Mortality benefits and the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator

Implantable cardioverter/defibrillators for primary prevention in dilated cardiomyopathy post-DANISH: an updated meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is frequent in patients with heart failure due to dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM). Implantable cardioverter/defibrillator (ICD) device therapy is currently used for primary prevention. However, publication of the DANISH trial has recently given reason for doubt, showing no significant improvement in all-cause mortality in comparison to contemporary medical therapy.

METHODS

We performed a meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials comparing ICD therapy to medical therapy (MT) for primary prevention in DCM. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality; secondary analyses were performed on sudden cardiac death, cardiovascular death and non-cardiac death.

RESULTS

Five trials including a total of 2992 patients were included in the pooled analysis. Compared to contemporary medical treatment there was a significant mortality reduction with ICD device therapy [odds ratio (OR) 0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64-0.93; p = 0.006]. SCD was decreased significantly (OR 0.43, CI 0.27-0.69; p = 0.0004), while cardiovascular death and non-cardiac death showed no differences. Sensitivity analyses showed no influence of amiodarone therapy on overall results. Analysis of MT details revealed the DANISH population to adhere the most to current guideline recommendations. In addition, it was the only study including a substantial amount of CRT devices (58%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis of all available randomized evidence shows a survival benefit of ICD therapy for primary prevention in DCM. DANISH results suggest an attenuation of this ICD advantage when compared to contemporary medical and cardiac resynchronization therapy. Until larger trials have confirmed this finding, ICD therapy should remain the recommendation for primary prevention of SCD in DCM.

PET imaging of the autonomic myocardial function: methods and interpretation

Cardiac positron emission tomography (PET) is mainly applied in myocardial perfusion and viability detection. Noninvasive imaging of myocardial innervation using PET is a valuable additional methodology in cardiac imaging. Novel methods and different PET ligands have been developed to measure presynaptic and postsynaptic function of the cardiac neuronal system. Obtained PET data can be analysed quantitatively or interpreted qualitatively. Thus far, PET is not a widely used clinical application in autonomic heart imaging; however, due to its technical advantages, the excellent properties of the imaging agents, and the availability of tools for quantification, it deserves a better position in the clinic. From a historical point of view, the focus of PET software packages for image analysis was mainly oncology and neurology driven. Actually, commercially available software for cardiac PET image analysis is still only available for the quantification of myocardial blood flow. Thus far, no commercial software package is available for the interpretation and quantification of PET innervation scans. However, image data quantification and analysis of kinetic data can be performed using adjusted generic tools. This paper gives an overview of different neuronal PET ligands, interpretation and quantification of acquired PET data.

Suppression of life-threatening tachyarrhyhmias, and atrio-ventricular ischemic block following the administration of anti-inflammatory intravenous drug

The occurrence of potentially lethal tachyarrhyhmias, or severe bradyarrhytmias could be the end of a cascade of pathophysiological abnormalities. These arrhythmias, occurring in the presence of a decompensated cardiopathy, can be inferred to have an inflammatory etiology. In the present study, we found that administration of an anti-inflammatory compound (ibuprofen IV) during the electrical storm resulted in an immediate suppression of the threatening arrhythmias.

Predictors of Appropriate Defibrillator Therapy Among Patients with an Implantable Defibrillator That Delivers Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to determine predictors of appropriate implantable defibrillator (ICD) therapy among patients with heart failure who are treated with a cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients enrolled in the Ventak CHF/Contak CD study were treated with a CRT-D device and were required to have NYHA class II-IV CHF, QRS duration > or = 120 msec, and a class I or II indication for an ICD. The study database was retrospectively analyzed during the 6-month postimplant period to identify predictors of appropriate ICD therapy. Five hundred and one of the 581 patients enrolled in the trial had successful device implantation and were included in this analysis. Patients were mostly male (83%), 66 +/- 11 years old, and had coronary artery disease (69%), a mean left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) = 0.22 +/- 0.07, and NYHA class II (33%), III (58%), or IV (9%) CHF symptoms. During 6 months of follow-up, 73 of 501 (14%) patients received an appropriate ICD therapy. Two independent predictors of appropriate therapy were identified: a history of a spontaneous, sustained ventricular arrhythmia (HR = 2.05; 95% CI = 1.31-3.20; P = 0.002) and NYHA class IV CHF (HR = 1.81; 95% CI = 1.10-2.96; P = 0.019). When patients with NYHA class II were excluded from analysis, a history of a sustained ventricular arrhythmia and the presence of NYHA class IV CHF symptoms remained as independent predictors of appropriate ICD therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

In a select population of advanced heart failure patients receiving a CRT-D, NYHA class IV CHF was a powerful independent predictor of appropriate ICD therapy. Approximately one-quarter of the patients with NYHA class IV CHF who received a CRT-D device received an appropriate ICD therapy within 3 months after implant. Additional studies are needed to confirm an association between class IV CHF symptoms and an increased frequency of ICD shocks.

Factors Determining ICD Implantation in Drug Therapy Patients After Termination of Antiarrythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators Trial

Because of a significant survival benefit in the defibrillator arm of the Antiarrhythmics versus Implantable Defibrillator (AVID) Trial, patients in the antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) arm were advised to undergo ICD implantation. Despite this recommendation, ICD implantation in AAD patients was variable, with a large number of patients not undergoing ICD implantation. Patients were grouped by those who had been on AAD < 1 year (n = 111) and those on AAD > 1 year (n = 223). Multiple clinical and socioeconomic factors were evaluated to identify those who might be associated with a decision to implant an ICD. The primary reason for patients not undergoing ICD implantation was collected, as well as reasons for a delayed implantation, occurring later than 3 months from study termination. Of 111 patients on AAD for less than 1 year, 53 received an ICD within 3 months compared to 40/223 patients on AAD for more than 1 year (P < 0.001). Patient refusal was the most common reason to not implant an ICD in patients on drug < 1 year; physician recommendation against implantation was the most common in patients on drug > 1 year. Multivariate analysis showed ICD recipients on AAD < 1 year were more likely to be working and have a history of myocardial infarction (MI), while those on AAD > 1 year were more likely to be working, have a history of MI and ventricular fibrillation, and less likely to have experienced syncope, as compared to those who did not get an ICD. Having private insurance may have played a role in younger patients receiving an ICD.

Trends in hospital treatment of ventricular arrhythmias among Medicare beneficiaries, 1985 to 1995

BACKGROUND

Treatment options for patients with ventricular arrhythmias have undergone major changes in the last 2 decades. Trends in use of invasive procedures, clinical outcomes, and expenditures have not been well documented.

METHODS

We used administrative databases of Medicare beneficiaries from 1985 to 1995 to identify patients hospitalized with ventricular arrhythmias. We created a longitudinal patient profile by linking the index admission with all earlier and subsequent admissions and with death records.

RESULTS

Approximately 85,000 patients aged > or =65 years went to hospitals in the United States with ventricular arrhythmias each year, and about 20,000 lived to admission. From 1987 to 1995, the use of electrophysiology studies and implantable cardioverter defibrillators in patients who were hospitalized grew substantially, from 3% to 22% and from 1% to 13%, respectively. Hospital expenditures rose 8% per year, primarily because of the increased use of invasive procedures. Survival improved, particularly in the medium term, with 1-year survival rates increasing between 1987 and 1994 from 52.9% to 58.3%, or half a percentage point each year.

CONCLUSION

Survival of patients who sustain a ventricular arrhythmia is poor, but improving. For patients who are admitted, more intensive treatment has been accompanied by increased hospital expenditures.

The natural history of recovery following sudden cardiac arrest and internal cardioverter-defibrillator implantation

The purposes of this review are to 1) summarize current knowledge regarding the "natural history of recovery" (physical functioning, psychological adjustment, and neurologic impairments) following sudden cardiac arrest and internal cardioverter-defibrillator implantation over the first year; and 2) discuss the implications for the development of nursing intervention programs based on the natural history of recovery. The natural history serves as a basis for understanding the recovery experiences of sudden cardiac arrest survivors as well as determining how intervention programs might help the most.

Role of Antiarrhythmic Therapy in Patients at Risk for Sudden Cardiac Death: An Evidence-Based Review

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) accounts for more than half of all cardiac deaths occurring each year in the United States. Although it has several causes, patients at greatest risk are those with coronary artery disease and impaired left ventricular function, heart failure secondary to ischemia or idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, documented sustained ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation, and survivors of cardiac arrest. The presence of asymptomatic ventricular arrhythmias, positive signal-averaged electrocardiogram (ECG), low heart rate variability index, or inducible ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation increases the risk. In primary prevention trials in patients with ischemic heart disease, beta-blockers reduced both total mortality and SCD, whereas class I antiarrhythmic drugs, especially class IC, increased mortality. Among class III agents, d,l-sotalol and dofetilide have a neutral effect on mortality, whereas d-sotalol increases mortality. Amiodarone has a neutral effect on total and cardiac mortality but does reduce the risk of arrhythmic death and cardiac arrest. Three primary prevention trials in patients with ischemic heart disease were conducted with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). Patients with low ejection fractions (EFs), asymptomatic ventricular arrhythmias, and inducible ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation had significant reductions in total, cardiac, and arrhythmic death with ICDs compared with either no drug therapy or conventional antiarrhythmic agents. The ICDs did not reduce mortality in patients with low EFs and a positive signal-averaged ECG undergoing coronary bypass graft. In those with heart failure, beta-blockers reduced total and SCD mortality, but dofetilide and amiodarone had a neutral effect on mortality. In the secondary prevention of SCD, antiarrhythmic drugs alone generally are not thought to improve survival. In three trials in patients with documented sustained ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation, or survivors of SCD, ICDs reduced cardiac and arrhythmic mortality. Total mortality, however, was significantly reduced in only one of these trials. The role of antiarrhythmic drugs in secondary prevention of SCD is limited to patients in whom ICD is inappropriate or in combination with ICD. Antiarrhythmics can be given selectively with ICDs to decrease episodes of ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation to reduce ICD discharges, to suppress episodes of nonsustained ventricular tachycardia that trigger ICD discharges, to slow the rate of ventricular tachycardia to increase hemodynamic stability, to allow effective antitachycardia pacing, or to suppress supraventricular arrhythmias.

Evidence rather than costs must guide use of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator

Randomized controlled trials have shown superior survival rates with implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) compared with antiarrhythmic drugs in survivors of cardiac arrest and life-threatening ventricular tachyarrhythmias, as well as in high-risk patients with ischemic heart disease and inducible ventricular tachycardia (VT). Current defibrillators are small and implanted with techniques similar to standard pacemakers. They provide high-energy shocks for ventricular fibrillation (VF) and rapid VT, antitachycardia pacing for monomorphic VT, and antibradycardia pacing. Limited evidence suggests that ICD therapy is cost-effective when compared with other widely accepted treatments. The use of ICDs is likely to continue to expand in the future. Ongoing clinical trials will define further prophylactic indications of the ICD and clarify its cost-effectiveness ratio in different clinical settings.

Advantages and disadvantages of trial designs: a review of analysis methods for ICD studies. AVID Investigators

General modalities of analyses that have been used for ICD studies are reviewed. Published "typical" examples are briefly described. The historical cohort method is exemplified with previously unpublished data from the Seattle Cardiac Arrest Survivor database. The AVID Study database is used to compare the results obtained from nonrandomized methodologies with randomized methodologies. Particular issues related to the use of the ICD for example, mode of death, inability to blind, selection practice, and treatment decision times make this a natural pedagogic platform.

Management of ventricular arrhythmias: a trial-based approach

Sudden cardiac death accounts for approximately 300,000 deaths annually in the U.S., and most of these are secondary to ventricular tachycardia (VT) and fibrillation in patients with coronary artery disease. Most patients with cardiac death die before reaching the hospital, which brought about a tremendous amount of research focused at identifying patients at high risk. Several trials were initiated to test the effectiveness of various therapeutic measures in these high-risk patients. A history of myocardial infarction, depressed left ventricular function and nonsustained VT have all been identified as independent risk factors for future arrhythmic death. Similarly, patients with a history of sustained VT or a history of sudden cardiac death are a high-risk group and should be aggressively evaluated and treated. The purpose of this article is to discuss risk stratification and primary prevention of sustained ventricular arrhythmias. We also review the recent secondary prevention trials and discuss the options available in the management of patients with sustained ventricular arrhythmias.

Ventricular arrhythmias, electrophysiologic studies, and devices

Because of the high incidence of heart disease in the elderly, ventricular tachyarrhythmias are not infrequent. Determining the nature and extent of the underlying heart disease and identifying precipitating causes is required prior to instituting long-term therapy. Recent studies suggest that for hemodynamically unstable ventricular tachyarrhythmias, mortality is lower with the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator compared with pharmacologic therapy. This benefit is likely to be more modest in the elderly because of competing cardiac and noncardiac causes of death. For similar reasons, the favorable results reported with the prophylactic use of the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator are likely to be attenuated in the elderly.

Clinical significance of consecutive shocks in patients with left ventricular dysfunction treated with implantable cardioverter defibrillators

The purpose of the present study was to determine the clinical significance of consecutive automatic shocks delivered by implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs). Sixty-four patients who received ICDs at our institution between January 1990 and July 1997 were included in this study. There were 53 men and 11 women with a mean age of 50 +/- 14 years. During a follow-up period ranging between 0.2 and 73 months (mean 23 +/- 21 months), 17 patients received consecutive shocks (group A), 29 patients received single shocks (group B), and 18 patients received no ICD therapy (group C). Clinical characteristics, episodes of ICD therapy, and prognosis were compared among the three groups. There were no significant differences among the three groups with regard to clinical characteristics, time to first ICD therapy, number of antitachycardia pacing episodes, or frequency of inappropriate discharges. The mortality rate was higher in group A than in groups B and C (P = 0.0021). The sensitivity of consecutive shocks in predicting death was 70%, the specificity was 88%, and the predictive accuracy was 81% in patients with left ventricular ejection fractions < 35%. In summary, consecutive shocks are a clinically important event in patients with ICDs. Specifically, patients who receive consecutive shocks and have a depressed left ventricular function should be considered particularly high risk.

Can implantable defibrillators reduce non-arrhythmic mortality?

Several authors have made the intriguing observation that Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators (ICD) appear not only to reduce sudden deaths, but also mortality due to non-arrhythmic causes. Studies have shown that this observation can not be attributed to patient selection bias. In trying to explain this apparent anomaly, it should be noted that two treatment strategies are being compared. Thus, it might be that, under certain circumstances, antiarrhythmic drugs contribute to non-arrhythmic deaths, not that ICDs reduce them. There appear to be some plausible explanations for this phenomenon, e.g., the long-term effect on cardiac function of episodes of ventricular tachycardia lasting for several hours for patients treated solely by antiarrhythmic drugs, compared to their quick termination by an ICD. However, further research into this curious mode of death issue is needed, and may provide further insights into patient populations deriving greatest benefit from one therapy or the other.

Clinical experience with downsized lower energy output implantable cardioverter defibrillators. Ventak Mini II Clinical Investigators

BACKGROUND AND STUDY OBJECTIVE

Technical improvements in cardioverter defibrillators technology has resulted in decrease in can size coupled with improved electrodes technology. A decrease in maximum energy output allows further decrease in device size. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of a single lead transvenous implant employing a downsized cardioverter-defibrillator (volume 59 cm3), with a related decrease in maximum energy output (29-31 joules as stored energy and 25-27 joules as delivered energy).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Fifty-five patients with ventricular tachyarrhythmias were enrolled in 17 European institutions for implantation. At implantation step-down defibrillation threshold (DFT) was determined and the device was implanted only if a safety margin > or =10 joules was maintained between DFT and maximum programmable output. Implantation was performed in 54 of the 55 referred patients (98%) in a single electrode-device configuration. Step-down DFT testing was performed in 44 patients (43 finally implanted) and DFT was 7.77+/-4.41 joules (range 3-20). In 20 of the tested patients (45%) DFT was < or =5 joules, in 26 patients (59%) was < or =8 joules and in 34 patients (77%) it was < or =10 joules. No differences were found in DFT comparing patients with left ventricular ejection fraction < or = or >40% or patients treated or not with antiarrhythmic drugs or beta-blockers. Mean implant duration was 85+/-34 min.

CONCLUSIONS

Employing a downsized cardioverter defibrillator, successful transvenous implantation can be achieved in 98% of the patients, with maintenance of adequate defibrillation safety margins despite a reduction in stored energy to 29 joules.

Detection of ventricular fibrillation by transvenous defibrillating leads: integrated versus dedicated bipolar sensing

INTRODUCTION

Dedicated bipolar sensing has been suggested to be safer than integrated bipolar sensing due to an increased incidence of failure to redetect ventricular fibrillation after an unsuccessful shock with leads that use integrated bipolar sensing. We compared sensing characteristics during ventricular fibrillation of simultaneously recorded dedicated and integrated bipolar electrograms.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Thirty patients undergoing transvenous defibrillator implantation with a Transvene lead were studied. Simultaneous recordings were made from the dedicated bipole and the integrated bipole from the distal tip to the coil (interelectrode distance 18.3 mm). The mean detection time and number of undetected beats for the initial episode of ventricular fibrillation were 2804 +/- 569 msec and 0.9 +/- 0.8 using the dedicated recordings and 2938 +/- 546 msec and 1.4 +/- 1.1 (P = 0.026) using the integrated recordings. The mean redetection times and number of undetected beats following a failed first shock (n = 13) were 2468 +/- 225 msec and 0.8 +/- 1.1 for the dedicated recordings and 3042 +/- 498 msec (P < 0.0003) and 4.2 +/- 4.2 (P < 0.005) for the integrated recordings. Frequency analysis of the ventricular fibrillation electrograms demonstrated that the signal energy in the dedicated electrograms was significantly greater than the energy in the integrated electrograms (P < 0.0001). There was a significant negative relationship between detection times and the ventricular fibrillation signal energy. There was no independent effect of recording type (dedicated versus integrated).

CONCLUSION

There are only minor differences in detection/redetection of ventricular fibrillation between dedicated and integrated (with tip to coil spacing of 18.3 mm) recording configurations. Detection times during ventricular fibrillation are related to the signal variance or energy recorded. Differences in the sensing performance of the two recording configurations can be explained by the differences in signal energy between the dedicated and integrated recordings that occur during ventricular fibrillation.

[Current indications for implantable automatic defibrillators]

Since the first implantation in man in 1980 implantable cardioverter defibrillator technology has greatly improved and the number of devices implanted has increased considerably in recent years. Non-thoracotomy lead systems and biphasic shocks are now the approach of choice, offering nearly a 100% success rate. This paper version reviews the current indications for the implantation of implantable cardioverter defibrillator and is an upgraded of an article previously published by the Arrhythmia's Section of the Spanish Society of Cardiology. Recommendations for qualification of centres implanting defibrillators and follow up are also addressed.

Primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in heart failure: will the solution be shocking?

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) may occur in as many as 40% of all patients who suffer from heart failure. This review describes the scope of the problem, risk factors for SCD, the effect of medications used in heart failure on SCD and the potential effect of the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in primary prevention.

Comparison of outcome of implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation in patients with severe versus moderately severe left ventricular dysfunction secondary to atherosclerotic coronary artery disease

This study was undertaken to assess the feasibility and clinical outcome of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) among patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of <20%. The morbidity, mortality, and the long-term survival of 117 patients with LVEF of <20% (group 1) were compared with 321 patients with LVEF of 20% to 40% (group 2). Mortality in the first 30 days after ICD implantation was 0% for group 1 and 0.6% in group 2. Actuarial survival (all cause) at the end of 2, 4, and 5 years were 83%, 70%, and 62%, respectively, in group 1 and 90%, 80%, and 71% in group 2 (p = 0.05). Fifty-five patients (47%) in group 1 and 126 patients (39%) in group 2 received appropriate shocks during follow up. Among the patients in group 1, the overall survival at 2 years after an appropriate shock from an ICD was 92% for patients <60 years of age, 77% for patients ages 60 to 69, and 53% for patients >70 years old. Although the overall survival of patients in group 1 was slightly lower compared with those in group 2, in a multivariate analysis, the EF was not an independent predictor of poor survival. The ICD can be implanted with acceptable operative morbidity and mortality in selected patients with LVEF of <20%.

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy: influence of left ventricular function on long-term results

The degree of left ventricular impairment in an acknowledged important prognostic marker of long-term outcome for patients being evaluated for implantation of cardioverter-defibrillators. Just how left ventricular function impacts freedom from all-cause mortality, as well as from sudden death and cardiac death, is a subject of current major debate, and is analyzed hereunder from a large, recent multicenter ICD patient cohort. The multicenter database consists of data from 361 patients receiving implantable cardioverter-defibrillators for standard indications, that is, documented episodes of ventricular fibrillation or sustained ventricular tachycardias with poor hemodynamic toleration. Data were collected from 1988 to 1995 at three centers in Germany. Two-hundred and three patients (56%) had a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) > 0.30 (group I), and 158 patients (44%) had a LVEF < or = 0.30 respectively (group II). The mean follow-up was 23.9 months (range 3-98 months). Overall survival at 5 years for group II patients was lower, as expected, at 74.1% versus 94.2%, respectively (P < 0.0001). Mortality was higher for each different cause of death in group II patients than in Group I: sudden arrhythmic deaths, 5 versus 1 (P < 0.048); nonsudden cardiac deaths, 16 versus 5 (P < 0.002); noncardiac deaths, 7 versus 2 (P < 0.03). Group II patients received a higher rate of at least one presumably appropriate shock at 86 (54.4%) versus 89 (43.8%) in group I (P < 0.05). However (and somewhat surprisingly), neither the time from ICD implantation to death, comparing only the patients who died, nor the event-free probability of appropriate shocks due to very rapid, sustained ventricular arrhythmias (> 230 beats/min), including a presumed risk of sudden arrhythmogenic death, differed between groups I and II. Sudden cardiac death was only marginally affected by LVEF (group I, 1.5% actuarial, 5-year survival 99.5%; group II, 3.1% and 95.8%, respectively). Therefore, the lower overall survival in ICD patients with LVEF < or = 0.30 resulted mainly from causes of death that cannot be directly influenced by cardioverter-defibrillator therapy. However, because group II patients had a far higher incidence of at least one ventricular tachyarrhythmia terminated by ICD shocks than group I patients, they also probably derived benefit from ICD therapy.

Mortality benefit of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy in patients with persistent malignant ventricular arrhythmias despite amiodarone treatment

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are very effective in preventing sudden cardiac death. However, debate continues as to whether ICD implantation is superior to amiodarone in prolonging survival in patients with life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias. Of 442 consecutive patients treated with amiodarone, we identified 48 patients with symptomatic ventricular arrhythmias who met all of the following inclusion criteria: (1) had inducible sustained ventricular tachycardia at baseline electrophysiologic study, (2) had an oral amiodarone load of at least 10 g over 10 to 14 days, (3) remained inducible with a hemodynamically unstable ventricular arrhythmia at follow-up electrophysiologic study, and (4) were advised to continue amiodarone therapy and undergo ICD implantation. Patients who agreed to undergo ICD implantation (n = 28) had a lower ejection fraction (29 +/- 9% vs 40 +/- 12% p <0.005) and were younger (61.0 +/- 10 vs 69 +/- 7 years, p <0.01) than patients who refused device implantation (n = 20). Using a Cox proportional-hazards model, defibrillator therapy was the strongest independent predictor of improved survival in patients with an ejection fraction < or =40% (RR = 0.42; 95% confidence interval 0.22 to 0.79). Thus, patients with depressed ejection fraction and continued inducibility of sustained ventricular tachycardia despite oral amiodarone loading have a poor prognosis. In such patients, ICDs are associated with a 58% reduction in total cardiac mortality.

Current concepts in electrical defibrillation

The electrical defibrillator has been proven to be a life-saving device in the treatment of cardiac arrest due to ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation. An understanding of the physiology and technology behind this device is useful for providers of emergency care. In this article, we review the current concepts in electrical defibrillation and briefly discuss the developmental history. The physiology and the technical considerations will make up the bulk of the discussion. The latest developments in electrical defibrillation also will be reviewed.

Predictors of long-term survival in patients with malignant ventricular arrhythmias

The study consisted of 369 patients (age 62 +/- 13 years) who presented to our institution from April 1984 to April 1994 for malignant ventricular arrhythmias presenting as sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) in 57% of patients, ventricular fibrillation in 25% of patients, and syncope due to VT in 17% of patients. Coronary artery disease was present in 74% of patients, cardiomyopathy in 19% of patients, and no evident heart disease in 7% of patients. Two hundred twenty-one patients were given drug, therapy, 47 patients underwent arrhythmia surgery, and 75 patients had an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). During a mean follow-up of 30 months (range 1 to 101), 66 patients (18%) died from a cardiac death of which 26 (39%) were sudden. Cox regression analysis was conducted utilizing a total of 19 variables (clinical and therapeutic) in the entire population and separately in patients with coronary artery disease and cardiomyopathy. The most significant variables (multivariate analysis) of survival from cardiac mortality in the entire population were: congestive heart failure (CHF) class (p = 0.0003), ejection fraction (p = 0.02), and the use of drug therapy (p = 0.03); in patients with coronary artery disease, CHF class (p = 0.0001) and ejection fraction (p = 0.0006); and in patients with cardiomyopathy, CHF class (p = 0.009) and sustained VT on Holter monitoring (p = 0.007). Kaplan-Meier survival rates from cardiac death were: significantly lower (p = 0.005) in patients with CHF class III and IV compared with CHF class I and II (25% vs 58%, p = 0.005) with drug therapy; marginally significant (47% vs 88%, p = 0.06) from 20 to 40 months in patients with an ICD; and nonsignificant in patients who underwent arrhythmia surgery (63% vs 71%). Patients with an ICD had a better expected survival (82%) than patients who had arrhythmia surgery (69%) and drug therapy (65%). Thus, in patients with malignant ventricular arrhythmias, CHF class was the most significant independent predictor of survival from cardiac mortality over all disease substrates, and therapy influenced survival depending on the CHF class. Patients in CHF class III and IV who underwent arrhythmia surgery or had an ICD had a better expected survival than those taking drug therapy, and the negative impact of antiarrhythmic therapy was most prominent in patients with CHF class III and IV.

Efficacy of the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in the elderly

OBJECTIVES

We sought to assess the effect of advanced age on the outcome of patients with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD).

BACKGROUND

ICDs are effective in preventing sudden cardiac death in susceptible patients, but their beneficial effect on survival is attenuated by the high rate of nonsudden cardiac death in those treated. Although advanced age is an important variable in determining cardiovascular mortality, its impact on the outcome of patients with an ICD has been inadequately studied.

METHODS

We performed multivariate analysis of a data base consisting of 769 consecutive patients with an ICD. Seventy-four patients > or = 75 years old at ICD implantation (Group 1) were compared with the remaining 695 patients (Group 2).

RESULTS

The two groups were similar in clinical presentation, left ventricular function and gender distribution. The mean follow-up time was 29 and 42 months, respectively, for patients in Group 1 and Group 2. Actuarial survival at 4 years was 57% in Group 1 versus 78% in Group 2 (p = 0.0001). This difference was primarily due to a higher rate of nonsudden cardiac death in Group 1. On multivariate analysis, age > or = 75 years, New York Heart Association functional class III, left ventricular ejection fraction < 30% and appropriate shocks during follow-up were independently associated with increased mortality (odds ratio 3.56, 1.8, 1.6 and 1.39, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with similar functional class and ejection fraction, the mortality risk is increased threefold in those > or = 75 years old at the time of ICD implantation. Extrapolation of results from younger patients is likely to overestimate ICD benefit in the elderly.

Long-term follow-up of patients treated with implantable cardioverter defibrillators in a Danish centre. Accurrence ICD therpay and patient survivors

The aim of the this prospective follow-up study was to evaluate long-term survival and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy for ventricular tachyarrhythmias in patients treated with an ICD in a Danish centre. A total of 140 consecutive patients (112 men), of which 70.7% had coronary artery disease, received an ICD at Skejby University Hospital between March 1989 and October 1996. Mean age was 55.6 +/- 14.6 years (range 14-78 years). After implantation, 136 of the patients were followed for a median (range) of 17.7 (0.4-74.1) months. Survival, mode of death and incidence of appropriate ICD therapy and therapy due to potential life-threatening ventricular tachyarrhythmia were the main outcome measures. Kaplan-Meier plots representing total survival, cardiac death, sudden cardiac death and first episode of ICD therapy are presented. After 1, 2, 3 and 4 years, respectively, the cumulative incidences of death were 9, 18, 20 and 24%, of cardiac death 4, 11, 14 and 18%, and of sudden cardiac death 2, 3, 6 and 6%. The cumulative incidences of appropriate therapy after 1, 2, 3 and 4 years were 47, 56, 66 and 80%, respectively. The cumulative incidences of cardiac death after the first episode of appropriate therapy were 9, 11, 15 and 20% after 1, 2, 3 and 4 years, respectively. The occurrence of ICD therapy and patient survival in the present study population treated with ICD at a Danish centre was comparable to results published previously from other larger centres. The rate of sudden cardiac death was low and most of our patients received appropriate ICD therapy during follow-up, indicating correct patient selection and probable benefit of the ICD device.

Determinants of nonthoracotomy biphasic defibrillation

The clinical variables affecting DFT for ICD systems are not completely determined, especially with regard to biphasic shocking devices. To distinguish which factors correlate with DFT, we examined data from patients who were enrolled in the Ventak P2/Endotak protocol. A total of 284 patients were enrolled in the study. Two patients had a DFT > 25 J and did not receive the device; 154 did not undergo stepdown to failure DFT testing. The remaining 128 patients had formal DFT testing and were suitable for analysis. Variables available for analysis included age, body surface area (BSA), LVEF, gender, lead configuration, primary arrhythmia, primary cardiac disease, and use of cardioactive medication. Data were evaluated using regression analysis, fitting DFT (range, 1-25 J, mean 11 +/- 5 J) as a function of each variable. As a univariate predictor. BSA was found to be significant in predicting DFT, but accounted for only 9% of the total variation on the DFT (P < 0.01, r = 0.3). This study suggests that DFT using a biphasic shocking waveform is modestly in fluenced by the BSA of the patient. Other specific factors, including LVEF, do not predict DFT.

Implantable defibrillators for high-risk patients with heart failure who are awaiting cardiac transplantation

The objective of this study was to assess the operative risk and efficacy of implantable defibrillators for preventing sudden death in patients with heart failure awaiting transplantation. The average waiting time for elective cardiac transplantation is 6 months to 1 year. Sudden cardiac death is the major source of mortality in outpatients in stable condition awaiting cardiac transplantation. The efficacy of implantable defibrillator therapy in this population is not established. We analyzed the operative risk, time to appropriate shock, and sudden death in 15 patients determined to be at high risk of sudden death who were accepted onto the outpatient cardiac transplant waiting list. Nonfatal postoperative complications occurred in two (13%) subjects with epicardial defibrillating lead systems and in none with transvenous lead systems. Defibrillation energies were 16 +/- 2 J versus 24 +/- 2 J with epicardial and transvenous lead systems, respectively. Sudden death free survival until transplantation was 93%. Most of the patients (60%) had an appropriate shock during a mean follow-up of 11 +/- 12 months. The mean time to an appropriate shock was 3 +/- 3 months. Hospital readmission was required in three (20%) subjects to await transplantation on an urgent basis. However, two of these subjects had received appropriate shocks before readmission. In selected patients at high risk for sudden death while on the outpatient cardiac transplant waiting list, the operative risk is low and adequate defibrillation energies can be obtained to allow implantable defibrillator placement. Most subjects will have an appropriate shock as outpatients before transplantation, and sudden death free survival is excellent.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

The impact of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators on mortality among patients on the waiting list for heart transplantation

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators were investigated for their impact on mortality in 228 consecutive heart transplant candidates on the waiting list for transplantation (207 patients without and 21 with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy). The mortality rate in 207 patients without implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy was 23.2% and in 21 patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy was 4.7%. In a Cox proportional hazards model for all 228 study patients (mortality while on the waiting list: 21.5%; transplantation rate: 54.8%), the absence of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator was only a marginally significant predictor of mortality (p = 0.079). However, the absence of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator was a powerful predictor of mortality for a subgroup of 134 patients with high-grade ventricular arrhythmias on Holter electrocardiography (mortality while on the waiting list: 26.1%; transplantation rate: 54.5%; p = 0.022) and for a subgroup of 58 survivors of sudden cardiac death (mortality while on the waiting list: 22.4%; transplantation rate: 56.9%; p = 0.018). Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy can be strongly recommended in transplant candidates with a history of sudden cardiac death. Recommendations for an expanded, prophylactic use of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy in heart transplant candidates cannot be given.

ICD therapy in survivors of sudden cardiac death awaiting heart transplantation

The impact of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy on survival of heart transplant candidates is of major socioeconomic and ethical interest. However, efficacy is even uncertain for patients at highest risk of tachyarrhythmic death on the waiting list. We studied 60 selected heart transplant candidates (mean age, 55.8 years; mean left ventricular ejection fraction, 0.15; functional class III and IV) with a history of successful resuscitation by external electric defibrillation for spontaneous, syncopal ventricular tachyarrhythmia during the study period from March 1992 through September 1994. At the time of registration for transplantation, 30 patients had ICD devices implanted, whereas 30 patients lacked ICD therapy for various nonmedical reasons. Both therapy groups were comparable in clinical and hemodynamic characteristics as well as in intention to transplant (median waiting time to transplantation, 5.7 and 6 months, respectively; not significant by log-rank method). Survival on the waiting list was significantly improved by ICD therapy; only 1 of the 30 ICD patients (19 transplanted) but 7 of the 30 non-ICD patients (14 transplanted) died on the waiting list (p < 0.05 by log-rank method). Implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy did not affect survival after transplantation as compared with non-ICD patients (not significant by log-rank method). During the waiting time, 26 of the ICD patients (87%) experienced adequate ICD discharges, and 12 of the non-ICD patients were treated successfully by external electric defibrillation (40%).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Benefits of treatment with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in patients with stable ventricular tachycardia without cardiac arrest

BACKGROUND

The availability of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) that are capable of antitachycardia pacing may lead to an increased use of ICDs in patients with haemodynamically tolerated ventricular tachycardia without a history of cardiac arrest. The frequency of potentially life-threatening fast ventricular tachycardias (cycle length < 250 ms) was investigated in patients who had a third generation ICD with endocardial leads implanted because they had haemodynamically tolerated ventricular tachycardia without a history of cardiac arrest.

METHODS

Between January 1990 and October 1993, 50 patients (age (mean (SD)) 60 (11); ejection fraction 39 (16)%; 82% with coronary artery disease and 8% with dilated cardiomyopathy) with haemodynamically tolerated ventricular tachycardia (cycle length (mean (SD)) 348 (60) ms; range 250-500 ms) and without a history of cardiac arrest were treated with third generation ICDs that were capable of antitachycardia pacing. Fast ventricular tachycardia had been induced in 14 (28%) during baseline electrophysiological study. The benefit of ICD treatment was estimated as the difference between total mortality and the occurrence of fast ventricular tachycardia that would have been fatal if it had not been terminated.

RESULTS

During follow up of 17 (12) months, 33 patients (66%) had a total of 3861 episodes of ventricular tachycardia. 91% of these episodes were terminated by antitachycardia pacing. 11 patients (22%) had episodes of potentially life-threatening fast ventricular tachycardia and 3 of these also had inducible fast ventricular tachycardia. One patient died suddenly 27 months after implantation. The difference between survival without fast ventricular tachycardia and total mortality was 9%, 12%, 27%, and 27% at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

About a fifth of patients who had been given an ICD to treat haemodynamically tolerated ventricular tachycardia and who had no history of cardiac arrest experienced fast ventricular tachycardia during follow up requiring immediate cardioversion. Prospective studies are needed to investigate whether the prognosis of patients with a history of haemodynamically tolerated ventricular tachycardia without cardiac arrest is improved by ICD therapy.