Generic ICD programming and outcomes

Management of patients following implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy-The importance of a multifaceted approach

Background

The most effective way to treat patients following a first ICD therapy is unclear. We hypothesised that following first ICD therapy, combining different treatment strategies would be associated with a reduction in the risk of subsequent therapy compared to single strategies alone.

Methods

Data was collected from consecutive patients undergoing ICD implantation at King's College Hospital between January 2009 and December 2019. We assessed the use of 7 specific treatment strategies, introduced after the 1st therapy-start/increase the dose of beta-blockers, prognostic heart failure medications, antiarrhythmic drugs as well as ICD reprogramming, ablation, ICD upgrade/revision and coronary revascularisation. We evaluated the association between these treatment strategies and the risk of a subsequent ICD therapy.

Results

During a mean 50 months follow-up, 267 patients experienced 1st ICD therapy (212 appropriate and 55 inappropriate). Combining treatment strategies was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of subsequent therapy for appropriate therapy compared to 0/7 strategies (1st appropriate ICD therapy, 1/7 treatment strategy (n = 80), 43% lower risk and  ≥2/7 treatment strategies (n = 73) 58% reduction, p = <.001). This was also true for inappropriate therapy (1st inappropriate therapy, 1 treatment strategy (n = 22) 86% lower risk and  ≥2/7 treatment strategies (n = 25), 94% reduction, p < 0.001) compared to patients with 0/7 treatment strategies (n = 8).

Conclusion

An approach combining treatment strategies may be more effective than using single strategies alone to prevent subsequent therapy in patients presenting following a 1st ICD therapy.

The impact of supraventricular arrhythmias on the outcomes of guideline-compliant implantable cardioverter defibrillator programming

INTRODUCTION

Several implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) programming strategies are applied to minimize ICD therapy, especially unnecessary therapies from supraventricular arrhythmias (SVA). However, it remains unknown whether these optimal programming recommendations only benefit those with SVAs or have any detrimental effects from delayed therapy on those without SVAs. This study aims to assess the impact of SVA on the outcomes of ICD programming based on 2015 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/SOLAECE expert consensus statement and 2019 focused update on optimal ICD programming and testing guidelines.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent ICD insertion for primary prevention were classified into four groups based on SVA status and ICD programming: (1) guideline-concordant group (GC) with SVA, (2) GC without SVA, (3) nonguideline concordant group (NGC) with SVA, and (4) NGC without SVA. Cox proportional hazard models were analyzed for freedom from ICD therapies, shock, and mortality.

RESULTS

Seven hundred and seventy-two patients (median age, 64 years) were enrolled. ICD therapies were the most frequent in NGC with SVA (24.0%), followed by NGC without SVA (19.9%), GC without SVA (11.6%), and GC with SVA (8.1%). Guideline concordant programming was associated with 68% ICD therapy reduction (HR 0.32, p = .007) and 67% ICD shock reduction (HR 0.33, p = .030) in SVA patients and 44% ICD therapy reduction in those without SVA (HR 0.56, p = .030).

CONCLUSION

Programming ICDs in primary prevention patients based on current guidelines reduces therapy burden without increasing mortality in both SVA and non-SVA patients. A greater magnitude of reduced ICD therapy was found in those with supraventricular arrhythmias.