Implantable loop recorders in patients with heart disease: comparison between patients with and without syncope

Usefulness of insertable cardiac monitors for risk stratification: current indications and clinical evidence

INTRODUCTION

The 2018 ESC Syncope guidelines expanded the indications for an insertable cardiac monitor (ICM) to patients with unexplained syncope and primary cardiomyopathy or inheritable arrhythmogenic disorders.

AREAS COVERED

This review article discusses the clinical evidence for using an ICM for risk stratification in different patient populations including Brugada syndrome, long QT syndrome, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy, cardiac sarcoidosis, and congenital heart disease.

EXPERT OPINION

Clinical data on the usefulness of ICMs in different patient populations is limited but most studies demonstrate early detection of clinically relevant arrhythmias, such as nonsustained ventricular tachycardia or atrial fibrillation. It is important to emphasize that the study populations usually comprise selected populations where conventional diagnostic methods fail to clarify the mechanism of symptoms. The effect of an ICM on prognosis by earlier detection of arrhythmias is difficult to demonstrate in populations with rare disease. Risk stratification in patients with cardiomyopathy or inheritable arrhythmogenic disorders remains a niche indication for ICMs. The most important indication for an ICM remains unexplained syncope in patients at low risk of SCD. Given the device costs and uncertain clinical value of device-detected arrhythmias, it is unclear whether it is also useful in non-syncopal patients.

Implantable defibrillators in primary prevention of genetic arrhythmias. A shocking choice?

Many previously unexplained life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac deaths (SCDs) in young individuals are now recognized to be genetic in nature and are ascribed to a growing number of distinct inherited arrhythmogenic diseases. These include hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy, long QT syndrome, Brugada syndrome, catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (VT), and short QT syndrome. Because of their lower frequency compared to coronary disease, risk factors for SCD are not very precise in patients with inherited arrhythmogenic diseases. As randomized studies are generally non-feasible and may even be ethically unjustifiable, especially in the presence of effective therapies, the risk assessment of malignant arrhythmic events such as SCD, cardiac arrest due to ventricular fibrillation (VF), appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) interventions, or ICD therapy on fast VT/VF to guide ICD implantation is based on observational data and expert consensus. In this document, we review risk factors for SCD and indications for ICD implantation and additional therapies. What emerges is that, allowing for some important differences between cardiomyopathies and channelopathies, there is a growing and disquieting trend to create, and then use, semi-automated systems (risk scores, risk calculators, and, to some extent, even guidelines) which then dictate therapeutic choices. Their common denominator is a tendency to favour ICD implantation, sometime with reason, sometime without it. This contrasts with the time-honoured approach of selecting, among the available therapies, the best option (ICDs included) based on the clinical judgement for the specific patient and after having assessed the protection provided by optimal medical treatment.