Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in primary and secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death: A meta-analysis

The psychological, social, and quality of life outcomes of people with a cardiac implantable electronic device: an umbrella review

AIMS

To synthesize the psychological, social, and quality of life outcomes of people with a cardiac implantable electronic device.

METHODS AND RESULTS

An umbrella review of systematic reviews that reported the psychological, social, or quality of life outcomes of adults with a cardiac implantable electronic device was conducted. This umbrella review was pre-registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023437078) and adhered to JBI and PRISMA guidelines. Seven databases (CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, EmCare, PsycINFO, PubMed, and the Web of Science) were searched alongside citation and bibliographic searches. Methodological quality was assessed using the JBI Checklist of Systematic Reviews and Research Syntheses. Due to the heterogeneity of the included reviews, the findings were reported narratively. A total of 14 systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria; 11 considered quality of life outcomes, and 3 considered psychological outcomes. Little difference in quality of life was found between people with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and controls; however, a high prevalence of psychological disorders was present. Cardiac resynchronization therapy devices demonstrated improvements in quality of life compared with control groups, alongside possible cognitive benefits. Quality of life did not differ between subcutaneous and transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. Pacemakers were associated with improved post-implantation quality of life.

CONCLUSION

Research on the psychosocial and quality of life outcomes of people with a cardiac implantable electronic device is limited and inconsistent. Given the heterogeneity of the current research, conclusions are uncertain. Nevertheless, some recipients may experience adverse psychosocial complications. Further research employing rigorous methodologies is needed, and healthcare practitioners should provide care that acknowledges the potential for adverse psychosocial experiences.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO: CRD42023437078.

Real-world evidence for the use of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in China: A single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (S-ICDs) have been shown to be non-inferior to transvenous ICDs in the prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD), but there is still a lack of evidence from clinical trials in China. We investigated whether S‑ICD implantation in the Chinese population is safe and feasible and should be promoted in the future.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing S‑ICD implantation at our center were enrolled in this retrospective study. Data were collected within the median follow-up period of 554 days. Data concerning patient selection, implantation procedures, complications, and episodes of shock were analyzed.

RESULTS

In total, 70.2% of all 47 patients (median age = 39 years) were included for secondary prevention of SCD with different etiologies. Vector screening showed that 98% of patients were with > 1 appropriate vector in all postures. An intraoperative defibrillation test was not performed on six patients because of the high risk of disease deterioration, while all episodes of ventricular fibrillation induced post implantation were terminated by one shock. As expected, no severe complications (e.g., infection and device-related complications) were observed, except for one case of delayed healing of the incision. Overall, 15 patients (31.9%) experienced appropriate shocks (AS) with all episodes terminated by one shock. Two patients (4.3%) experienced inappropriate shocks (IAS) due to noise oversensing, resulting in a high Kaplan-Meier IAS-free rate of 95.7%.

CONCLUSION

Based on appropriate patient selection and standardized implantation procedures, this real-world study confirmed the safety and efficacy of S‑ICD in Chinese patients, indicating that it may help to promote the prevention of SCD in China.

Clinical outcomes of subcutaneous vs. transvenous implantable defibrillator therapy in a polymorbid patient cohort

Background

The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) has been designed to overcome lead-related complications and device endocarditis. Lacking the ability for pacing or resynchronization therapy its usage is limited to selected patients at risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD).

Objective

The aim of this single-center study was to assess clinical outcomes of S-ICD and single-chamber transvenous (TV)-ICD in an all-comers population.

Methods

The study cohort comprised a total of 119 ICD patients who underwent either S-ICD (n = 35) or TV-ICD (n = 84) implantation at the University Hospital Frankfurt from 2009 to 2017. By applying an inverse probability-weighting (IPW) analysis based on the propensity score including the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) to adjust for potential extracardiac comorbidities, we aimed for head-to-head comparison on the study composite endpoint: overall survival, hospitalization, and device-associated events (including appropriate and inappropriate shocks or system-related complications).

Results

The median age of the study population was 66.0 years, 22.7% of the patients were female. The underlying heart disease was ischemic cardiomyopathy (61.4%) with a median LVEF of 30%. Only 52.9% had received an ICD for primary prevention, most of the patients (67.3%) had advanced heart failure (NYHA class II–III) and 16.8% were in atrial fibrillation. CCI was 5 points in TV-ICD patients vs. 4 points for patients with S-ICD (p = 0.209) indicating increased morbidity. The composite endpoint occurred in 38 patients (31.9 %), revealing no significant difference between patients implanted with an S-ICD or TV-ICD (unweighted HR 1.50, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.78–2.90; p = 0.229, weighted HR 0.94, 95% CI, 0.61–1.50, p = 0.777). Furthermore, we observed no difference in any single clinical endpoint or device-associated outcome, neither in the unweighted cohort nor following inverse probability-weighting.

Conclusion

Clinical outcomes of the S-ICD and TV-ICD revealed no differences in the composite endpoint including survival, freedom of hospitalization and device-associated events, even after careful adjustment for potential confounders. Moreover, the CCI was evaluated in a S-ICD cohort demonstrating higher survival rates than predicted by the CCI in young, polymorbid (S-)ICD patients.

Comparative Assessment of Transvenous versus Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillator Therapy Outcomes: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Subcutaneous (S-ICD) and transvenous (TV-ICD) implantable cardioverter-defibrillator devices effectively reduce the incidence of sudden cardiac death in patients at a high risk of ventricular arrhythmias. This study aimed to evaluate the safe replacement of TV-ICD with S-ICD based on updated recent evidence.

METHODS

We systematically searched EMBASE, JSTOR, PubMed/MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library on 30 July 2021 following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

RESULTS

We identified 26 studies that examined 7542 (58.27%) patients with S-ICD and 5400 (41.72%) with TV-ICD. The findings indicated that, compared to patients with TV-ICD, patients with S-ICD had a lower incidence of defibrillation lead failure (odds ratio [OR], 0.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.98; p = 0.05), lead displacement or fracture (OR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.12-0.86; p = 0.0003), pneumothorax and/or hemothorax (OR: 0.22, 95% CI 0.05, 0.97, p = 0.05), device failure (OR: 0.70, 95% CI 0.51, 0.95, p = 0.02), all-cause mortality (OR: 0.44 [95% CI 0.32, 0.60], p < 0.001), and lead erosion (OR: 0.01, 95% CI 0.00, 0.05, p < 0.001). Patients with TV-ICD had a higher incidence of pocket complications than patients with S-ICD (OR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.23-3.69; p = 0.007) and a higher but insignificant incidence of inappropriate sensing (OR, 3.53; 95% CI, 0.97-12.86; p = 0.06).

CONCLUSIONS

The S-ICD algorithm was safer and more effective than the TV-ICD system as it minimized the incidence of pocket complications, lead displacement or fracture, inappropriate sensing, defibrillation lead failure, pneumothorax/hemothorax, device failure, lead erosion, and all-cause mortality. Future studies should explore the scope of integrating novel algorithms with the current S-ICD systems to improve cardiovascular outcomes.

Lead Macrodislodgement of a Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Results in a Reel Problem

Lead macrodislodgement is a rare complication of cardiac implantable electronic devices associated with patient-related risk factors. This paper outlines a case of reel syndrome secondary to device manipulation 3 months after subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation and describes the challenges with lead macrodislodgement diagnosis, mechanisms, and management. (Level of Difficulty: Beginner.).

[Infections in interventional electrophysiology]

The implantation of pacemakers and defibrillators carries the highest risk of infection in interventional electrophysiology. The use of implantable cardiac devices is continually increasing with almost 2 million devices implanted worldwide each year. The recipients' profile may also be associated with an increased risk of infection. Several measures can be implemented to reduce the risk of device-related infection. Systematic antibiotic prophylaxis has proven to be beneficial provided that prescription modalities are respected, especially with respect to the selection of the appropriate molecule and timing of administration prior to the procedure. Despite all the precautions taken during surgery (asepsis, prophylactic antibiotic therapy….) the estimated rate of peri-procedural infection is around 2%. Device related infections are associated with a high rate of morbidity and mortality as well as substantial healthcare costs. Staphylococcus aureus (SA) and epidermidis (SE) are the pathogenic agents involved in most cases. Prevention is crucial given the difficulties in treating such infections because of the near-systematic need to remove the device and antibiotic resistance. Leadless pacemakers and subcutaneous defibrillators are potential alternatives to implantable endocardial devices, albeit with certain limitations. A group of experts has recently issued consensus paper on the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of infections associated with endocardial implantable cardiac devices.

Myopotential Oversensing Is a Major Cause of Inappropriate Shock in Subcutaneous Implantable Defibrillator in Japan

Previous study has identified marked differences in patient characteristics and causes of inappropriate shock (IAS) between Japan and the Western societies in terms of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD). However, evidence of IAS in Asian populations including Japan has been limited to one observational study.Thus, we conducted a single-center registry study that tracks the postoperative course of 61 consecutive patients who received S-ICD from February 2016 to January 2020. Our findings showed that IAS occurred in 9.8% of the study population (6/61), which is comparable to the previously reported incidence. Remarkably, T-wave oversensing did not result in an IAS (0/6). Instead, myopotential oversensing was determined to have caused the most IAS events (4/6), while atrial fibrillation ranked second (2/6). A provocation maneuver (e.g., abdominal clench, push-ups, lifting a heavy item) reproduced myopotential noise disguised as R-waves, which should potentially trigger an IAS if uninterrupted. R-wave amplitude of the IAS group appeared relatively low compared to that of the non-IAS group although this finding was not tested significant. Furthermore, no temporal changes were noted in R-wave amplitude between the time of implantation and IAS events, suggesting that it is neither constantly low nor acutely dropped R-wave amplitude but a relatively high noise level that drives IAS. All the myopotential-IAS patients were found to be male. Right-sided lead implantation was associated with a higher incidence of IAS.This study highlights the fact that IAS continues to occur due to myopotential noise oversensing instead of T-wave oversensing. To minimize the risk of IAS, it is desirable to search and secure high R-wave voltage.

Secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death

The prevention and treatment of sudden cardiac death (SCD) remains a significant public health challenge. For patients with a history of sudden death attributable to ventricular arrhythmia, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy is a mainstay of treatment, although these patients remain at high risk for recurrent ventricular arrhythmia and defibrillator therapies. In this review, we summarize landmark clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of ICD therapy in secondary prevention patients, review clinical outcomes including mode of death in survivors of SCD, and highlight the role for systematic diagnostic evaluation. We additionally discuss the invasive electrophysiological management of these patients, including ICD selection and programming as well as the role and timing of antiarrhythmic drug therapy and catheter ablation. Finally, we frame future challenges and needs to advance the care for secondary prevention patients.

Ultrasound-guided serratus anterior plane block combined with parasternal block in subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation: Results of a pilot study

BACKGROUND

The standard approach to subcutaneous defibrillator (S-ICD) implantation often requires general anesthesia or anesthesiologist-delivered deep sedation. Ultrasound-guided serratus anterior plane block (SAPB) combined with parasternal block (PSB) has been proposed in order to provide anesthesia/analgesia and to reduce the need for sedation during S-ICD implantation. In this pilot study, we compared the double-block approach (SAPB + PSB) with the single-block approach (SAPB only) and with the standard approach involving local anesthesia and sedation.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled 22 patients undergoing S-ICD implantation: in 10, the single-block approach was adopted; in 12, the double-block approach. As a control group, we retrospectively enrolled 14 consecutive patients who had undergone S-ICD implantation under standard local anesthesia and sedation in the previous 6 months. Intra- and postprocedural data, including patient-reported pain intensity, were collected and compared in the three study groups.

RESULTS

The double-block approach was associated with a shorter procedure duration than the single-block and standard approaches (63.3 ± 7.9 vs 70.1 ± 6.8 vs 76.9 ± 7.8 min; P < .05) and with a lower dose of local an aesthetic for infiltration (18.9 ± 1.7 vs 27.5 ± 4.6 vs 44.6 ± 4.0 cc; P < .001). Both the double- and single-block approaches were associated with lower pain intensity at the device pocket and the lateral tunneling site (P < .05). The double-block approach proved superior to the other two approaches in controlling intraoperative pain at the parasternal tunneling site (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, SAPB combined with PSB was superior to SAPB alone and to the standard approach in controlling intraoperative pain during S-ICD implantation. In addition, this approach resulted in shorter procedure durations.

Diagnosis and management of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator infections based on process mapping

BACKGROUND

Infection is a well-recognized complication of cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation, including the more recently available subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD). Although the AHA/ACC/HRS guidelines include recommendations for S-ICD use, currently there are no clinical trial data that address the diagnosis and management of S-ICD infections. Therefore, an expert panel was convened to develop consensus on these topics.

METHODS

A process mapping methodology was used to achieve a primary goal - the development of consensus on the diagnosis and management of S-ICD infections. Two face-to-face meetings of panel experts were conducted to recommend useful information to clinicians in individual patient management of S-ICD infections.

RESULTS

Panel consensus of a stepwise approach in the diagnosis and management was developed to provide guidance in individual patient management.

CONCLUSION

Achieving expert panel consensus by process mapping methodology in S-ICD infection diagnosis and management was attainable, and the results should be helpful in individual patient management.