design with a relative margin of 35%. Superiority tests were performed at interim analyses and the final analysis if equivalence was not proven. Patients were enrolled between September 2016 and April 2021 at 134 sites in 8 countries, with the last date of follow-up on July 6, 2023. Patients were required to have an indication for a primary prevention ICD, including left ventricular ejection fraction less than or equal to 35%. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive ATP plus shock vs shock only. The primary end point was time to first all-cause shock. Secondary end points included time to first appropriate shock, time to first inappropriate shock, all-cause mortality, and the composite of time to first all-cause shock plus all-cause mortality. A total of 2595 patients were randomized (mean age, 63.9 years; 22.4% were females). At a mean follow-up of 38 months, first all-cause shock occurred in 129 participants in the ATP plus shock group and 178 participants in the shock only group. The hazard ratio (HR) for the primary end point was 0.72 (95.9% CI, 0.57-0.92), with P = .005 for superiority of the ATP plus shock group over the shock only group. During follow-up in an intention-to-treat analysis, the total shock burden per 100 patient-years was not statistically different, at 12.3 and 14.9, respectively (P = .70). The use of a single burst of ATP prior to shock in primary prevention ICD recipients with modern ICD detection programming prolonged the time to first all-cause ICD shock. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02923726.

Competing risks of monomorphic vs. non-monomorphic ventricular arrhythmias in primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients: Global Electrical Heterogeneity and Clinical Outcomes (GEHCO) study.

Ablation of monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (MMVT) has been shown to reduce shock frequency and improve survival. We aimed to compare cause-specific risk factors for MMVT and polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (PVT)/ventricular fibrillation (VF) and to develop predictive models. The multicentre retrospective cohort study included 2668 patients (age 63.1 ± 13.0 years; 23% female; 78% white; 43% non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy; left ventricular ejection fraction 28.2 ± 11.1%). Cox models were adjusted for demographic characteristics, heart failure severity and treatment, device programming, and electrocardiogram metrics. Global electrical heterogeneity was measured by spatial QRS-T angle (QRSTa), spatial ventricular gradient elevation (SVGel), azimuth, magnitude (SVGmag), and sum absolute QRST integral (SAIQRST). We compared the out-of-sample performance of the lasso and elastic net for Cox proportional hazards and the Fine-Gray competing risk model. During a median follow-up of 4 years, 359 patients experienced their first sustained MMVT with appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy, and 129 patients had their first PVT/VF with appropriate ICD shock. The risk of MMVT was associated with wider QRSTa [hazard ratio (HR) 1.16; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-1.34], larger SVGel (HR 1.17; 95% CI 1.05-1.30), and smaller SVGmag (HR 0.74; 95% CI 0.63-0.86) and SAIQRST (HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.71-0.99). The best-performing 3-year competing risk Fine-Gray model for MMVT [time-dependent area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC(t)AUC) 0.728; 95% CI 0.668-0.788] identified high-risk (> 50%) patients with 75% sensitivity and 65% specificity, and PVT/VF prediction model had ROC(t)AUC 0.915 (95% CI 0.868-0.962), both satisfactory calibration. We developed and validated models to predict the competing risks of MMVT or PVT/VF that could inform procedural planning and future randomized controlled trials of prophylactic ventricular tachycardia ablation. URL:www.clinicaltrials.gov Unique identifier:NCT03210883.

Impact of a Chronic Total Coronary Occlusion on the Incidence of Appropriate Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Shocks and Mortality: A Substudy of the Dutch Outcome in ICD Therapy (DO-IT)) Registry.

Chronic total coronary occlusions (CTO) substantially increase the risk for sudden cardiac death. Among patients with chronic ischemic heart disease at risk for sudden cardiac death, an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is the favored therapy for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death. This study sought to investigate the impact of CTOs on the risk for appropriate ICD shocks and mortality within a nationwide prospective cohort. This is a subanalysis of the nationwide Dutch-Outcome in ICD Therapy (DO-IT) registry of primary prevention ICD recipients in The Netherlands between September 2014 and June 2016 (n=1442). We identified patients with chronic ischemic heart disease (n=663) and assessed available coronary angiograms for CTO presence (n=415). Patients with revascularized CTOs were excluded (n=79). The primary end point was the composite of all-cause mortality and appropriate ICD shocks. Clinical follow-up was conducted for at least 2 years. A total of 336 patients were included, with an average age of 67±9 years, and 20.5% was female (n=69). An unrevascularized CTO was identified in 110 patients (32.7%). During a median follow-up period of 27 months (interquartile range, 24-32), the primary end point occurred in 21.1% of patients with CTO (n=23) compared with 11.9% in patients without CTO (n=27; P=0.034). Corrected for baseline characteristics including left ventricular ejection fraction, and the presence of a CTO was an independent predictor for the primary end point (hazard ratio, 1.82 [95% CI, 1.03-3.22]; P=0.038). Within this nationwide prospective registry of primary prevention ICD recipients, the presence of an unrevascularized CTO was an independent predictor for the composite outcome of all-cause mortality and appropriate ICD shocks.

Mortality Benefit Among Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Recipients on Contemporary Heart Failure Treatment

BackgroundPast clinical trials have shown the benefit of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) for reducing sudden cardiac death in at-risk patients. However, heart failure management and ICD technology have changed since these trials were first published. An updated assessment of ICD mortality benefit is needed. ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to compare mortality rates between patients with a primary prevention (PP) indication for an ICD who did or did not receive an ICD using a contemporary, real-world data set. MethodsData was obtained from a large electronic health record data set covering patients in the United States from 2012 through 2020 who had a PP indication for an ICD and survived at least 1-year postindication. ResultsA total of 25,296 patients were identified as having a PP indication for ICD implantation, of which 2,118 (8.4%) were treated with an ICD within a year. Treated patients were younger than nontreated patients (age 63.4 years vs 66.1 years) with a smaller proportion of women (25.0% vs 36.7%). After 4-to-1 propensity matching, treated patients had similar clinical characteristics to nontreated patients. A Cox proportional hazard model estimated a 24.3% lower risk of all-cause mortality in patients when treated vs not treated with an ICD (HR: 0.757; 95% CI: 0.678-0.835; P <0.001). There was no detectable difference in ICD benefit between patients with ischemic and nonischemic heart disease (P = 0.50). ConclusionsICD treatment of patients with a PP indication is associated with improved mortality even in the context of evolving adjunctive HF treatment, consistent with earlier landmark trials.

Cardiac magnetic resonance for prophylactic implantable-cardioVerter defibrillator therapy international registry in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy

Abstract Background Sudden cardiac death (SCD) in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) remains a leading cause of death. Current guidelines provide a class I recommendation for implantable cardioverter–defibrillator (ICD) implantation in ICM patients with transthoracic echocardiographic (TTE) left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35%. and NYHA functional class II or III. The current paradigm is suboptimal in identifying patients who are likely to benefit. In fact, only a relatively small proportion of ICD recipients for SCD primary prevention receive appropriate device therapy and instead there is a not negligible percentage of patients who experienced SCD event despite not fulfilling criteria for implantation. Purpose The DERIVATE-ICM registry sought to evaluate the additional prognostic value for the indication of ICD implantation using cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) as compared to standard of care based on TTE in a large cohort of ICM patients. Methods We enrolled 861 ICM patients (86% male, mean age 65±11 years) with chronic heart failure and TTE-LVEF&amp;lt;50%. Major adverse arrhythmic cardiac events (MAACE), defined as the combination of SCD, aborted SCD event, and sustained ventricular tachycardia. were the primary endpoint. Independent predictors were used to calculate a CMR risk score for each patient. Risk levels were defined as low (quantile 1 [Q1]), medium (Q2 and Q3) and high (Q4). Results During a median follow-up of 1054 days, MAACE occurred in 88 (10.2%). Left ventricular end-diastolic volume index (HR:1.007, 95%CI:1.000-1.011, p=0.05), CMR-LVEF (HR:0.972, 95%CI: 0.945-0.999, p=0.045) and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) mass (HR:1.010, 95%CI: 1.002–1.018, p=0.015) were independent predictors of MAACE. Based on the multivariate analysis, CMR weighted risk score was developed according to the following equation [0.005 * EDV/BSA (mL/m2) – 0.029 * LVEF (%) + 0.010 * LGE ischemic mass (g)]. A multiparametric CMR weighted predictive derived score effectively identifies subjects at high risk for MAACE as compared to TTE-LVEF cut-off of 35% with a Continuous NRI: 31.7% (95%CI: 8.6%-54.8%, p=0.007) (Figure 1, Figure 2). Conclusions In this large multicenter registry, a multi-parametric CMR predictive model provides additional prognostic stratification for MAACE predictions in a large cohort of ICM patients as compared to standard of care. This model identifies a large number of patients with TTE-LVEF&amp;lt;35% at low risk of SCD event and on the other side it identifies a subset of patients who are at high risk of MAACE despite TTE-LVEF≥35% (i.e. the population currently not fulfilling the guideline-based criteria for ICD implantation). Further randomized trials to test a CMR guided strategy for ICD implantation versus standard of care are now needed.Kaplan-Meier curvesEvent rate redistribution

Abstract 15930: Using Charlson Comorbidity Index to Predict 1-Year All-Cause Mortality in ICD Recipients

Introduction: Primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (PP-ICD) are indicated in patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 35% despite 3 months of maximally tolerated guideline directed medical therapy (GDMT), who are expected to survive at least 1 year. The Seattle Heart Failure Score, commonly used for evaluation of 1 year survival, only addresses heart failure mortality. The Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) is a validated model of comorbid conditions used to predict 1-year all-cause mortality. Objectives: We aimed to create a predictive model using the CCI to guide eligibility for PP-ICD based on predicted 1-year all-cause mortality in patients with severe cardiomyopathy. Methods: We analyzed clinical data from the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, a large multi-hospital system, between January 2010 and July 2021. Patients receiving PP-ICD were included. We used a logistical regression model based on patients’ CCI, age, race, mean number of GDMT medications, the presence of coronary artery disease (CAD), and baseline LVEF. Results: Of the total cohort of 2,864 patients (mean age 67±12 years; Male 69%; White 85%; LVEF 24±7%; CAD 62%), 235 (8.2%) patients died within 1 year. Patients were on average prescribed 2.0±0.8 GDMT agents and had a mean CCI of 1.4± 1.6. CCI was significantly associated with adjusted 1-year mortality (OR 1.41 per standard deviation of CCI, 95% CI 1.35-1.71, p&lt; 0.001). A receiver operator curve was generated (Figure 1) and a CCI cutoff of 1.54, yielded a sensitivity of 71% and a specificity of 59% (AUC 0.70). Conclusions: Our data demonstrate that a model incorporating the CCI can predict 1-year all-cause mortality in PP-ICD recipients with modest accuracy and could therefore assist in shared-decision making around PP-ICD therapy. Future work should focus on refining the model for higher predictive accuracy.

Effect of Carvedilol vs Metoprolol on Atrial and Ventricular Arrhythmias Among Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Recipients

BackgroundBoth selective and nonselective beta-blockers are used to treat patients with heart failure (HF). However, the data on the association of beta-blocker type with risk of atrial arrhythmia and ventricular arrhythmia (VA) in HF patients with a primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) are limited. ObjectivesThis study sought to evaluate the effect of metoprolol vs carvedilol on the risk of atrial tachyarrhythmia (ATA) and VA in HF patients with an ICD. MethodsThis study pooled primary prevention ICD recipients from 5 landmark ICD trials (MADIT-II, MADIT-CRT, MADIT-RIT, MADIT-RISK, and RAID). Fine and Gray multivariate regression models, stratified by study, were used to evaluate the risk of ATA, inappropriate ICD shocks, and fast VA (defined as ventricular tachycardia ≥200 beats/min or ventricular fibrillation) by beta-blocker type. ResultsAmong 4,194 patients, 2,920 (70%) were prescribed carvedilol and 1,274 (30%) metoprolol. The cumulative incidence of ATA at 3.5 years was 11% in patients treated with carvedilol vs 15% in patients taking metoprolol (P = 0.003). Multivariate analysis showed that carvedilol treatment was associated with a 35% reduction in the risk of ATA (HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.53-0.81; P < 0.001) when compared to metoprolol, and with a corresponding 35% reduction in the risk of inappropriate ICD shocks (HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.47-0.89; P = 0.008). Carvedilol vs metoprolol was also associated with a 16% reduction in the risk of fast VA. However, these findings did not reach statistical significance (HR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.70-1.02; P = 0.085). ConclusionsThese findings suggests that HF patients with ICDs on carvedilol treatment experience a significantly lower risk of ATA and inappropriate ICD shocks when compared to treatment with metoprolol.

Long-term Clinical Outcomes of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Recipients in New Zealand

The long-term clinical outcomes of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) recipients across New Zealand are unknown. This study provides a detailed analysis of long-term clinical outcomes of ICD recipients in New Zealand over the past decade. All patients with an ICD implant between 2010 and 2019 were identified using the National Minimum Dataset, which collects all public hospital admissions in New Zealand using International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision, Australian Modification (ICD10-AM) procedure coding. There were 4,261 patients with a mean follow-up of 4.85±2.76 years. There were 1,739 (40.8%) primary prevention and 2,522 (59.2%) secondary prevention ICD recipients. The median age was 62 years and 78.9% were male. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality between primary prevention or secondary prevention ICD recipients (21.7% vs 21.9%, p=0.99). In the primary prevention ICD group, heart failure (HF) hospitalisation more frequently occurred (32.7% vs 26.1%, p<0.001) but hospitalisations with ventricular arrhythmia (VA) were less common (16.7% vs 27.1%, p<0.001). Compared with ICD recipients with non-ischaemic aetiology for HF, those with ischaemic HF had higher all-cause mortality (30.0% vs 16.1%, p<0.001), HF hospitalisation (38.0% vs 22.4%, p<0.001), and hospitalisation with VA (27.9% vs 19.4%, p<0.001). In New Zealand ICD recipients, there was no difference in all-cause mortality between primary prevention and secondary prevention ICD implants. However, ICD recipients with ischaemic aetiology for HF had significantly higher all-cause mortality, HF hospitalisation, and hospitalisation with VA.

PO-04-226 RISK OF VENTRICULAR RECURRENT TACHYARRHYTHMIA IN PATIENTS RECEIVING PRIMARY PREVENTION IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER-DEFIBRILLATORS

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) have demonstrated efficacy in reducing mortality attributable to sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmia (VTA) and have been used for primary prevention of sudden death. However, patients with primary prevention ICDs remain at risk for first and recurrent VTA, which are associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Currently, there are limited data on factors associated with recurrent VTA after the occurrence of a first episode in this population. Improved risk stratification may help tailor advanced therapies, such as catheter ablation or antiarrhythmic medications, to patients at a high risk for recurrence. The objective of this study was to quantify the risk for recurrent VTA after the occurrence of a first VTA episode among patients with a primary prevention ICD. The population comprised patients enrolled in five landmark ICD trials (MADIT-II, MADIT-Risk, MADIT-CRT, MADIT-RIT, RAID) who experienced a first episode of VTA (defined as ventricular tachycardia [VT] ≥170 bpm or ventricular fibrillation [VF]) after ICD implantation (N=789). The primary endpoint was recurrent VTA after a first episode. All-cause mortality associated with recurrent VTA was a secondary endpoint. Among 789 study patients who experienced a first VTA after ICD implantation, mean age was 63 ± 11 years, 17% were women, 64% had ischemic cardiomyopathy, and mean left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) was 24 ± 7%. Kaplan Meier analysis showed the risk of recurrent VTA after a first episode was very high (60% at 3 years [Figure - A]). Findings were consistent regardless of baseline risk factors, including age, sex, NYHA Class, EF. Furthermore, the burden of multiple VTA episodes after a first episode was also high (average of 3.6 episodes per patient at 3 years [Figure B]). Recurrent VTA was associated with a significant two-fold increased risk of subsequent death (HR=2.15, 95% CI 1.40-3.32, p=0.001 [Figure - C]). Among primary prevention ICD recipients who experience a first VTA, the burden of recurrent VTA and subsequent mortality increase is very high regardless of baseline risk factors. Intensification of therapies, including early catheter ablation, should be considered in primary prevention ICD recipients who experience a first VTA.

Age and the Risk of Ventricular Tachyarrhythmia in Patients With an Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator

BackgroundThe benefit of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) in elderly patients is controversial. ObjectivesThe aims of this study were to evaluate the risk for ventricular tachyarrhythmia (VTA) and ICD shocks by age groups and to assess the competing risk for VTA and death without prior VTA. MethodsThe study included 5,170 primary prevention ICD recipients enrolled in 5 landmark ICD trials (MADIT [Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial] II, MADIT-Risk, MADIT-CRT [MADIT Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy], MADIT-RIT [MADIT Reduce Inappropriate Therapy], and RAID [Ranolazine in High-Risk Patients With Implanted Cardioverter-Defibrillator]). Fine and Gray regression analysis was used to evaluate the risk for fast VTA (ventricular tachycardia ≥200 beats/min or ventricular fibrillation) vs death without prior fast VTA in 3 prespecified age groups: <65, 65 to <75, and ≥75 years. ResultsThe cumulative incidence of fast VTA at 3 years was similar for patients <65 years of age and those 65 to <75 years of age (17% vs 15%) and was lowest among patients ≥75 years of age (10%) (P < 0.001). Multivariate Fine and Gray analysis showed a 40% lower risk for fast VTA in patients ≥75 years of age (HR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.46-0.78; P < 0.001) compared with patients <65 years of age. In patients ≥75 years of age, a risk reversal was observed whereby the risk for death without prior fast VTA exceeded the risk for developing fast VTA. A history of nonsustained ventricular tachycardia, male sex, and the presence of nonischemic cardiomyopathy were identified as predictors of fast VTA in patients ≥75 years of age. ConclusionsPatients ≥75 years of age have a significantly lower risk for VTA and ICD shocks compared with younger patients. Aging is associated with a higher risk for death compared with the risk for fast VTA, the reverse of what is seen in younger patients.

Two decades of implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation and follow-up at a South African referral centre: trends, indications and long-term outcomes in a resource-limited setting

BackgroundMore than two-thirds of cardiovascular deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries. Sudden cardiac deaths (SCD) from ventricular arrhythmias are an important cause of cardiovascular deaths. Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) are an important therapeutic strategy for detecting and terminating ventricular arrhythmias in patients at risk of SCD. The profile of patients treated with ICDs in South Africa is unknown. Further, with changing lines of evidence, the implantation trends are undetermined. The objectives of this study were to determine the profile of ICD recipients and implantation trends in a South African quaternary hospital.MethodsThis was a retrospective review of all patients implanted with ICDs at Groote Schuur Hospital from 01 January 1998 to 31 December 2020. A standardised data collection form was used to collect baseline demographic data, information on clinical presentation and ICD follow-up data for the history of ICD shock therapies.ResultsA total of 253 ICDs were implanted; 75% for secondary prevention and 25% for primary prevention. 67.2% of the implanted ICDs were single-chamber ICDs, dual-chamber ICDs were implanted in 12.3% and Cardiac resynchronisation with a defibrillator (CRT-D) in 20.6%. There was an upward trajectory of ICD implantations during the study period. Increasing numbers of dual-chamber devices and CRT-D were implanted over time. ICD recipients had a mean (standard deviation) age of 50 (14) years and were predominantly male (69%). Primary prevention ICD recipients were younger than secondary prevention recipients, with a mean (SD) age of 46 (14) years versus 51 (14) years, p = 0.019. The secondary prevention group presented with ventricular tachycardia in 81%, ventricular fibrillation in 13% and cardiopulmonary resuscitation without documented heart rhythm in 5.3% (10/190). After a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 44 (15; 93) months, there was an overall mortality rate of 16.2%, with no mortality difference between the primary and secondary prevention patient groups.ConclusionThere is an increase in the annual number of ICDs implanted at a South African referral centre. ICDs are predominantly implanted for secondary prevention. However, over time the number of devices implanted for primary prevention is steadily increased. During follow-up, there was no mortality difference between the primary prevention and the secondary prevention groups.

The Association of Clustered Ventricular Arrhythmia and Cycle Length With ScarBurden in Cardiomyopathy.

Patients with≥2 ventricular arrhythmia (VA) events within 3months (clustered VA) have increased risk for mortality. The aim of this study was to examine the association of risk factors including scar characteristics on cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging with clustered VA and VA cycle length in nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) and ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM). Data from 329 primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients (mean age 57 years, 26% women) were analyzed from the Left Ventricular Structural Predictors of Sudden Cardiac Death study. Twenty-one patients developed clustered VA (median time 2.7 years after implantable cardioverter-defibrillator placement). Men had the greatest risk for recurrent VA. Patients with NICM and scar had the highest incidence rate of clustered VA. In patients with NICM, each 1-g increase in core scar correlated with greater clustered VA risk (HR: 1.19; 95%CI: 1.07-1.32). Gray scar was similar among subgroups. Patients with NICM with clustered VA had the longest mean VA cycle length (297 ± 40 milliseconds). Higher core scar burden correlated with longer VA cycle length inpatients with NICM (P = 0.002), and higher body mass index correlated with shorter VA cycle length in those with ICM (P = 0.02). Type of VA was similar between cardiomyopathy subgroups, and no scar pattern predominated. Clustered VA was most common in patients with NICM and scar, with greatest risk among those with larger core scar. Core scar correlated with slower VA in patients with NICM, and higher body mass index correlated with faster VA in those with ICM. Type of VA was similar by cardiomyopathy etiology, and no dominant scar pattern was associated with clustered VA.

CinE caRdiac magneTic resonAnce to predIct veNTricular arrhYthmia (CERTAINTY)

Better models to identify individuals at low risk of ventricular arrhythmia (VA) are needed for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) candidates to mitigate the risk of ICD-related complications. We designed the CERTAINTY study (CinE caRdiac magneTic resonAnce to predIct veNTricular arrhYthmia) with deep learning for VA risk prediction from cine cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). Using a training cohort of primary prevention ICD recipients (n = 350, 97 women, median age 59 years, 178 ischemic cardiomyopathy) who underwent CMR immediately prior to ICD implantation, we developed two neural networks: Cine Fingerprint Extractor and Risk Predictor. The former extracts cardiac structure and function features from cine CMR in a form of cine fingerprint in a fully unsupervised fashion, and the latter takes in the cine fingerprint and outputs disease outcomes as a cine risk score. Patients with VA (n = 96) had a significantly higher cine risk score than those without VA. Multivariate analysis showed that the cine risk score was significantly associated with VA after adjusting for clinical characteristics, cardiac structure and function including CMR-derived scar extent. These findings indicate that non-contrast, cine CMR inherently contains features to improve VA risk prediction in primary prevention ICD candidates. We solicit participation from multiple centers for external validation.

Reassessing the role of antitachycardia pacing in fast ventricular arrhythmias in primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients: Results from MADIT-RIT

In Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial - Reduce Inappropriate Therapy (MADIT-RIT), high-rate cutoff (arm B) and delayed therapy (arm C) reduced the risk of inappropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) interventions when compared with conventional programming (arm A); however, appropriate but unnecessary therapies were not evaluated. The purpose of this study was to assess the value of antitachycardia pacing (ATP) for fast ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) ≥ 200 beats/min in patients with primary prevention ICD. We compared ATP only, ATP and shock, and shock only rates in patients in MADIT-RIT treated for VAs ≥ 200 beats/min. The only difference between these randomized groups was the time delay between ventricular tachycardia detection and therapy (3.4 seconds vs 4.9 seconds vs 14.4 seconds). In arm A, 11.5% patients had events, the initial therapy was ATP in 10.5% and shock in 1%, and the final therapy was ATP in 8% and shock in 3.5%. In arm B, 6.6% had events, 4.2% were initially treated with ATP and 2.4% with shock, and the final therapy was ATP in 2.8% and shock in 3.8%. In arm C, 4.7% had events, 2.5% were initially treated with ATP and 2.3% with shock, and the final therapy was ATP in 1.4% and shock in 3.3%. The final shock rate was similar in arm A vs arm B (3.5% vs 3.8%; P = .800) and in arm A vs arm C (3.5% vs 3.3%; P = .855) despite the marked discrepancy in initial ATP therapy utilization. In MADIT-RIT, there was a significant reduction in ATP interventions with therapy delays due to spontaneous termination, with no difference in shock therapies, suggesting that earlier interventions for VAs ≥ 200 beats/min are likely unnecessary, leading to an overestimation of the value of ATP in primary prevention ICD recipients.

Frequency, predictors and prognostic impact of implantable cardioverter defibrillator shocks in a primary prevention population with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction

The role of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) in primary prevention real-world population is debated. We sought to evaluate the incidence, predictors and prognostic impact of ICD shocks in consecutive heart failure patients implanted for primary prevention at our tertiary institution. We retrospectively selected a sample of 497 patients (mean age 64.8 years, 82.1% men, average left ventricular ejection fraction, LVEF, 27.1%). At long-term follow-up (median time 70.4 months), total mortality was 40.8%, and 16.5% of patients had received at least one appropriate shock (3.12%/year). Inappropriate shock [odds ratio (OR) 1.93, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.08-3.47; P = 0.027] and length of follow-up (1 year, OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.01; P = 0.0031) were associated with the occurrence of appropriate shock, whereas atrial fibrillation (OR 2.65, 95% CI 1.55-4.51, P < 0.001), length of follow-up (1-year OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.01, P < 0.001) and appropriate shock (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.08-3.47, P = 0.027) were associated with the occurrence of inappropriate shock. Neither appropriate nor inappropriate shock independently increased mortality risk, whereas older age (hazard ratio 1.05; 95% CI 1.04-1.07; P < 0.001), atrial fibrillation (hazard ratio 2.25; 95% CI 1.67-3.02; P < 0.001) and lower LVEF (hazard ratio 0.97; 95% CI 0.94-0.99; P = 0.004) did. Incidence of shocks in real-world primary prevention ICD recipients might be lower than expected, and the association between ICD shocks and prolongation of survival is not as clear-cut as might be perceived. Further investigations from larger real-world samples are warranted.

N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide is a specific predictor of appropriate device therapies in patients with primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillators

Sudden death risk stratification of patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction remains challenging. Retrospective studies have suggested N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) may be a useful risk stratification tool. The purpose of this study was to ascertain the utility of NT-proBNP as a predictor of appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapies in primary prevention ICD recipients. This was a prospective study of 342 stable patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40% who received a primary prevention ICD. NT-proBNP assay was performed at the time of device implant and used as a dichotomized variable (1st-3rd NT-proBNP quartiles vs 4th NT-proBNP quartile) to predict primary (appropriate ICD therapies) and secondary (death, ICD-deactivation, chronic inotropic support, transplant) outcomes. Median follow-up was 35.0 months (interquartile range 15.2-55.3). In unadjusted analyses, NT-proBNP predicted both primary (hazard ratio [HR] 1.89; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00-3.56); P = .049) and secondary outcomes (HR 2.13; 95% CI 1.18-3.85; P =.012). Multivariable analysis reaffirmed NT-proBNP as a primary outcome predictor (HR 4.31; 95% CI 1.92-9.70; P<.001) but not as a secondary outcome predictor (HR 1.23; 95% CI 0.61-2.50; P = .564). Instead, secondary outcome was predicted by patient age and renal function. In an unadjusted subanalysis limited to patients with blood urea nitrogen <30 mg/dL, NT-proBNP remained a primary endpoint predictor (HR 2.51; 95% CI 1.25-5.05; P = .010) but not a secondary endpoint predictor (HR 1.34; 95% CI 0.52-3.44; P = .541). Receiver operating analyses at 2- and 3-year follow-up timepoints confirmed that NT-proBNP significantly improved the performance of multivariable models designed to predict future appropriate ICD therapies. In multivariable analysis, NT-proBNP is a reasonable and specific predictor of future appropriate device therapies in primary prevention ICD recipients. In contrast, adjusted NT-proBNP does not predict all-cause mortality.

P1463Regional variation in survival rates among primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients in Eastern and Northern Europe POLKARD Polish ICD Registry perspective

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements None. OnBehalf POLKARD Polish ICD Registry Objective The findings of Danish Study to assess the efficiency of ICD in patients with non ischemic heart failure has recently raised questions about the current strategy of ICD implantation for the primary prevention of sudden cardiac death. POLKARD - Polish ICD Registry is a prospective, non-randomised, central registry of patients who are referred for an implantation of an ICD in Poland. The Registry contains prospectively collected follow-up data including mortality. Purpose To compare survival rates between Polish and Danish ‘real-world’ non-ischemic primary prevention cohorts. Methods Retrospective analysis of clinical characteristics and long-term follow-up of patients referred for primary prophylactic implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation in Poland between April 2008 and November 2014 was performed. The primary outcome of the trial was all-cause mortality. Results: The polish study cohort was large (964) as compared to Danish population randomized to receive ICD therapy (556). The median follow-up time in DANISH Study and Polish ICD Registry was 67,6 and 77 months, respectively. Compared with patients enrolled in the DANISH Study, patients in the Polish ICD Registry were age-similar. However, the polish study population was male-dominated. What is more, male gender was identified as a risk factor for long-term mortality in polish study population (p = 0.005). In the matched cohorts, there was difference in survival between DANISH Study and Polish ICD Registry patients (all-cause mortality rates: 21,6% - 44 events per 1000 person-years and 39,3% - 72 events per 1000 person-years, respectively). Conclusions Our findings imply that survival among patients who receive a primary prevention ICD for non-ischemic cardiomyopathy in clinical practice in Central Europe is different from Northern Europe.

Influence of Multimorbidity on Burden and Appropriateness of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Therapies.

To determine whether burden of multiple chronic conditions (MCCs) influences the risk of receiving inappropriate vs appropriate device therapies. Retrospective cohort study. Seven US healthcare delivery systems. Adults with left ventricular systolic dysfunction receiving an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) for primary prevention. Data on 24 comorbid conditions were captured from electronic health records and categorized into quartiles of comorbidity burden (0-3, 4-5, 6-7 and 8-16). Incidence of ICD therapies (shock and antitachycardia pacing [ATP] therapies), including appropriateness, was collected for 3 years after implantation. Outcomes included time to first ICD therapy, total ICD therapy burden, and risk of inappropriate vs appropriate ICD therapy. Among 2235 patients (mean age = 69 ± 11 years, 75% men), the median number of comorbidities was 6 (interquartile range = 4-8), with 98% having at least two comorbidities. During a mean 2.2 years of follow-up, 18.3% of patients experienced at least one appropriate therapy and 9.9% experienced at least one inappropriate therapy. Higher comorbidity burden was associated with an increased risk of first inappropriate therapy (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.94 [95% confidence interval {CI} = 1.14-3.31] for 4-5 comorbidities; HR = 2.25 [95% CI = 1.25-4.05] for 6-7 comorbidities; and HR = 2.91 [95% CI = 1.54-5.50] for 8-16 comorbidities). Participants with 8-16 comorbidities had a higher total burden of ICD therapy (adjusted relative risk [RR] = 2.12 [95% CI = 1.43-3.16]), a higher burden of inappropriate therapy (RR = 3.39 [95% CI = 1.67-6.86]), and a higher risk of receiving inappropriate vs appropriate therapy (RR = 1.74 [95% CI = 1.07-2.82]). Comorbidity burden was not significantly associated with receipt of appropriate ICD therapies. Patterns were similar when separately examining shock or ATP therapies. In primary prevention ICD recipients, MCC burden was independently associated with an increased risk of inappropriate but not appropriate device therapies. Comorbidity burden should be considered when engaging patients in shared decision making about ICD implantation.

Primary Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death With Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Therapy in Patients With Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy remains a corner stone of sudden cardiac death (SCD) prevention in patients with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC). We aimed to assess predictors of appropriate ICD therapies in the Scandinavian cohort of ARVC patients who received ICD for primary prevention of SCD. Study group comprised of 79 definite ARVC patients by 2010 Task Force criteria (60% male, age at ICD implant 39 ± 14 years) who were enrolled in the Nordic ARVC Registry and received an ICD for primary SCD prevention. The primary end point of appropriate ICD shock or death from any cause was assessed and compared with 137 definite ARVC patients who received ICD for secondary SCD prevention (74% male, age at ICD implant 42 ± 15 years). In the study group, 38% were ≤35 years of age at baseline, 25% had nonsustained ventricular tachycardia, and 29% had syncope at baseline. Major repolarization abnormality (hazard ratio = 4.00, 95% confidence interval 1.30 to 12.30, p = 0.015) and age ≤35 years (hazard ratio = 4.21, 95% confidence interval 1.49 to 11.85, p = 0.001) independently predicted the primary end point. The outcome did not differ between the primary prevention patients with either of these risk factors and the secondary prevention cohort (2% to 4% annual event rate) whereas patients without risk factors did not have any appropriate ICD shocks during follow-up. In conclusion, young age at ARVC diagnosis and major repolarization abnormality independently predict ICD shocks or death in the primary prevention ICD recipients and associated with the event rate similar to the one observed in the secondary prevention cohort. Our data indicate the benefit of ICD for primary prevention in patients with any of these risk factors.

Importance of beta-blocker dose in prevention of ventricular tachyarrhythmias, heart failure hospitalizations, and death in primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients: a Danish nationwide cohort study

There is a paucity of studies investigating a dose-dependent association between beta-blocker therapy and risk of outcome. In a nationwide cohort of primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) patients, we aimed to investigate the dose-dependent association between beta-blocker therapy and risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VT/VF), heart failure (HF) hospitalizations, and death. Information on ICD implantation, endpoints, comorbidities, beta-blocker usage, type, and dose were obtained through Danish nationwide registers. The two major beta-blockers carvedilol and metoprolol were examined in three dose levels; low (metoprolol ≤ 25 mg; carvedilol ≤ 12.5 mg), intermediate (metoprolol 26-199 mg; carvedilol 12.6-49.9 mg), and high (metoprolol ≥ 200 mg; carvedilol ≥ 50 mg). Time to events was investigated utilizing multivariate Cox models with beta-blocker as a time-dependent variable. From 2007 to 2012, 2935 first-time ICD devices were implanted. During follow-up, 399 patients experienced VT/VF, 728 HF hospitalizations and 361 died. As compared with patients not on beta-blockers, low, intermediate, and high dose had significantly reduced risk of HF hospitalizations {hazard ratio (HR) = 0.68 [0.54-0.87], P = 0.002; HR = 0.53 [0.42-0.66], P < 0.001; HR = 0.43 [0.34-0.54], P < 0.001} and death (HR = 0.47 [0.35-0.64], P < 0.001; HR = 0.29 [0.22-0.39], P = 0.001; HR = 0.24 [0.18-0.33], P < 0.001). For the endpoint of VT/VF, only intermediate and high dose beta-blocker was associated with significantly reduced risk (HR = 0.58 [0.43-0.79], P < 0.001; HR = 0.53 [0.39-0.72], P < 0.001). No significant difference was found between comparable doses of carvedilol and metoprolol on any endpoint (P = 0.06-0.94). In primary prevention ICD patients, beta-blocker therapy was associated with significantly reduced risk of all endpoints, as compared with patients not on beta-blocker, with the suggestion of a dose-dependent effect. No detectable difference was found between comparable doses of carvedilol and metoprolol.