Classification of death in antiarrhythmia trials

Sudden death secondary to cardiac arrhythmias: mechanisms and treatment strategies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article reviews mechanisms and available therapeutic options for arrhythmias leading to sudden cardiac death in patients with coronary artery disease.

RECENT FINDINGS

Intensive efforts have led to a better understanding of the pathophysiology and various treatments of sudden cardiac death. Antiarrhythmic medications have not demonstrated a survival benefit. Beta-adrenergic blocking agents have been revalidated in recent studies to improve survival and reduce risk of sudden cardiac death in patients with myocardial infarction. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and aldosterone antagonists should also be used in these patients. Data from randomized trials demonstrate significant survival benefit with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and indications have expanded. Patients with established ischemic cardiomyopathy do not require electrophysiologic studies for induction of tachyarrhythmias based on these trials. One recent trial did not demonstrate mortality reduction with implantable defibrillators in patients with recent myocardial infarction. Devices may not provide survival benefit in patients with advanced New York Heart Association class IV heart failure.

SUMMARY

The incidence of arrhythmia-related sudden death in the general population remains relatively high. Better risk stratification tools are needed to identify high-risk patients in the general population and in those with known coronary disease and to exclude low-risk patients.

Clinical Experience with Tiered Atrial Therapies and Atrial Arrhythmia Prevention Algorithms in a Dual Chamber Cardioverter Defibrillator

INTRODUCTION

The acceptance of atrial arrhythmia features in implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) will depend on their ability to appropriately discriminate atrial tachyarrhythmias/atrial fibrillation (AT/AF). This study tested the effectiveness of an atrial/ventricular ICD with advanced atrial detection and new algorithms designed to prevent atrial arrhythmias.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Ninety-five patients were implanted with a dual chamber ICD (Model 1900, Guidant Corporation, MN, USA) at 25 US centers. Ten patients received a coronary sinus (CS) lead allowing a defibrillation vector for AT/AF cardioversion. Follow-up was 12.2 months. The addition of new atrial features designed for detection, discrimination, and prevention of AT/AF had no adverse effect upon detection of induced ventricular fibrillation (VF) (mean detection time with new features ON was 2.22 seconds vs 2.19 seconds with features OFF). A total of 100% of the induced and spontaneous ventricular and atrial arrhythmias receiving shock therapy were reviewed as appropriate detection. Atrial shock conversion efficacy for spontaneous and induced AT/AF episodes was 83% and 96%, respectively (144 spontaneous, 162 induced episodes). A 3-month randomized crossover trial of atrial preventative pacing features did not result in adverse effects, but there was no clinical efficacy for prevention of AT/AF.

CONCLUSION

Enhanced atrial detection and discrimination features combined with tiered atrial therapies did not adversely impact the ability of the ICD (Model 1900) to appropriately detect and treat ventricular tachyarrhythmias.

Intraoperative testing of the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: how much is enough?

INTRODUCTION

Defibrillation testing of the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is considered a standard and required practice at the time of implantation. How much testing, if any in some cases, should be performed, however, remains unknown.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Included in this retrospective analysis were 835 patients (77% men; age 65 +/- 13 years) who received transvenous ICDs between January 1996 and December 2003. One hundred twenty-nine (15.5%) had intraoperative defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing, 503 (60.2%) had limited defibrillation safety margin testing, and 203 (24.3%) had no defibrillation testing. We compared the outcome (success of ICD therapies against spontaneous VT/VF events and survival) of the three groups of patients, who in some respects had important clinical differences. The success of the first delivered shocks against VT/VF was similar for DFT (91%), safety margin testing (91%), and no-testing (92%) groups; and the second shocks terminated the remaining episodes in all three groups. Sudden-death-free survival rates were similar in the three groups, however, the overall long-term survival rate was significantly lower in the no-testing group (58%) than in the DFT (74%) and safety margin testing (69%) groups (P < 0.0005). Multivariate analysis found no strong predictors of sudden death, but there were several independent predictors of overall mortality including lack of ICD testing (HR: 2.031, CI: 1.253-3.290, P = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

In this select patient cohort, success of ICD therapies and sudden-death-free survival were similar in patients who had DFT, safety margin testing, and no testing, but overall survival was significantly lower in the no-testing group. Thus in the absence of prospective mortality data, a minimum of safety margin ICD testing should remain standard practice.

Frequency and causes of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapies: is device therapy proarrhythmic?

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shocks diminish patients' quality of life, increase health care resource utilization, and may lead to other adverse sequelae. Better understanding of the factors that lead to ICD therapies, and better strategies to avoid unnecessary therapies, are needed to optimize patient outcomes. Data from major randomized clinical trials involving the use of ICDs and cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator devices were reviewed to determine control group mortality rates, control group sudden death rates, and the frequency of appropriate and inappropriate ICD therapies. In all studies that classified deaths, appropriate ICD therapies outnumbered control group sudden cardiac deaths by a factor of 2 to 3. Some of these episodes can be explained by device programming, by the treatment of potentially unsustained tachycardias, and by errors of episode classification. Another underexplored possibility is that device therapy is proarrhythmic. Reasons for frequent therapies and methods to prevent them are discussed, as well as the notion of device proarrhythmia and the potentially detrimental effects of ICD shocks. These issues clearly affect the overall benefit of device therapy and have important implications for patient management and health care delivery.

Comparing classifications of death in the Mode Selection Trial: agreement and disagreement among site investigators and a clinical events committee

Clinical events committees (CECs) are the current standard for endpoint adjudication in clinical trials. However, little data exist with which to compare CEC and site investigator determinations or to evaluate internal agreement among CEC members. Using data from the Mode Selection Trial in Sinus Node Dysfunction (MOST), we analyzed classifications of death in order to compare internal agreement among CEC physician reviewers and agreement between the CEC and site investigators. Death was classified at 2 levels: by major cause (cardiac, noncardiac, or unknown) and by minor subclassification of the major classifications. Reviewer agreement was tabulated at the major and minor levels, and standard and weighted kappa statistics were calculated. Disagreement at both levels was also determined. Individual decision-making was tabulated in terms of frequency in classifying death as unknown. All 404 deaths were classified by the CEC. Site investigators determined major classifications in 382 cases and minor classification in 379 cases. The CEC and the site investigators disagreed in classifying 41 cases (10.7%) at the major level and 117 (30.9%) at the minor level. CEC reviewers disagreed internally at the major level in 64 cases (15.8%), at the minor level in 63 cases (15.6%), and at any level in 127 cases (31.4%) (kappa = 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.55, 0.66]; weighted kappa = 0.66, 95% CI [0.62, 0.75]). In resolving internal disagreements, the full CEC agreed with 1 of 2 CEC reviewers in 85.9% of cases. Disagreements occurred between site investigators and CEC reviewers in classifying deaths. Endpoint determination and decision-making varied among individual CEC reviewers, but second-tier reviews by the full CEC resolved all disagreements. These findings support continued use of CECs for endpoint adjudication in clinical trials.

Preserved heart rate variability identifies low-risk patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy: Results from the DEFINITE trial

BACKGROUND

The recent expansion of indications for prophylactic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) placement in subjects with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy has raised concerns about the cost-effectiveness of this therapy.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to identify low-risk patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy who may not require prophylactic ICD placement.

METHODS

This was a prospective study of 274 participants in the Defibrillators in Non-Ischemic Cardiomyopathy Treatment Evaluation (DEFINITE) trial, a randomized controlled trial that evaluated the role of prophylactic ICD placement in patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy. The patients underwent 24-hour Holter recording for analysis of heart rate variability (HRV). The primary HRV variable was the standard deviation of normal R-R intervals (SDNN). Patients with atrial fibrillation and frequent ventricular ectopy (>25% of beats) were excluded from HRV analysis (23% of patients). SDNN was categorized in tertiles, and Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to compare survival in the three tertiles and excluded patients.

RESULTS

The study population was 73% male, with a mean age of 59 +/- 12 years and mean left ventricular ejection fraction of 21% +/- 6%. After 3-year follow-up, significant differences in mortality rates were observed: SDNN >113 ms: 0 (0%), SDNN 81-113 ms: 5 (7%), SDNN <81 ms: 7 (10%), excluded patients: 11 (17%) (P = .03). There were no deaths in the tertile with SDNN >113 ms regardless of treatment assignment (ICD vs control).

CONCLUSION

Patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy and preserved HRV have an excellent prognosis and may not benefit from prophylactic ICD placement. Patients with severely depressed HRV and patients who are excluded from HRV analysis because of atrial fibrillation and frequent ventricular ectopy have the highest mortality.

Comparison of ventricular arrhythmia frequency in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy versus nonischemic cardiomyopathy treated with implantable cardioverter defibrillators

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators have been shown to provide similar survival benefits for patients who have left ventricular dysfunction due to ischemic heart disease and for subsets of patients who have nonischemic cardiomyopathy. Findings in this study extend these observations by showing that patients who have ischemic or nonischemic heart disease and receive implantable cardioverter defibrillators not only have comparable mortality rates but also similar tachyarrhythmia frequencies during follow-up; further, mortality and tachyarrhythmia outcomes are independent of initial arrhythmia indication.

Ejection fraction and QRS width as predictors of event rates in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators

OBJECTIVES

The Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial II in 2002 recommended implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) prophylactically for all patients with a prior myocardial infarction and ejection fraction (EF) of 30% or less. In June of 2003, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services approved reimbursement for ICD placement in patients with an EF of 30% or less who have a QRS interval greater than 120 ms. The purpose of this study was therefore to determine the value of QRS duration in predicting the occurrence of ventricular arrhythmias within the first year after ICD implantation. These ICDs were placed over the past 5 years for various indications.

METHODS

EF cut points of 30% or less and 31% or greater and QRS duration of 120 ms or less and 121 ms or greater were used to assess the risk of events.

RESULTS

There was a significant increase in events in subjects with EF of 30% or less, compared with patients with EF of 31% or greater (P < 0.05), and there was a trend toward increased likelihood of arrhythmias in patients with widened QRS width.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms the conclusion of the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial II and implies that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services criteria for reimbursement may not be scientifically valid.

Primary prevention of sudden cardiac death

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is the leading cause of death in the United States. Although SCD occurs most commonly in patients with established heart disease, SCD can also be the initial manifestation of cardiovascular disease. Efforts to reduce the incidence of SCD include aggressive treatment of heart disease and its risk factors with pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic strategies. Public health measures to improve the response to cardiac arrest, including dissemination of automated external defibrillators in the community, are extremely important. Implantation of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) in patients at high risk of SCD improves survival in these patients. Clinical trials have identified patients with ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy who may benefit from prophylactic ICD implantation.

Prophylactic defibrillator implantation in patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy

BACKGROUND

Patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy are at substantial risk for sudden death from cardiac causes. However, the value of prophylactic implantation of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) to prevent sudden death in such patients is unknown.

METHODS

We enrolled 458 patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy, a left ventricular ejection fraction of less than 36 percent, and premature ventricular complexes or nonsustained ventricular tachycardia. A total of 229 patients were randomly assigned to receive standard medical therapy, and 229 to receive standard medical therapy plus a single-chamber ICD.

RESULTS

Patients were followed for a mean (+/-SD) of 29.0+/-14.4 months. The mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 21 percent. The vast majority of patients were treated with angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors (86 percent) and beta-blockers (85 percent). There were 68 deaths: 28 in the ICD group, as compared with 40 in the standard-therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.40 to 1.06; P=0.08). The mortality rate at two years was 14.1 percent in the standard-therapy group (annual mortality rate, 7 percent) and 7.9 percent in the ICD group. There were 17 sudden deaths from arrhythmia: 3 in the ICD group, as compared with 14 in the standard-therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.20; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.06 to 0.71; P=0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with severe, nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy who were treated with ACE inhibitors and beta-blockers, the implantation of a cardioverter-defibrillator significantly reduced the risk of sudden death from arrhythmia and was associated with a nonsignificant reduction in the risk of death from any cause.

Right Ventricular Outflow Tract Placement of Defibrillation Leads:. Five Year Experience

Over a 5-year period, 112 patients (89 male/23 female, mean age 65 years) underwent right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) placement of permanent active-fixation transvenous pacing/defibrillating leads. At implantation, the pacing threshold was 0.6 +/- 0.3 V at 0.5 ms pulse duration and R wave amplitude was 10.9 +/- 4.9 mV. The defibrillation threshold (DFT) of right-sided implants was 17.7 +/- 3.4 J while that of left-sided implants was 16.1 +/- 3.3 J. Patients were followed at 1 and 3 month postimplant and at six-month intervals thereafter. At mean follow-up of 22.5 +/- 17.5 months (range 1-47 months) there were no lead dislodgments, unsuccessful shock therapies, or failure to sense or pace for bradycardia or tachycardia. Death was not sudden in the 17 patients who died. We conclude that RVOT pacing-defibrillation lead implantation is safe, efficacious, and potentially attractive because preliminary evidence suggests that it may not be associated with the adverse hemodynamic effects of pacing at the right ventricular apex.

Death in patients with permanent pacemakers for sick sinus syndrome

BACKGROUND

Although more than one million patients in the United States have permanent pacemakers, little is known about their cause of death. We evaluated the cause of death in 404 patients who died in the Mode Selection Trial (MOST).

METHODS

In MOST, patients received a dual-chamber pacemaker randomly programmed to either dual-chamber or ventricular pacing. The circumstances surrounding each death were reviewed by a clinical events committee, which used prospectively defined criteria to adjudicate the cause of death.

RESULTS

A total of 2010 patients with a median age of 74 years were included. After a median follow-up of 33 months, 404 (20%) patients died, including 198 (49%) of noncardiac causes and 143 (35.4%) of cardiac causes. In 63 patients, the cause of death was unknown. Independent predictors of death through the use of a multivariable analysis were (1) demographic factors including age, male sex, and weight; (2) clinical factors including prior myocardial infarction, cardiomyopathy, New York Heart Association class III/IV, and the Charlson Comorbidity Index; and (3) scores from two measures of functional status, the Karnofsky Score and the Mini-Mental State Examination. Independent predictors of cardiovascular death were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated with permanent pacemakers for sinus node dysfunction are elderly and have a substantial mortality rate, with more than half the classifiable deaths being noncardiac. Baseline demographic variables and scores from quality-of-life measures can identify patients with the highest risk of death.

Analysis of implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy in the Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) Trial

INTRODUCTION

The implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is commonly used to treat patients with documented sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF). Arrhythmia recurrence rates in these patients are high, but which patients will receive a therapy and the forms of arrhythmia recurrence (VT or VF) are poorly understood.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The therapy delivered by the ICD was examined in 449 patients randomized to ICD therapy in the Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) Trial. Events triggering ICD shocks or antitachycardia pacing (ATP) were reviewed for arrhythmia diagnosis, clinical symptoms, activity at the onset of the arrhythmia, and appropriateness and results of therapy. Both shock and ATP therapies were frequent by 2 years, with 68% of patients receiving some therapy or having an arrhythmic death. An appropriate shock was delivered in 53% of patients, and ATP was delivered in 68% of patients who had ATP activated. The first arrhythmia treated in follow-up was diagnosed as VT (63%), VF (13%), supraventricular tachycardia (18%), unknown arrhythmia (3%), or due to ICD malfunction or inappropriate sensing (3%). Acceleration of an arrhythmia by the ICD occurred in 8% of patients who received any therapy. No physical activity consistently preceded arrhythmias, nor did any single clinical factor predict the symptoms of the arrhythmia.

CONCLUSION

Delivery of ICD therapy in AVID patients was common, primarily due to VT. Inappropriate ICD therapy occurred frequently. Use of ICD therapy as a surrogate endpoint for death in clinical trials should be avoided.

Maintenance of sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation: an AFFIRM substudy of the first antiarrhythmic drug

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated the efficacy of antiarrhythmic drugs for the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF).

BACKGROUND

The most effective and safest antiarrhythmic drug for the treatment of AF is unknown.

METHODS

The Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) study compared two treatment strategies--rate control and rhythm control--in patients with AF and risk factors for stroke or death. This substudy, performed in patients randomized to rhythm control, compared different antiarrhythmic drugs by randomly assigning the first drug treatment to: 1) amiodarone, 2) sotalol, or 3) a class I drug. The primary end point was the proportion of patients alive, in sinus rhythm, with no additional cardioversions and still taking the assigned drug at one year. Comparisons were made between patients eligible for each of three drug pairs.

RESULTS

At one year, in 222 patients randomized between amiodarone and class I agents, 62% were successfully treated with amiodarone, compared with 23% taking class I agents (p < 0.001). In 256 patients randomized between amiodarone and sotalol, 60% versus 38% were successfully treated, respectively (p = 0.002). In 183 patients randomized between sotalol and class I agents, 34% versus 23% were successfully treated, respectively (p = 0.488), although this portion of the substudy was stopped early when amiodarone was shown to be better than class I agents. Sinus rhythm was achieved in nearly 80% of patients at one-year follow-up with serial therapy. Adverse effects were common.

CONCLUSIONS

Amiodarone was more effective at one year than either sotalol or class I agents for the strategy of maintenance of sinus rhythm without cardioversion.

Circadian heart rate and blood pressure variability considered for research and patient care

OBJECTIVES

To review mechanisms of circadian variations in heart rate variability (HRV) and blood pressure variability (BPV) and mortality and morbidity due to cardiovascular diseases (CVD).

METHODS

Results from 7-day/24-h HRV and BPV are interpreted by gender and age-specified reference values in the context of a Medline search.

RESULTS

Abnormal HRV and BPV measured around the clock for 7 days provides information on the risk of subsequent morbid events in subjects without obvious heart disease and without abnormality outside the conventional (in the sense of chronobiologically unquantified) physiological range. Meditation, beta-blockers, ACE inhibitors, n-3 fatty acids and estrogens may have a beneficial influence on HRV, but there is no definitive outcome-validated therapy. Low HRV has been associated with a risk of arrhythmias and arrhythmic death, unstable angina, myocardial infarction, progression of heart failure and atherosclerosis. BPV may be characterized by treatable circadian-hyper-amplitude-tension (CHAT), which can be transient '24-h CHAT' or '7-day-CHAT', MESOR-hypertension and/or an unusually-timed (odd) circadian acrophase (ecphasia), all associated with an increased risk of stroke, stroke death, myocardial infarction, and kidney disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Precise insight into the patho-physiology in time of HRV and BPV is needed with development of a consensus on best measures of HRV for clinical purposes and to determine when a 7-day record interpreted chronobiologically suffices and when it does not, for detection within as well as outside the conventional normal range, for diagnostic clinical practice and to direct therapy of risk greater than that associated with hypertension, smoking or any other risk factor.

Can nutrition influence circadian rhythm and heart rate variability?

Recent studies indicate that there is an interaction between biorhythms, the biological clock and triggers, which may be important in the pathogenesis of altered heart rate variability (HRV) and blood pressure variability (BPV). Circadian rhythms are under the influence of, and physiological variables are mediated by the activation of the adrenals, sympathetic/parasympathetic, hypothalamic and pituitary activity. Emotional stress, physical exertion, sleep deprivation and large fatty meals are major triggers of myocardial ischemia, angina, infarction, sudden cardiac death (SCD) and stroke. These events have been reported to exhibit a circadian variation with increased frequency in the second quarter of the day, which has also been observed in our studies on Indians. Recent studies indicate that altered HRV and BPV are also important in the pathogenesis and progression of heart failure, atheroma and thrombosis. Mediation via beta-blockers, oestrogens, n-3 fatty acids, vitamin E and coenzyme Q10 and fasting appears to have a beneficial influence whereas progestins, nifedipine, stress and exercise may have an adverse effect on HRV and BPV. We have reported that plasma levels of vitamin E and C are lower in the second quarter of the day than at other times, indicating their role in the pathogenesis of variability and cardiac events. Prospective studies also indicate that HRV and BPV are important and independent risk factors for cardiovascular events. However, no study has yet been conducted in patients with abnormal HRV and BPV in a randomized, placebo-controlled intervention trial to find out whether improvement in variability can cause a significant reduction in cardiovascular events. There is a need to study the role of n-3 fatty acids, coenzyme Q10, the effect of regular physical training, medication and ACE inhibitors in patients with abnormal HRV and BPV to demonstrate that improving variability can modulate cardiovascular events.

Sudden death in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators: the importance of post-shock electromechanical dissociation

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to determine the mechanisms of sudden death (SD) in patients with ventricular tachyarrhythmias (ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation [VT/VF]) treated with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD).

BACKGROUND

Despite ICD therapy, some patients with VT/VF still die suddenly. Optimal ICD use requires determination of the mechanisms of these residual SDs.

METHODS

We reviewed 320 patient deaths during trials of Medtronic transvenous ICD systems (Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota). Sudden deaths were further categorized according to mechanism. Post-shock electromechanical dissociation (EMD) describes a scenario where VT/VF was appropriately detected and treated by an ICD shock that restored a physiologic rhythm, but death still occurred immediately by EMD.

RESULTS

A mode of death could be ascribed for 317 patients-90 (28%) were sudden, 156 (49%) were non-sudden cardiac, and 71 (22%) were noncardiac. A mechanism of SD was proposed for 68 patients-20 (29%) had post-shock EMD, 17 (25%) had VT/VF uncorrected by shocks, 11 (16%) had primary electromechanical dissociation, 9 (13%) had incessant VT/VF, 5 (7%) had VT/VF after their ICD was deactivated or removed, and 6 (9%) had single instances of various other terminal events. Only New York Heart Association functional class independently predicted SD by post-shock EMD.

CONCLUSIONS

The most common mechanism of SD in patients with an ICD is VT/VF treated with an appropriate shock followed by EMD. As this mechanism accounted for 29% of the SDs to which a cause could be ascribed, this mechanism of SD warrants further investigation.

Systematic adjudication of myocardial infarction end-points in an international clinical trial

BACKGROUND: Clinical events committees (CEC) are used routinely to adjudicate suspected end-points in cardiovascular trials, but little information has been published about the various processes used. We reviewed results of the CEC process used to identify and adjudicate suspected end-point (post-enrolment) myocardial infarction (MI) in the large Platelet Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa in Unstable Angina: Receptor Suppression Using Integrilin (Eptifibatide) Therapy (PURSUIT) trial. METHODS: The PURSUIT trial randomised 10,948 patients with acute coronary syndromes to receive eptifibatide or placebo. A central adjudication process was established prospectively to identify all suspected MIs and adjudicate events based on protocol definitions of MI. Suspected MIs were identified by systematic review of data collection forms, cardiac enzyme results, and electrocardiograms. Two physicians independently reviewed all suspected events. If they disagreed whether a MI had occurred, a committee of cardiologists adjudicated the case. RESULTS: The CEC identified 5005 patients with suspected infarction (46%), of which 1415 (28%) were adjudicated as end-point infarctions. As expected, the process identified more end-point events than did the site investigators. Absolute and relative treatment effects of eptifibatide were smaller when using CEC-determined MI rates rather than site investigator-determined rates. The site-investigator reporting of MI and the CEC assessment of MI disagreed in 20% of the cases reviewed by the CEC. CONCLUSIONS: End-point adjudication by a CEC is important, to provide standardised, systematic, independent, and unbiased assessment of end-points, particularly in trials that span geographic regions and clinical practice settings. Understanding the CEC process used is important in the interpretation of trial results and event rates.

A comparison of T-wave alternans, signal averaged electrocardiography and programmed ventricular stimulation for arrhythmia risk stratification

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study was to compare T-wave alternans (TWA), signal-averaged electrocardiography (SAECG) and programmed ventricular stimulation (EPS) for arrhythmia risk stratification in patients undergoing electrophysiology study.

BACKGROUND

Accurate identification of patients at increased risk for sustained ventricular arrhythmias is critical to prevent sudden cardiac death. T-wave alternans is a heart rate dependent measure of repolarization that correlates with arrhythmia vulnerability in animal and human studies. Signal-averaged electrocardiography and EPS are more established tests used for risk stratification.

METHODS

This was a prospective, multicenter trial of 313 patients in sinus rhythm who were undergoing electrophysiologic study. T-wave alternans, assessed with bicycle ergometry, and SAECG were measured before EPS. The primary end point was sudden cardiac death, sustained ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation or appropriate implantable defibrillator (ICD) therapy, and the secondary end point was any of these arrhythmias or all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

Kaplan-Meier survival analysis of the primary end point showed that TWA predicted events with a relative risk of 10.9, EPS had a relative risk of 7.1 and SAECG had a relative risk of 4.5. The relative risks for the secondary end point were 13.9, 4.7 and 3.3, respectively (p < 0.05). Multivariate analysis of 11 clinical parameters identified only TWA and EPS as independent predictors of events. In the prespecified subgroup with known or suspected ventricular arrhythmias, TWA predicted primary end points with a relative risk of 6.1 and secondary end points with a relative risk of 8.0.

CONCLUSIONS

T-wave alternans is a strong independent predictor of spontaneous ventricular arrhythmias or death. It performed as well as programmed stimulation and better than SAECG in risk stratifying patients for life-threatening arrhythmias.

Location of death (in-hospital or out-of-hospital) and type of death (arrhythmic, nonarrhythmic, noncardiac) after inducible sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias after syncope, sustained ventricular tachycardia, or nonfatal cardiac arrest (the ESVEM trial)

The ESVEM Trial evaluated methods to guide antiarrhythmic drug use in patients with spontaneous, inducible sustained tachyarrhythmias at electrophysiologic testing and frequent ventricular premature complexes (VPCs) per hour (>/=10). We assessed the relation between location (in-hospital or out-of-hospital) and classification of death (arrhythmic, nonarrhythmic, cardiac and/or noncardiac) for 486 randomized patients. Deaths were classified as out-of-hospital arrhythmic deaths if arrhythmic death occurred out-of-hospital, or if an arrhythmia preceded hospital admission and directly caused death. Of the 486 randomized patients, 188 (39%) died during 6 years of follow-up. The location and type of death could be determined clearly in 171 patients (91%). Ninety-one deaths were in-hospital (53%); 80 were out-of-hospital (47%). Arrhythmic deaths occurred in 85% out-of-hospital patients and in 30% in-hospital patients (p <0.001). Baseline characteristics were comparable for patients with out-of-hospital and in-hospital arrhythmic deaths. Twenty-seven of 95 arrhythmic deaths occurred in-hospital (28%); 72% occurred out-of-hospital. Out-of-hospital arrhythmic death accounted for 40% of deaths for which location and type of information were available. The 1- and 4-year actuarial out-of-hospital arrhythmic death rates were 9% and 18%, respectively. Of nonarrhythmic cardiac deaths, 91% were in-hospital and 9% were out-of-hospital. Of noncardiac deaths, 74% were in-hospital and 26% were out-of-hospital. Similar results were seen in the 296 patients for whom a drug was considered to be effective. Thus, over half the deaths in the ESVEM trial occurred in-hospital. The long-term actuarial risk of out-of-hospital arrhythmic death in ESVEM was unexpectedly low.

Sudden cardiac death syndrome and pump dysfunction: the link

Clearly, sudden cardiac death syndrome in heart failure is linked to severely perturbed neurohumoral, hemodynamic, and mechanical systems. Routine antiarrhythmic drug therapy has not proven beneficial and, therefore, there is no justification for using these agents in unselected heart failure patients who are without significant symptomatic ventricular arrhythmia. Aggressive treatment of the failure syndrome seems most important. Because many of the problematic arrhythmias arise from triggering automaticity, which is known to occur in excessive ventricular stretch and wall stress, systemic vascular "unloading" with vasodilators and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors is likely helpful. The most recent American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines regarding therapeutic management of heart failure suggest that aggressive pharmacologic treatment of asymptomatic ventricular arrhythmias is best avoided. To be considered strongly for pharmacologic prescription or for implantation of a tachyarrhythmia termination device, a patient should have symptomatic ventricular tachycardia with an episode of syncope or sudden cardiac death syndrome rather than simply having palpitations of asymptomatic, unsustained ventricular tachycardia. Indeed, aggressively treating congestive heart failure with medication often eliminates potentially life-threatening arrhythmias. Appropriate use of vasodilators and, particularly, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors is important. Correction of fluid balance and electrolyte disorders may be helpful to address symptoms and certainly is likely to decrease the potential for morbidity and mortality. On occasion it may be necessary to consider bradyarrhythmia pacemaker insertion or the use of atrioventricular nodal-ablation techniques with subsequent ventricular or atrioventricular pacer insertion. Obviously, sudden cardiac death due to sudden heart block or asystole might be attenuated with this strategy.

Determinants of outcome in patients with sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias: the antiarrhythmics versus implantable defibrillators (AVID) study registry

BACKGROUND

The prognosis of patients with sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias varies according to clinical characteristics. We sought to identify predictors of survival in a large population of patients with documented sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias not related to reversible or correctable causes included in the Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) Registry.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We analyzed the impact of 36 demographic, clinical, and discharge treatment variables on the outcome for 3559 patients. Survival status was assessed with the use of the National Death Index. Multivariate analyses were performed with the use of the Cox proportional hazards model. After a mean follow-up of 17 +/- 12 months, 631 patients died. Actuarial survival was 0.86 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.85 to 0.88), 0.79 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.81), and 0.72 (95% CI 0.70 to 0.74) at 1, 2, and 3 years. Multivariate predictors of worse survival included older age, severe left ventricular dysfunction, lower systolic blood pressure, history of congestive heart failure, diabetes, smoking or atrial fibrillation, and preexistent pacemaker. The hemodynamic impact of the qualifying arrhythmia was not a predictor of outcome. Defibrillator implantation and hospital discharge while the patient was taking a beta-blocker or an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor were associated with better prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite therapeutic advances, the mortality rates of patients with sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias remain high. Prognosis depends on the severity of underlying heart disease, as reflected by the extent of left ventricular dysfunction and the presence of heart failure. Well-tolerated ventricular tachycardia in patients with structural heart disease does not carry a significantly better prognosis than ventricular tachyarrhythmia with more severe hemodynamic consequences.

Large clinical trials in the management of ventricular arrhythmias. Applying group results to individual cases

Applying the results of clinical trials to everyday practice in an appropriate manner can be difficult. Earlier clinical trials focused on the secondary prevention of ventricular arrhythmias. Studying patients at high risk of recurrent ventricular arrhythmias is important, but the overall impact on arrhythmic death is low. Recent arrhythmia trials have studied specific patient populations for the primary prevention of ventricular arrhythmias. New trials will expand the investigation to other populations. This article summarizes the results of large clinical trials in the management of ventricular arrhythmias and attempts to provide guidelines for applying their results to everyday clinical practice.

Application of noninvasive and invasive tests for risk assessment in patients with ventricular arrhythmias

Sudden cardiac death remains a major public health problem in western society. Because most patients who experience cardiac arrest are not successfully resuscitated, primary prevention of sudden death remains an important challenge. A number of noninvasive risk stratification techniques have been suggested as providing useful information in patients with underlying structural heart defects. Unfortunately, the positive predictive value of most of these techniques has been limited. Left ventricular ejection fraction, the presence of nonsustained ventricular tachycardia on Holter monitoring, and inducible sustained ventricular tachycardia at electrophysiologic testing in patients with coronary artery disease remain the best established prognostic test. However, with the exception of two ICD studies using the combination of these markers, prospective studies have not yet completely validated the use of these and other prognostic markers. Further understanding of the pathophysiology of ventricular fibrillation and other risk stratification techniques will be necessary before a clear algorithm can be developed for application to patients at risk for sudden death.

Sudden death in children and adolescents

OBJECTIVE

To identify the incidence, causes, and characteristics of sudden death at age 1-20 years.

DESIGN

A review of all deaths at age 1-20 years. Death certificates were obtained from the Office for National Statistics, and further information, where appropriate, from coroners, paediatricians, physicians, and pathologists.

SETTING

The resident population of one English health region in 1985-1994.

RESULTS

In a population of 806 500 children and adolescents aged 1-20 years there were 2523 deaths in 10 years. Medical causes accounted for 1017 deaths (40%); 1236 (49%) were unnatural, and 270 (11%) were sudden. These sudden deaths comprised 142 with a previous diagnosis, the commonest being epilepsy 49 (34%), cardiovascular disease 33 (23%), and asthma 30 (21%); 87 attributed to a cause discovered at necropsy, which was respiratory infection in 32 (37%), other infections in 17 (20%), and unsuspected cardiovascular abnormalities in 26 (30%); 41 remained unexplained.

CONCLUSIONS

Half of all sudden deaths in children or adolescents were attributed to an already diagnosed condition. Abnormalities identified at necropsy accounted for one third of sudden deaths. Undiagnosed hypertrophic cardiomyopathy caused less than one death per million person years in the population aged 1-20 years. Unexplained sudden death, which may be caused by primary cardiac arrhythmia, is probably about 10 times more common.

Defibrillators in nonischemic cardiomyopathy treatment evaluation

The Defibrillators in Nonischemic Cardiomyopathy Treatment Evaluation (DEFINITE) is a multicenter randomized trial. Patients will have nonischemic cardiomyopathy (LVEF < or = 35%), a history of symptomatic heart failure and spontaneous arrhythmia (> 10 PVCs/hour or nonsustained ventricular tachycardia defined as 3-15 beats at a rate of > 120 beats/min) on Holter monitor or telemetry within the past 6 months. Patients will be randomized to an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) versus no ICD. All patients will receive standard oral medical therapy for heart failure including angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and beta-blockers (if tolerated). Patients will be followed for 2-3 years. The primary endpoint will be total mortality. Quality-of-life and pharmacoeconomics analyses will also be performed. A registry will track patients who meet basic inclusion criteria but are not randomized. We estimate an annual total mortality of 15% at 2 years in the treatment arm that does not receive an ICD. The ICD is expected to reduce mortality by 50%. Approximately 204 patients will be required in each treatment group. Twenty-five centers will be included in a trial designed to last an estimated 4 years.

Measurement of heart rate variability: a clinical tool or a research toy?

The objectives of this review are to discuss the diversity of mechanisms that may explain the association between heart rate (HR) variability and mortality, to appraise the clinical applicability of traditional and new measures of HR variability and to propose future directions in this field of research. There is a large body of data demonstrating that abnormal HR variability measured over a 24-h period provides information on the risk of subsequent death in subjects with and without structural heart disease. However, the mechanisms responsible for this association are not completely established. Therefore, no specific therapy is currently available to improve the prognosis for patients with abnormal HR variability. Reduced HR variability has been most commonly associated with a risk of arrhythmic death, but recent data suggest that abnormal variability also predicts vascular causes of death, progression of coronary atherosclerosis and death due to heart failure. A consensus is also lacking on the best HR variability measure for clinical purposes. Time and frequency domain measures of HR variability have been most commonly used, but recent studies show that new analysis methods based on nonlinear dynamics may be more powerful in terms of risk stratification. Before the measurement of HR variability can be applied to clinical practice and used to direct therapy, more precise insight into the pathophysiological link between HR variability and mortality are needed. Further studies should also address the issue of which of the HR variability indexes, including the new nonlinear measures, is best for clinical purposes in various patient populations.

Causes of death in the Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) Trial

OBJECTIVES

This study analyzed the causes of death in the Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) Trial.

BACKGROUND

Both implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) and antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) are used as mainstays of treatment for life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias in patients who have survived either ventricular fibrillation or sustained ventricular tachycardia with hemodynamic compromise and serious symptoms. The AVID Trial compared the effectiveness of these two therapies. Survival was better with the ICD. Assessment of the cause of death should help to determine the mechanism of improvement in survival with the ICD.

METHODS

Of 1,016 patients enrolled in the AVID Trial, 202 patients died. The mode of death was determined by the unblinded Principal Investigator and independently by an Events Committee, which reviewed materials meticulously blinded with respect to treatment. Deaths were classified as cardiac or noncardiac. Cardiac deaths were further classified as arrhythmic or nonarrhythmic, and causes of noncardiac death were identified.

RESULTS

Deaths were more frequent in patients treated with an AAD (n = 122), compared with patients treated with the ICD (n = 80), unadjusted p < 0.001, p = 0.012 adjusted for sequential monitoring. In AVID, 157 deaths were cardiac, and 79 were arrhythmic. The major effect of the ICD was to prevent arrhythmic death (AAD = 55, ICD = 24, nominal unadjusted p < 0.001). Nonarrhythmic cardiac deaths were equal (AAD = 39, ICD = 39). Patients treated with an AAD had a slightly greater incidence of noncardiac deaths (28 vs. 17, p = 0.053), primarily due to pulmonary and renal causes.

CONCLUSIONS

The ICD is more effective than an AAD in reducing arrhythmic cardiac death, while nonarrhythmic cardiac death is unchanged. Of note, apparent arrhythmic death still seems to constitute 38% of all cardiac deaths despite treatment with an ICD. However, the ICD remains superior to an AAD in prolonging survival after life-threatening arrhythmias.

Sudden death in recipients of transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator systems: terminal events, predictors, and potential mechanisms

INTRODUCTION

Transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) systems are very effective in preventing sudden death; however, little is known about terminal events and potential causes and mechanisms of sudden death in recipients of these devices.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We analyzed 74 cases of sudden death among patients enrolled in several clinical investigations of transvenous ICD systems. Eighty-one percent were men (mean age 68+/-10 years), 86% had coronary artery disease, mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 0.27+/-0.11, and two thirds presented with sustained ventricular tachycardia. The final event was witnessed in 65 patients (81%). Based on reported ICD shocks, documented rhythm, and/or postmortem device data, sudden death was deemed tachyarrhythmic in 49 cases (66%), nontachyarrhythmic in 12 (16%), and indeterminate in the remaining 13 (18%). Multivariate analysis of several clinical and nonclinical factors found advanced age (> 65 years, P = 0.03, odds ratio [OR] 1.75, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.05 to 2.92), reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (< 0.35, P < 0.01, OR 3.51, CI 1.66 to 7.40), and having antibradycardia pacing ICDs (P = 0.02, OR 5.26, CI 1.37 to 20.0) to be independent predictors of sudden death. One or more predisposing factors and/or potential causes of sudden death were identified in 21 patients (28%).

CONCLUSION

In this select group of transvenous ICD recipients, (1) sudden death was associated with ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation in at least two thirds of cases, (2) nearly one third of patients had one or more factors, some device related, that could have been associated with sudden death, and (3) death ensued despite appropriate ICD therapies and, in many cases, external resuscitation, suggesting acute adverse events as common terminal factors.

Mechanisms of death in the CABG Patch trial: a randomized trial of implantable cardiac defibrillator prophylaxis in patients at high risk of death after coronary artery bypass graft surgery

BACKGROUND

The CABG Patch trial compared prophylactic implantable cardiac-defibrillator (ICD) implantation with no antiarrhythmic therapy in coronary bypass surgery patients who had a left ventricular ejection fraction <0.36 and an abnormal signal-averaged ECG. There were 102 deaths among the 446 ICD group patients and 96 deaths among the 454 control group patients, a hazard ratio of 1.07 (P=0.63). The mechanisms of death were classified, and hypotheses were tested about the effects of ICD therapy on arrhythmic and nonarrhythmic cardiac deaths in the CABG Patch Trial and the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial (MADIT).

METHODS AND RESULTS

The 198 deaths in the trial were reviewed by an independent Events Committee and classified by the method of Hinkle and Thaler. Only 54 deaths (27%) occurred out of hospital; 145 deaths (73%) were witnessed. Seventy-nine (82%) of the 96 deaths in the control group and 76 (75%) of the 102 deaths in the ICD group were due to cardiac causes. Cumulative arrhythmic mortality at 42 months was 6.9% in the control group and 4.0% in the ICD group (P=0. 057). Cumulative nonarrhythmic cardiac mortality at 42 months was 12. 4% in the control group and 13.0% in the ICD group (P=0.275). Death due to pump failure was significantly associated with death >1 hour from the onset of symptoms, dyspnea within 7 days of death, and overt heart failure within 7 days of death.

CONCLUSIONS

In the CABG Patch Trial, ICD therapy reduced arrhythmic death 45% without significant effect on nonarrhythmic deaths. Because 71% of the deaths were nonarrhythmic, total mortality was not significantly reduced.

Sudden death in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients: clinical context, arrhythmic events and device responses

OBJECTIVES

We sought to investigate the nature of terminal events and potential contributory clinical and nonclinical (e.g., device-related) factors associated with sudden death (SD) in recipients of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD).

BACKGROUND

The ICD is very effective in terminating ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF), but protection against SD is not absolute. Little is known about the nature and potential causes of SD in patients with ICDs.

METHODS

We analyzed 25 cases of out-of-hospital SD among patients enrolled in the clinical investigation of the Cadence Tiered-Therapy Defibrillator System.

RESULTS

All patients (24 men and 1 woman, mean age 62+/-10 years) received epicardial lead systems. The majority (92%) had coronary artery disease and a previous myocardial infarction (MI), with a mean left ventricular ejection fraction 0.25+/-0.07. At device implantation, the mean defibrillation threshold was 13+/-5 J. Sudden death occurred 13+/-11 months later. Twenty patients (80%) had received appropriate ICD therapies before death, and 18 (72%) were receiving > or = 1 antiarrhythmic drugs at the time of death. Sudden death was tachyarrhythmia-associated in 16 patients (64%), non-tachyarrhythmia-associated in 7 (28%) and indeterminate in 2 (8%). In the 16 patients with tachyarrhythmia-associated SD, the overall first therapy success rate in tachycardia and fibrillation zones was 60% and 67%, respectively. However, despite protracted therapies (> or = 2 shocks) in 7 (66%) of 12 patients who received fibrillation therapies, the final tachyarrhythmic episode was ultimately terminated by the ICD in 15 (94%) of the 16 patients, whereas 1 patient died after multiple (initially successful) internal and external shocks for intractable VT/VF during exercise. In 10 patients (40%) one or more, primarily clinical, factors potentially contributory to SD were identified: heart failure (n=8), angina (n=2), hypokalemia (n=1), adverse antiarrhythmic drug treatment (n=1) and acute MI (n=1). An additional 10 patients (40%) had experienced an increase in frequency of ICD shocks within 3 months of SD. Appropriate battery voltages and normal circuitry function were found in all devices interrogated and analyzed after death.

CONCLUSIONS

In this select group of patients receiving a third-generation ICD, SD was associated with VT or VF events in nearly two-thirds of patients, and death occurred despite ultimately successful, although often protracted, device therapies. These observations, along with evidence of recent worsening clinical status, suggest acute cardiac mechanical dysfunction as a frequent terminal factor. In recipients with ICDs, SD directly attributable to device failure seems to be rare.

Clinical characteristics of sudden death victims in heritable (chromosome 1p1-1q1) conduction and myocardial disease

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to identify the clinical characteristics of family members at risk of sudden death.

BACKGROUND

The significance of sudden death in heritable cardiac disorders with delayed expression is incompletely understood. Additional insights come from a four-decade experience of seven generations of a family of German origin with autosomal dominant (chromosome 1p1-1q1) cardiac conduction and myocardial disease.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 38 family members (20 males; 18 females) were identified with sudden death. Twenty-eight family members (mean age 48+/-8 years) from earlier generations had no pacemaker at the time of sudden death. In this group, 15 subjects were asymptomatic prior to sudden death. Ten family members with sudden death, from later generations, had chronically implanted pacemakers for high grade atrioventricular block. This group was older (mean age 57+/-2 years), with decreased functional status (New York Heart Association class II to IV), enlarged left atria, dilated left ventricles with reduced systolic function and documented ventricular fibrillation in three members. Twenty-eight family members with sudden death were descendants of sib lineages 2 or 6; 21 family members with sudden death were offspring of a parent who also suffered sudden death.

CONCLUSION

Sudden death is an important late outcome in heritable (chromosome 1p1-1q1) cardiac conduction and myocardial disease. Pacemaker therapy is important for the treatment of symptomatic bradycardia, but it does not prevent sudden death. Family members who are beyond the third decade of life with reduced functional capacity, left ventricular dysfunction, pacemakers and who are the offspring of a parent with sudden death appear to be at greatest risk

Nonsustained ventricular tachycardia in the setting of acute myocardial infarction: tachycardia characteristics and their prognostic implications

BACKGROUND

Nonsustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT) has significant prognostic implications in the setting of healing and healed myocardial infarction (MI), but only limited information is available on its importance in the setting of acute MI. We evaluated the prognostic significance of NSVT characteristics in the setting of acute MI.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A prospective database was used to identify 112 patients with NSVT within 72 hours of acute MI. A control group was identified matched for age, sex, type of MI, and thrombolytic treatment. Mean age was 64 to 65 years in the 2 groups with 71% to 72% men. Q-wave MI was noted in 52% to 53%, and thrombolytic therapy was administered to 31% to 32% of patients in each group. In-hospital ventricular fibrillation occurred more frequently in the NSVT group (9% versus 0% in the control group; P<0. 001), but total in-hospital (10% versus 4%) and follow-up mortality (10% versus 17%) did not differ between the 2 groups. With a Cox regression model, specific NSVT characteristics were predictive of mortality. The strongest predictor was time from presentation to occurrence of NSVT. Shortest RR interval during NSVT was also a univariate predictor of mortality. Multivariate analysis identified time from presentation to occurrence of NSVT as the strongest predictor of mortality (P<0.0001). The increased relative risk of NSVT was first significant when it occurred 13 hours from presentation and continued to increase as the time from presentation to occurrence of NSVT increased, plateauing at approximately 24 hours with a relative risk of 7.5.

CONCLUSIONS

Contrary to prevailing clinical opinion, NSVT that occurs in the setting of acute MI does have important prognostic significance. Specifically, the currently accepted notion that NSVT that occurs within 48 hours of acute MI has no prognostic significance needs to be adjusted. Although NSVT that occurs within the first several hours of presentation does not have an associated adverse prognosis, NSVT that occurs beyond the first several hours after presentation is associated with significant increases in relative risk.

Programmed ventricular stimulation for arrhythmia risk prediction in patients with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy and nonsustained ventricular tachycardia

OBJECTIVES

This study investigated the role of programmed ventricular stimulation (PVS) for arrhythmia risk prediction in patients with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy (IDC) and spontaneous nonsustained ventricular tachycardia (VT).

BACKGROUND

Nonsustained VT in patients with IDC has been associated with a high incidence of sudden cardiac death.

METHODS

Over the course of 4 years, 34 patients with IDC, a left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction < or = 35%, and spontaneous nonsustained VT underwent PVS. All patients were prospectively followed for 24+/-13 months.

RESULTS

Sustained ventricular arrhythmias were induced in 13 patients (38%). Sustained monomorphic VT was induced in three patients (9%), and polymorphic VT or ventricular fibrillation (VF) in another 10 patients (29%). No sustained ventricular arrhythmia could be induced in 21 study patients (62%). Prophylactic implantation of third-generation defibrillators (ICDs) with electrogram storage capability was performed in all 13 patients with inducible sustained VT or VF, and in nine of 21 patients (43%) without inducible sustained VT or VF. There were no significant differences between the additional use of amiodarone, d,I-sotalol, and beta-blocker therapy during follow-up in patients with and without inducible VT or VF. During 24+/-13 months of follow-up, arrhythmic events were observed in nine patients (26%) including sudden cardiac deaths in two patients and ICD shocks for rapid VT or VF in seven patients. Arrhythmic events during follow-up occurred in four of 13 patients with inducible ventricular arrhythmias compared with five of 21 patients without inducible ventricular arrhythmias at PVS (31% vs. 24%, p=NS).

CONCLUSION

PVS does not appear to be helpful for arrhythmia risk stratification in patients with IDC, a left ventricular ejection fraction < or =35%, and spontaneous nonsustained VT. Due to the limited number of patients, however, the power of this study is too small to exclude moderately large differences in outcome between patients with IDC with and without inducible VT or VF.

Adverse events with transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: a prospective multicenter study. European 7219 Jewel ICD investigators

BACKGROUND

A newly developed classification system relates adverse events to the surgical procedure or the function of the implantable defibrillator.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Adverse events were monitored during prospective clinical evaluation of the Medtronic model 7219 Jewel ICD and were classified according to the definitions of the ISO 14155 standard for device clinical trials into 3 groups: severe and mild device-related and severe non-device-related adverse events. In addition, events were related to the surgical procedure, treatment with the device, or cardiac function. Seven hundred seventy-eight patients were followed up for an average of 4.0 months after ICD implantation. In total, 356 adverse events were observed in 259 patients. At 1, 3, and 12 months after ICD implantation, 99%, 98%, and 97% of the patients, respectively, survived; 95%, 93%, and 92%, respectively, were free of surgical reintervention; and 79%, 68%, and 51%, respectively, were free of any adverse event. Twenty patients died: 6 deaths were related to the surgical procedure, 12 deaths were considered unrelated to ICD treatment, and 2 patients died of an unknown cause. Of 111 nonlethal severe adverse device effects, 47 required surgical intervention, 19 times for correction of a dislodged lead. Inappropriate delivery of therapy was observed 128 times in 111 patients, and the events were typically resolved by reprogramming or drug adjustment. Nine of these required rehospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 50% of patients experience an adverse event within the first year after ICD implantation. The observed adverse event rate depends on the definitions and the prospective monitoring. The incidence of inappropriate therapy emphasizes the need for improved detection algorithms and for quality-of-life evaluations, especially when considering ICD treatment in high-risk but arrhythmia-free patients.

The Ablate and Pace Trial: a prospective study of catheter ablation of the AV conduction system and permanent pacemaker implantation for treatment of atrial fibrillation. APT Investigators

BACKGROUND

The Ablate and Pace Trial (APT) prospectively assessed the effects of catheter ablation of the AV conduction system and permanent pacemaker implantation on health-related quality of life, survival, exercise capacity, and ventricular function in 156 patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

All patients referred for catheter ablation and permanent pacemaker implantation because of medically-refractory atrial fibrillation at 16 centers were screened for enrollment in a prospective registry. Baseline assessment prior to ablation included measurement of quality of life, including the Health Status Questionnaire, the Quality of Life Index and the Symptom Checklist: Frequency and Severity. Exercise capacity was assessed with metabolic treadmill exercise testing and ventricular function was quantitated with echocardiography. The quality of life instruments, exercise capacity, and echocardiography were repeated at 3 and 12 months after catheter ablation.

RESULTS

The APT population included 90 men and 66 women (66.1 +/- 11.5 years of age) with either chronic (n = 70), recurrent (n = 31), or paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (n = 55). Structural heart disease was present in 78.2% of patients. Successful ablation of AV conduction was achieved in 155 of 156 patients (99.4%). Survival at 1 year was 85.3%, with 5 of 23 deaths being sudden cardiac deaths. Survival over the first year of follow-up was significantly lower for patients with a baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 0.45 (0.73) than for patients with a LVEF > or = 0.45 (0.88, p = 0.03). The NYHA functional class improved from 2.1 at baseline to 1.8 at 3 months and 1.9 at 12 months of followup (p = 0.0001). Significant improvement in quality of life scores were noted for all 8 subscales of the Health Status Questionnaire, for the overall rating of the Quality of Life Index, the Health and Function subscales; Arrhythmia-related symptoms were markedly reduced as measured by the Symptom Checklist: Frequency and Severity scale. The mean LVEF improved from 0.50 +/- 0.20 at baseline to 0.54 +/- 0.20 at 3 months (p = 0.03). The LVEF 12 months after ablation was 0.52 +/- 0.20, not statistically different from baseline. Individuals with reduced systolic function at baseline had the greatest improvement, from LVEF 0.31 +/- 0.20 at baseline to 0.41 +/- 0.20 at 3 months and 0.41 +/- 0.30 at 12 months (p = 0.0001). There were no significant changes in treadmill exercise duration (10.0 +/- 4.3 min at baseline and 11.6 +/- 3.6 min at 12 months) or VO2max (1467 +/- 681 ml O2 min baseline and 1629 +/- 739 ml O2 min at 12 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Catheter ablation of the AV conduction system and permanent pacemaker implantation were associated with improved quality of life and left ventricular function in this population of highly symptomatic patients with atrial fibrillation refractory to medical therapy.

Empirical versus tested antitachycardia pacing in implantable cardioverter defibrillators: a prospective study including 200 patients

BACKGROUND

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) reduce the risk of sudden cardiac death. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether testing of antitachycardia pacing (ATP) for induced ventricular tachycardias (VTs) at predischarge examination can predict ATP success during follow-up.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The study covers 200 consecutive patients who received ICD implants from June 1991 through December 1995. All underwent electrophysiological testing. In 54 patients (ATP tested, group T), ATP terminated induced VTs successfully. In 146 patients (empirically programmed ATP, group E), only ventricular fibrillation could be induced, including 18 with unsuccessful ATP attempts for induced VTs. Disregarding the results of ATP testing, the same ATP scheme was programmed in all patients: three attempts of autodecremental ramp with 81% of the VT cycle length, with 8 to 10 pulses. During a follow-up of 20.4 +/- 10 months, 95% of 3819 spontaneous VTs were successfully terminated with ATP in 42 patients of group T. In group E, 90% of 1346 spontaneous VTs in 81 patients were terminated with ATP. Acceleration after ATP occurred in 2% in group T versus 5% in group E. The success for all episodes in individual patients was > or =90% in >60% of the ATP tested and empirically programmed patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this 200-patient prospective study comparing tested versus empirical ATP show high success (95% versus 90%) for VT termination, with low rates of acceleration. ATP is safe and very effective and should be programmed "on" in all patients regardless of the predischarge EP inducibility.

Transcatheter management of neonates with pulmonary atresia and intact ventricular septum

This report describes a 1 day-old infant with valvar pulmonary atresia with intact ventricular septum in whom we were successful in performing transcatheter guidewire perforation and balloon pulmonary valvuloplasty to establish right ventricle-to-pulmonary artery continuity and flow. Also described is implantation of a 4 mm coronary stent into ductus arteriosus in lieu of surgical aortopulmonary shunt to treat pulmonary oligemia and systemic arterial hypoxemia. Details of transcatheter guidewire perforation are presented and it is suggested that this method be used as an alternative to Laser/radio frequency wires, especially in the absence of approval of the latter wires by the regulatory agencies. Stenting of the ductus may be considered an alternative to surgical aortopulmonary shunt. Role of transcatheter technology in the management of selected patients with pulmonary atresia and intact ventricular septum is discussed.

Use and accuracy of state death certificates for classification of sudden cardiac deaths in high-risk populations

In a large cohort of patients with known or suspected coronary disease, we evaluated the characteristics of 407 patients who died after hospital discharge and tested whether the state death certificate can be used to classify deaths as sudden cardiac versus nonsudden. Compared with a paramedic classification system based on heart rhythm, the death certificate-based classification resulted in a sensitivity that ranged from 78% to 85% and a specificity that ranged from 25% to 58%. We conclude that the death certificate can be used to identify cases of sudden cardiac death in patients at high risk; however, there is a substantial rate of false-positive sudden death classification.

A comparison of antiarrhythmic-drug therapy with implantable defibrillators in patients resuscitated from near-fatal ventricular arrhythmias

BACKGROUND

Patients who survive life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias are at risk for recurrent arrhythmias. They can be treated with either an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator or antiarrhythmic drugs, but the relative efficacy of these two treatment strategies is unknown.

METHODS

To address this issue, we conducted a randomized comparison of these two treatment strategies in patients who had been resuscitated from near-fatal ventricular fibrillation or who had undergone cardioversion from sustained ventricular tachycardia. Patients with ventricular tachycardia also had either syncope or other serious cardiac symptoms, along with a left ventricular ejection fraction of 0.40 or less. One group of patients was treated with implantation of a cardioverter-defibrillator; the other received class III antiarrhythmic drugs, primarily amiodarone at empirically determined doses. Fifty-six clinical centers screened all patients who presented with ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation during a period of nearly four years. Of 1016 patients (45 percent of whom had ventricular fibrillation, and 55 percent ventricular tachycardia), 507 were randomly assigned to treatment with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators and 509 to antiarrhythmic-drug therapy. The primary end point was overall mortality.

RESULTS

Follow-up was complete for 1013 patients (99.7 percent). Overall survival was greater with the implantable defibrillator, with unadjusted estimates of 89.3 percent, as compared with 82.3 percent in the antiarrhythmic-drug group at one year, 81.6 percent versus 74.7 percent at two years, and 75.4 percent versus 64.1 percent at three years (P<0.02). The corresponding reductions in mortality (with 95 percent confidence limits) with the implantable defibrillator were 39+/-20 percent, 27+/-21 percent, and 31+/-21 percent

CONCLUSIONS

Among survivors of ventricular fibrillation or sustained ventricular tachycardia causing severe symptoms, the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator is superior to antiarrhythmic drugs for increasing overall survival.

Heart rate variability and dispersion of QT interval in patients with vulnerability to ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation after previous myocardial infarction

OBJECTIVES

This study was designed to compare QT dispersion measured from the standard 12-lead electrocardiogram and 24-h heart rate variability in patients with vulnerability to either ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation after a previous myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND

Increased QT interval dispersion and reduced heart rate variability have been shown to be associated with vulnerability to ventricular tachyarrhythmias, but the data have mainly been pooled from patients with presentation of stable ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation.

METHODS

QT dispersion and time domain and two-dimensional vector analysis of heart rate variability were studied in 30 survivors of ventricular fibrillation with a previous myocardial infarction and with inducible unstable ventricular tachyarrhythmia by programmed electrical stimulation and in 30 postinfarction patients with clinical and inducible stable monomorphic sustained ventricular tachycardia. Both of these patient groups were matched, with respect to age, gender and left ventricular ejection fraction, with an equal number of postinfarction control patients without a history of arrhythmic events or inducible ventricular tachyarrhythmia and arrhythmia-free survival during a follow-up period of 2 years. Forty-five age-matched healthy subjects served as normal control subjects.

RESULTS

Standard deviation of all sinus intervals and long-term continuous RR interval variability analyzed from Poincaré plots were reduced in patients with vulnerability to ventricular fibrillation (p < 0.001 for both), but not in patients with ventricular tachycardia (p = NS for both), compared with postinfarction control subjects. Corrected QT (QTc) dispersion was significantly broader both in patients with ventricular fibrillation (p < 0.001) and in those with ventricular tachycardia (p < 0.05) than in matched postinfarction control subjects. Heart rate variability performed better than QTc dispersion in predicting vulnerability to ventricular fibrillation.

CONCLUSIONS

Increased QT dispersion is associated with vulnerability to both ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation. Low heart rate variability is specifically related to susceptibility to ventricular fibrillation but not to stable monomorphic ventricular tachycardia, suggesting that the autonomic nervous system modifies the presentation of life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias.

Risk assessment and risk stratification in sudden cardiac death: a biostatistician's view

Determining individual probabilities of developing lethal arrhythmia over time (risk assessment) and grouping individuals by that probability (risk stratification) are similar to, yet differ in purpose from, screening, diagnosis, risk factor identification, and prognostic staging. Methods of handling bias, use of multiple predictors, and evaluation of results provide challenges. A key purpose of risk assessment and stratification is examined. The role of operational definitions of predictors and events and of methods that account for multiple predictors and known confounding factors is analyzed. Constructed examples illustrate potential pitfalls in assessment and how multivariate techniques can deal with multiple predictors. A trial design to evaluate risk stratification for the identified purpose is elaborated and potential results are interpreted. Bias from predictors regressing to the mean can be minimized either by averaging a number of measurements or by equalizing the bias in comparison groups. An analysis of two predictors and two risk strata illustrates how the discrimination of combined predictors may be greater than the sum of the individual variables' discrimination. Risk stratification can be evaluated in trials that randomize competing interventions within different risk strata. Results of such trials indicate whether the risk strata adequately distinguish individuals by their responsiveness to particular intervention. Potential pitfalls, not easily recognized in risk stratification, can be avoided in the methods and in studies for evaluating those methods. Multivariate techniques maximize the discrimination of multiple predictors, but may increase complexity. Randomized trials of treatment provide evidence for utility of risk stratification.

Classification of sudden and arrhythmic death

Since all death is (eventually) sudden and associated with cardiac arrhythmias, the concept of sudden death is only meaningful if it is unexpected, while arrhythmic death is only meaningful if life could have continued had the arrhythmia been prevented or treated. Current classifications of death as being arrhythmic or sudden are all biased by the difficulty of having to decide on the degree of unexpectedness or the likelihood that life could continue without the arrhythmia. The uncertainties are enlarged by the fact that critical data (such as knowledge of arrhythmias at the time of death or autopsy) are available in only a few percent of cases. A main problem in using classifications is the lack of validation data. This situation has, with the MADIT trial, changed in the case of the Thaler and Hinkle classification of arrhythmic death. The MADIT trial demonstrated that arrhythmic death was nearly abolished by the implantable defibrillator, indicating that arrhythmic death by this classification is meaningful, at least in the population studied. For future investigations, a call is made for committees to present data in a way that allows the reader to examine the quality of the data used for evaluation.

Are more complex implantable cardioverter defibrillators associated with an increased mortality? Lessons learned from clinical trials

We compared 1-year survival in patients receiving implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) that provide only shock therapy with more advanced ICDs that provide antitachycardia pacing, bradycardia pacing, low-energy cardioversion, and advanced detection algorithms. Outcome in patients with advanced-generation ICD systems was similar or improved compared with outcome in patients receiving ICDs with only monophasic shock.

Drugs or implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in patients with poor left ventricular function?

Poor left ventricular function is a predictor of sudden death. Both antiarrhythmic drugs and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) promise to reduce the sudden death rate in these patients and consequently improve survival. In patients without spontaneous ventricular tachyarrhythmias, only beta-blocking agents and amiodarone have been shown to reduce sudden death and improve survival in some studies, whereas class I antiarrhythmic drugs increased mortality. For patients with documented ventricular tachyarrhythmias, protection against sudden death by serially tested class I antiarrhythmic drugs is at best moderate. There is some evidence suggesting that therapy with class III antiarrhythmic drugs, either amiodarone or dl-sotalol, may reduce sudden death rates and improve overall mortality in comparison to therapy with class I antiarrhythmic drugs. ICDs have been shown to prevent sudden death reliably. In published patient cohorts in which only patients who were not inducible off antiarrhythmic drugs or still inducible on antiarrhythmic drugs received an ICD, the ICD seemed to improve overall survival in comparison to class I antiarrhythmic drugs. A small prospective randomized study that compared a conventional therapy strategy to primary ICD implantations showed an improved outcome with ICDs as therapy of first choice. However, these studies included many patients treated with class I antiarrhythmic drugs considered to be less effective. In matched control studies comparing the ICD to amiodarone or dl-sotalol, less sudden deaths and an improved overall survival could be shown for the ICD in general without stratification for left ventricular function. Thus, in patients with hemodynamically nontolerated ventricular tachyarrhythmias, the ICD seems to improve survival in comparison to class I antiarrhythmic drugs, dl-sotalol, or amiodarone. However, in patients with poor left ventricular function, therapy with ICDs seems to be less cost-effective than in patients with preserved left ventricular function. In patients with very poor left ventricular function who are evaluated for cardiac transplantation, the ICD seems to change only the mode of death from sudden to a nonsudden cardiac death if transplantation cannot be performed soon.