1
|
Borne RT, Randolph T, Wang Y, Curtis JP, Peterson PN, Masoudi FA, Sandhu A, Zipse MM, Thomas K, Kutyifa V, Desai NR, Cha YM, Hsu JC, Russo AM. Analysis of Temporal Trends and Variation in the Use of Defibrillation Testing in Contemporary Practice. JAMA Netw Open 2019; 2:e1913553. [PMID: 31626314 PMCID: PMC6813586 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.13553] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/28/2023] Open
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Defibrillation testing (DFT) is performed during implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation to assess the capacity of the device to detect and terminate ventricular arrhythmias. However, DFT can result in complications and omission of its use has been shown to be safe. OBJECTIVE To describe temporal trends and variation in the use of DFT in contemporary practice in the United States. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This multicenter cross-sectional study used data from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry. A total of 499 211 patients from 1794 different facilities undergoing first-time ICD implantation from April 2010 to December 2015 were included. Data analysis was performed from May 20, 2015, to August 15, 2019. EXPOSURE Defibrillation testing was assessed using the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Defibrillation testing rates and median odds ratios (MORs) were assessed over time. The MOR represents the odds that a randomly selected patient receiving testing at a hospital with high testing rates would be tested compared with if he or she had received care at a hospital with low testing rates. RESULTS Of the 499 211 patients from 1794 different facilities included in this analysis, the mean (SD) age of the population was 65.5 (13.4) years and 356 681 patients (71.4%) were men. The use of DFT declined from 71.6% in the first calendar quarter of 2010 to 36.4% in the fourth quarter of 2015 (P < .001). Patients undergoing DFT were more likely than those without testing to have ischemic heart disease (170 569 [58.1%] vs 116 295 [56.6%]), ventricular tachycardia (91 500 [31.2%] vs 58 949 [28.7%]), and less advanced heart failure (New York Heart Association class I and II, 153 188 [52.2%] vs 91 215 [44.4%]) (P < .001 for all). The MOR for the use of defibrillation testing was 3.78 (95% CI, 3.54-4.03) in 2010, increasing to 6.05 (95% CI, 5.61-6.52) in 2015, indicating that by 2015 a randomly selected patient receiving testing at a hospital with high testing rates would have a 6-fold higher odds of being tested than if they had received care at a hospital with low testing rates. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Defibrillation testing at the time of ICD placement in the United States may have declined over time; however, institutional variation in its use appears to be marked and increased. This variability in the reduced use of defibrillation testing could reflect differences in individual or institutional cultures of practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ryan T. Borne
- Division of Cardiology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado
| | | | - Yongfei Wang
- Department of Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
- Center of Outcomes and Research Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Health, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Jeptha P. Curtis
- Department of Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
- Center of Outcomes and Research Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Health, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Pamela N. Peterson
- Division of Cardiology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado
- Department of Medicine, Denver Health Hospital, Denver, Colorado
| | - Frederick A. Masoudi
- Division of Cardiology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado
| | - Amneet Sandhu
- Division of Cardiology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado
| | - Matthew M. Zipse
- Division of Cardiology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado
| | - Kevin Thomas
- Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina
| | | | - Nihar R. Desai
- Department of Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
- Center of Outcomes and Research Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Health, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Yong-Mei Cha
- Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Jonathan C. Hsu
- Department of Medicine, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla
| | - Andrea M. Russo
- Department of Medicine, Cooper Medical School of Rowan University, Camden, New Jersey
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kannabhiran M, Mustafa U, Acharya M, Telles N, Alexandria B, Reddy P, Dominic P. Routine DFT testing in patients undergoing ICD implantation does not improve mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Arrhythm 2018; 34:598-606. [PMID: 30555603 PMCID: PMC6288554 DOI: 10.1002/joa3.12109] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/30/2018] [Accepted: 07/24/2018] [Indexed: 01/30/2023] Open
Abstract
Defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing has been an integral part of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation to confirm appropriate sensing of ventricular fibrillation and to establish an adequate safety margin for defibrillation. However, there is a lack of evidence regarding benefits of routine DFT testing. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to assess its mortality benefit. We searched MEDLINE for studies comparing mortality outcomes in ICD recipients who underwent DFT testing to those who did not. For the second analysis, studies comparing outcomes in patients with high- vs low-energy DFT were included. Odds ratio and standard errors were calculated, and inverse variance method in a random-effect model was used to combine effect sizes. Fifteen studies with 10,975 subjects comparing outcomes in patients who underwent routine DFT testing during ICD implantation and those who did not were included. There was no difference in the group that did not undergo DFT testing with regards to all-cause mortality (OR 0.935; CI 0.725-1.207; P = 0.606), cardiac mortality (OR 0.709; CI 0.385-1.307; P = 0.271), noncardiac mortality (OR 0.921; CI 0.701-1.210; P = 0.554), and arrhythmic mortality (OR 1.152; CI 0.831-1.596; P = 0.396). Percentage of successful appropriate first shocks among the two groups showed no difference. Five studies with 2278 subjects were included in the second analysis comparing patients with low DFT vs high DFT. Patients with high DFT had no significant increase in all-cause mortality compared to patients with low DFT (OR 0.527; CI 0.034-8.107; P = 0.646). Patients requiring higher DFT had no increased all-cause mortality compared to patients with lower DFT. Routine DFT testing during ICD implantation does not confer any significant benefit.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Munish Kannabhiran
- The Department of Medicine/Division of Cardiology and Center for Cardiovascular Diseases & SciencesLouisiana State University Health Sciences Center‐ Shreveport (LSUHSC‐S)ShreveportLouisiana
| | - Usman Mustafa
- The Department of Medicine/Division of Cardiology and Center for Cardiovascular Diseases & SciencesLouisiana State University Health Sciences Center‐ Shreveport (LSUHSC‐S)ShreveportLouisiana
| | - Madan Acharya
- The Department of Medicine/Division of Cardiology and Center for Cardiovascular Diseases & SciencesLouisiana State University Health Sciences Center‐ Shreveport (LSUHSC‐S)ShreveportLouisiana
| | - Nelson Telles
- The Department of Medicine/Division of Cardiology and Center for Cardiovascular Diseases & SciencesLouisiana State University Health Sciences Center‐ Shreveport (LSUHSC‐S)ShreveportLouisiana
| | - Brackett Alexandria
- The Department of Medicine/Division of Cardiology and Center for Cardiovascular Diseases & SciencesLouisiana State University Health Sciences Center‐ Shreveport (LSUHSC‐S)ShreveportLouisiana
| | - Pratap Reddy
- The Department of Medicine/Division of Cardiology and Center for Cardiovascular Diseases & SciencesLouisiana State University Health Sciences Center‐ Shreveport (LSUHSC‐S)ShreveportLouisiana
| | - Paari Dominic
- The Department of Medicine/Division of Cardiology and Center for Cardiovascular Diseases & SciencesLouisiana State University Health Sciences Center‐ Shreveport (LSUHSC‐S)ShreveportLouisiana
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Borne RT, Katz D, Betz J, Peterson PN, Masoudi FA. Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators for Secondary Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death: A Review. J Am Heart Assoc 2017; 6:JAHA.117.005515. [PMID: 28258050 PMCID: PMC5524042 DOI: 10.1161/jaha.117.005515] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Ryan T Borne
- Division of Cardiology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO
| | - David Katz
- Division of Cardiology, Medical Center of the Rockies, University of Colorado Health, Loveland, CO
| | - Jarrod Betz
- Division of Cardiology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Pamela N Peterson
- Division of Cardiology, Denver Health and Hospital Authority, Denver, CO
| | - Frederick A Masoudi
- Division of Cardiology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Abstract
The induction and termination of ventricular fibrillation at the time of defibrillator insertion (defibrillation testing [DT]) has traditionally been an integral component of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation. However, over the last 10 years, published series suggested a high rate of first-shock efficacy for clinical ventricular arrhythmias, even if no DT was done. Over the same time, several published reports and series have shown uncommon but serious complications related to DT. Throughout the world, there has been a steady decline in the proportion of patients receiving an ICD who undergo DT, which, in many regions, is less than 50%.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Guy Amit
- McMaster University, 237 Barton Street East, Hamilton, Ontario L8L 2X2, Canada
| | - Jeff S Healey
- McMaster University, 237 Barton Street East, Hamilton, Ontario L8L 2X2, Canada; Population Health Research Institute, Hamilton Health Sciences, Room C3-121, DBCVSRI Building, General Site, 237 Barton Street East, Hamilton, Ontario L8L 2X2, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Semmler V, Biermann J, Haller B, Jilek C, Sarafoff N, Lennerz C, Vrazic H, Zrenner B, Asbach S, Kolb C. ICD Shock, Not Ventricular Fibrillation, Causes Elevation of High Sensitive Troponin T after Defibrillation Threshold Testing--The Prospective, Randomized, Multicentre TropShock-Trial. PLoS One 2015. [PMID: 26208329 PMCID: PMC4514854 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0131570] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The placement of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) has become routine practice to protect high risk patients from sudden cardiac death. However, implantation-related myocardial micro-damage and its relation to different implantation strategies are poorly characterized. METHODS A total of 194 ICD recipients (64±12 years, 83% male, 95% primary prevention of sudden cardiac death, 35% cardiac resynchronization therapy) were randomly assigned to one of three implantation strategies: (1) ICD implantation without any defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing, (2) estimation of the DFT without arrhythmia induction (modified "upper limit of vulnerability (ULV) testing") or (3) traditional safety margin testing including ventricular arrhythmia induction. High-sensitive Troponin T (hsTnT) levels were determined prior to the implantation and 6 hours after. RESULTS All three groups showed a postoperative increase of hsTnT. The mean delta was 0.031±0.032 ng/ml for patients without DFT testing, 0.080±0.067 ng/ml for the modified ULV-testing and 0.064±0.056 ng/ml for patients with traditional safety margin testing. Delta hsTnT was significantly larger in both of the groups with intraoperative ICD testing compared to the non-testing strategy (p≤0.001 each). There was no statistical difference in delta hsTnT between the two groups with intraoperative ICD testing (p = 0.179). CONCLUSION High-sensitive Troponin T release during ICD implantation is significantly higher in patients with intraoperative ICD testing using shock applications compared to those without testing. Shock applications, with or without arrhythmia induction, did not result in a significantly different delta hsTnT. Hence, the ICD shock itself and not ventricular fibrillation seems to cause myocardial micro-damage. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01230086.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Verena Semmler
- Deutsches Herzzentrum München, Klinik für Herz- und Kreislauferkrankungen, Abteilung für Elektrophysiologie, Faculty of Medicine, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany
- * E-mail:
| | - Jürgen Biermann
- Cardiology and Angiology I, Heart Center, Freiburg University, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Bernhard Haller
- Klinikum rechts der Isar, Institut für Medizinische Statistik und Epidemiologie, Technische Universität, Munich, Germany
| | - Clemens Jilek
- Deutsches Herzzentrum München, Klinik für Herz- und Kreislauferkrankungen, Abteilung für Elektrophysiologie, Faculty of Medicine, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany
- Schön Klinik Starnberger See, Kardiologie, Starnberg, Germany
| | - Nikolaus Sarafoff
- Deutsches Herzzentrum München, Klinik für Herz- und Kreislauferkrankungen, Abteilung für Elektrophysiologie, Faculty of Medicine, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany
- Medizinische Klinik I und Poliklinik, Klinikum der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich, Germany
| | - Carsten Lennerz
- Deutsches Herzzentrum München, Klinik für Herz- und Kreislauferkrankungen, Abteilung für Elektrophysiologie, Faculty of Medicine, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany
| | - Hrvoje Vrazic
- Deutsches Herzzentrum München, Klinik für Herz- und Kreislauferkrankungen, Abteilung für Elektrophysiologie, Faculty of Medicine, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany
- University Hospital Dubrava, Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Zagreb, Croatia
| | - Bernhard Zrenner
- Krankenhaus Landshut-Achdorf, Medizinische Klinik I, Kardiologie, Landshut, Germany
| | - Stefan Asbach
- Cardiology and Angiology I, Heart Center, Freiburg University, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Christof Kolb
- Deutsches Herzzentrum München, Klinik für Herz- und Kreislauferkrankungen, Abteilung für Elektrophysiologie, Faculty of Medicine, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Healey JS, Hohnloser SH, Glikson M, Neuzner J, Mabo P, Vinolas X, Kautzner J, O'Hara G, VanErven L, Gadler F, Pogue J, Appl U, Gilkerson J, Pochet T, Stein KM, Merkely B, Chrolavicius S, Meeks B, Foldesi C, Thibault B, Connolly SJ. Cardioverter defibrillator implantation without induction of ventricular fibrillation: a single-blind, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial (SIMPLE). Lancet 2015; 385:785-91. [PMID: 25715991 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(14)61903-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 192] [Impact Index Per Article: 21.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Defibrillation testing by induction and termination of ventricular fibrillation is widely done at the time of implantation of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of ICD implantation without defibrillation testing versus the standard of ICD implantation with defibrillation testing. METHODS In this single-blind, randomised, multicentre, non-inferiority trial (Shockless IMPLant Evaluation [SIMPLE]), we recruited patients aged older than 18 years receiving their first ICD for standard indications at 85 hospitals in 18 countries worldwide. Exclusion criteria included pregnancy, awaiting transplantation, particpation in another randomised trial, unavailability for follow-up, or if it was expected that the ICD would have to be implanted on the right-hand side of the chest. Patients undergoing initial implantation of a Boston Scientific ICD were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computer-generated sequence to have either defibrillation testing (testing group) or not (no-testing group). We used random block sizes to conceal treatment allocation from the patients, and randomisation was stratified by clinical centre. Our primary efficacy analysis tested the intention-to-treat population for non-inferiority of no-testing versus testing by use of a composite outcome of arrhythmic death or failed appropriate shock (ie, a shock that did not terminate a spontaneous episode of ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation). The non-inferiority margin was a hazard ratio (HR) of 1·5 calculated from a proportional hazards model with no-testing versus testing as the only covariate; if the upper bound of the 95% CI was less than 1·5, we concluded that ICD insertion without testing was non-inferior to ICD with testing. We examined safety with two, 30 day, adverse event outcome clusters. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00800384. FINDINGS Between Jan 13, 2009, and April 4, 2011, of 2500 eligible patients, 1253 were randomly assigned to defibrillation testing and 1247 to no-testing, and followed up for a mean of 3·1 years (SD 1·0). The primary outcome of arrhythmic death or failed appropriate shock occurred in fewer patients (90 [7% per year]) in the no-testing group than patients who did receive it (104 [8% per year]; HR 0·86, 95% CI 0·65-1·14; pnon-inferiority <0·0001). The first safety composite outcome occurred in 69 (5·6%) of 1236 patients with no-testing and in 81 (6·5%) of 1242 patients with defibrillation testing, p=0·33. The second, pre-specified safety composite outcome, which included only events most likely to be directly caused by testing, occurred in 3·2% of patients with no-testing and in 4·5% with defibrillation testing, p=0·08. Heart failure needing intravenous treatment with inotropes or diuretics was the most common adverse event (in 20 [2%] of 1236 patients in the no-testing group vs 28 [2%] of 1242 patients in the testing group, p=0·25). INTERPRETATION Routine defibrillation testing at the time of ICD implantation is generally well tolerated, but does not improve shock efficacy or reduce arrhythmic death. FUNDING Boston Scientific and the Heart and Stroke Foundation (Ontario Provincial office).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jeff S Healey
- Population Health Research Institute, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
| | | | - Michael Glikson
- Leviev Heart Center, Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Israel
| | | | | | | | - Josef Kautzner
- Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Gilles O'Hara
- Institut Universitaire de Cardiologie et de Pneumologie de Québec, QC, Canada
| | | | | | - Janice Pogue
- Population Health Research Institute, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Ursula Appl
- Boston Scientific, Minneapolis MN, USA, and Brussels, Belgium
| | - Jim Gilkerson
- Boston Scientific, Minneapolis MN, USA, and Brussels, Belgium
| | - Thierry Pochet
- Boston Scientific, Minneapolis MN, USA, and Brussels, Belgium
| | - Kenneth M Stein
- Boston Scientific, Minneapolis MN, USA, and Brussels, Belgium
| | - Bela Merkely
- Semmelweis University, Heart and Vascular Centre, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Susan Chrolavicius
- Population Health Research Institute, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Brandi Meeks
- Population Health Research Institute, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Csaba Foldesi
- Gottsegen National Institute of Cardiology, Budapest, Hungary
| | | | - Stuart J Connolly
- Population Health Research Institute, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Traumatic Tension Pneumothorax as a Cause of ICD Failure: A Case Report and Review of the Literature. Case Rep Cardiol 2014; 2014:261705. [PMID: 25400953 PMCID: PMC4220567 DOI: 10.1155/2014/261705] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/09/2014] [Revised: 09/18/2014] [Accepted: 09/21/2014] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Background. Tension pneumothorax can infrequently cause ventricular arrhythmias and increase the threshold of defibrillation. It should be suspected whenever there is difficulty in defibrillation for a ventricular arrhythmia. Purpose. To report a case of traumatic tension pneumothorax leading to ventricular tachycardia and causing defibrillator failure. Case. A 65-year-old African-American female was brought in to our emergency department complaining of dyspnea after being forced down by cops. She had history of mitral valve replacement for severe mitral regurgitation and biventricular implantable cardioverter defibrillator inserted for nonischemic cardiomyopathy. Shortly after arrival, she developed sustained ventricular tachycardia, causing repetitive unsuccessful ICD shocks. She was intubated and ventricular tachycardia resolved with amiodarone. Chest radiograph revealed large left sided tension pneumothorax which was promptly drained. The patient was treated for congestive heart failure; she was extubated on the third day of admission, and the chest tube was removed. Conclusion. Prompt recognition of tension pneumothorax is essential, by maintaining a high index of suspicion in patients with an increased defibrillation threshold causing ineffective defibrillations.
Collapse
|
8
|
Healey JS, Brambatti M. Is defibrillation testing necessary for implantable transvenous defibrillators?: defibrillation testing should not be routinely performed at the time of implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2014; 7:347-51. [PMID: 24736424 DOI: 10.1161/circep.113.000373] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Jeff S Healey
- Population Health Research Institute, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
| | | |
Collapse
|