Predictors of ventricular tachycardia recurrence in 100 patients receiving tiered therapy defibrillators

Programmed Ventricular Stimulation: Risk Stratification and Guiding Antiarrhythmic Therapies

Electrophysiologic testing with programmed ventricular stimulation (PVS) has been utilized to induce ventricular tachycardia (VT), thereby improving risk stratification for patients with ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathies and determining the effectiveness of antiarrhythmic therapies, especially catheter ablation. A variety of procedural aspects can be modified during PVS in order to alter the sensitivity and specificity of the test including the addition of multiple baseline pacing cycle lengths, extrastimuli, and pacing locations. The definition of a positive result is also critically important, which has varied from exclusively sustained monomorphic VT (>30 seconds) to any ventricular arrhythmia regardless of morphology. In this review, we discuss the history of PVS and evaluate its role in sudden cardiac death risk stratification in a variety of patient populations. We propose an approach to future investigations that will capitalize on the unique ability to vary the sensitivity and specificity of this test. We then discuss the application of PVS during and following catheter ablation. The strategies that have been utilized to improve the efficacy of intraprocedural PVS are highlighted during a discussion of the limitations of this probabilistic strategy. The role of noninvasive programmed stimulation is also reviewed in predicting recurrent VT and informing management decisions including repeat ablations, modifications in antiarrhythmic drugs, and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator programming. Based on the available evidence and guidelines, we propose an approach to future investigations that will allow clinicians to optimize the use of PVS for risk stratification and assessment of therapeutic efficacy.

Noninvasive programmed stimulation in the setting of ventricular tachycardia catheter ablation

In the setting of catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia (VT), invasive programmed ventricular stimulation (PVS) is considered an important tool to assess the (residual) inducibility of ventricular arrhythmias and determine the acute success of the procedure. In patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices, noninvasive programmed stimulation via implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) leads can be an alternative to the invasive PVS with intracardiac catheters. The advantages of noninvasive programmed stimulation include preprocedure planning of the electrophysiology procedure to ensure optimal conditions for successful catheter ablation of VT. Following the procedure, noninvasive programmed stimulation has been shown to be used as a guide for repeat early ablation, to offer better programming of ICD, to offer prognostic value regarding the VT recurrence, and to guide antiarrhythmic drug therapy. The noninvasive nature of noninvasive programmed stimulation makes it an attractive alternative to PVS in patients with ICD who have not undergone catheter ablation of VT to obtain prognostic value regarding the occurrence of VT.

Non-invasive programmed stimulation to identify high-risk patients with implanted cardioverter defibrillator (the NIPS-ICD study): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

The use of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is a widely used and effective therapy, which reduces the risk of cardiac death in many cardiac diseases, both implanted for secondary and primary prevention. However, recurrent arrhythmias and ICD discharges have adverse prognostic significance. Additional parameters that would identify patients who are at increased risk of arrhythmias and appropriate ICD interventions would be of clinical value. Modern ICDs are relatively complex devices with a number of functions, including the possibility to perform noninvasive programmed stimulation (NIPS) with an implanted electrode located in the right ventricle.

Methods/Design

The aim of the study is to evaluate the usefulness of NIPS in determining the likelihood of life-threatening arrhythmic events in patients with ICD. The study will include 150 consecutive patients with an ICD implanted both for primary and secondary prevention, regardless of etiology, who are followed in the outpatient clinic of our center and do not meet the exclusion criteria. A 12-step St. George’s Hospital NIPS protocol using ICD will be performed. The endpoint is to induce sustained ventricular arrhythmia (VT lasting more than 30 seconds or hemodynamically unstable VT/VF) or the end of the protocol. In case of serious and/or hemodynamically unstable heart rhythm disorders resistant to treatment with a low-energy antiarrhythmic pacing (ATP), the patient receives a short-term intravenous general anesthesia, and internal or external defibrillation is performed. Outpatient follow-up will be conducted during the pre-scheduled ICD control visits. An analysis of records of a registered memory device will be collected, a patient will be interviewed, and physical examination will be carried out. The follow-ups will be held every 3 months for 1 year. The primary endpoint of the follow-up will be appropriate intervention of ICD or sudden cardiac (arrhythmic) death; the secondary, appropriate ICD intervention, or death from cardiovascular causes; and the tertiary, appropriate ICD intervention, death or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes.

Discussion

It is expected that appropriate ICD interventions during follow-up will occur more often in patients who had sustained ventricular arrhythmias induced during NIPS.

Clinical trials registry

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02373306, date of registration: 26 February 2015.

Clinical variables predicting inappropriate use of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in patients with coronary heart disease or nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy

Inappropriate therapy is a common clinical problem in recipients of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). The present study evaluated whether clinical characteristics could predict inappropriate ICD therapy due to atrial tachyarrhythmias in a series of 260 patients.

Recurrent cardiac events in patients with idiopathic ventricular fibrillation, excluding patients with the Brugada syndrome

BACKGROUND

The recurrence of cardiac events in patients with idiopathic ventricular fibrillation (VF) excluding patients with the Brugada syndrome is unclear since this entity remains present in previous studies.

METHODS

Since 1992, 18 patients (72% male) with idiopathic VF out of 455 ICD implants were treated with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). The mean age at first ICD implantation was 42 +/- 14 years. Brugada syndrome, as well as other primary electrical diseases (e.g. long QT), were systematically excluded in all patients by the absence of the typical electrocardiogram (ST elevation in the right precordial leads) at rest and/or after pharmacological tests (ajmaline, flecainide, or procainamide). Recurrence of cardiac events was prospectively assessed.

RESULTS

During a mean follow-up period of 41 +/- 27 months, VF recurrence with appropriate shock occurred in 7 patients (39%) covering a total of 27 shocks. The median time to first appropriate shock was 12 +/- 9 months. There were no deaths. In the electrophysiological study, 39% of patients were inducible, but inducibility failed to predict subsequent arrhythmic events. Forty-four percent of patients suffered 21 inappropriate shocks, which were caused by sinus tachycardia, atrial arrhythmias or lead malfunction.

CONCLUSION

Idiopathic ventricular fibrillation patients have a high recurrence rate of potentially fatal ventricular arrhythmias, excluding patients with the Brugada syndrome or other known causes. ICD prevents sudden cardiac death but inappropriate shocks remained a major issue in this young and active population.

Clinical and electrophysiologic predictors of ventricular tachyarrhythmia recurrence in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators

INTRODUCTION

Not all patients experience recurrent sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias after placement of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). We evaluated the clinical and electrophysiologic predictors of ventricular tachycardia (VT) and ventricular fibrillation (VF) recurrence following ICD implantation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Consecutive patients (n = 133) underwent 4 +/- 3 serial electrophysiologic studies (EPS) over 50 +/- 26 months following ICD implantation. Sustained VT/VF could always be induced during follow-up EPS in 49 patients; sustained VT/VF was sometimes induced during follow-up EPS in 47 patients; and sustained VT/VF could never be induced during follow-up EPS in 37 patients. Spontaneous VT/VF requiring ICD therapy occurred in 107 patients during follow-up. Patients with sustained VT/VF that was always inducible or sometimes inducible during follow-up experienced more frequent episodes of VT/VF following ICD implant (20.5, 95% CI 12.7-33.0; and 17.8, 95% CI 11.3-28.1 episodes/patient respectively; vs 3.0, 95% CI 2.0-4.6 episodes/patient for patients with VT/VF never induced, P < 0.001). Inducibility of sustained VT/VF post-ICD implant (P < 0.001) and sustained VT as the presenting arrhythmia (P = 0.02) were independent predictors of spontaneous VT/VF recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Reproducibly inducible VT/VF following ICD implantation predicts a high probability of VT/VF recurrence and identifies a cohort of patients who experience frequent episodes of VT/VF over time. Persistent noninducibility of sustained VT/VF identifies a group of patients who experience no or very few episodes of VT/VF recurrence.