Wearable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Therapy for the Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death: A Science Advisory From the American Heart Association

Clinical outcomes during and after wearable cardioverter defibrillator use in Japanese patients with heart failure: A single-center experience

Background

A wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) is indicated for a limited period in patients at high risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD). Nonischemic heart failure (HF) is common among Japanese patients with HF. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of fatal arrhythmias during WCD use and the clinical outcomes after WCD withdrawal in Japanese patients with HF.

Methods

We retrospectively studied 105 hospitalized HF patients who were discharged with a WCD. The main outcome was SCD/ventricular arrhythmias during WCD use and the other outcomes were implantation of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), SCD/ventricular arrhythmias after WCD withdrawal, and changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).

Results

Eighty-seven (83%) patients received a WCD for primary prevention of SCD, of whom 60 (69%) were new-onset HF patients with an LVEF ≤35%. The median daily wear time was 22.1 h. Two patients experienced sustained ventricular tachycardia and one patient experienced atrioventricular block with asystole while on WCD. After WCD withdrawal, 81 (77%) patients decided not to receive ICD implantation. The percentage of patients with an LVEF ≥35% increased from 20% at baseline to 70% at 1 year after discharge. During the median follow-up of 50 months, 78 (96%) of the 81 patients who did not have an ICD were free of SCD/ventricular arrhythmias.

Conclusions

The use of a WCD is useful for determining the appropriate indication for ICD implantation in Japanese patients with new-onset HF, a low LVEF, and a risk of SCD.

Cardiac implantable electronic devices in pregnancy: A position statement

The aim of this document is to provide guidance for the management of women and birthing people with a permanent pacemaker (PPM) or implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). Cardiac devices are becoming more common in obstetric practice and a reference document for contemporary evidence-based practice is required. Where evidence is limited, expert consensus has established recommendations. The purpose is to improve safety and reduce the risk of adverse events relating to implanted cardiac devices during pregnancy, birth and the postnatal period.

Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices in Cardiac Transplant Patients: A Comprehensive Review

A fraction of patients (approximately 10%) undergoing heart transplantation require permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation due to sinus node dysfunction or atrioventricular block, occurring either shortly after surgery or later. The incidence of PPM implantation has declined to less than 5% with the introduction of bicaval anastomosis transplantation surgery. Pacing dependency during follow-up varies among recipients. A smaller subset (1.5-3.4%) receives implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs), but data on their use in transplant recipients are limited, primarily from cohort studies and case series. Sudden cardiac death affects around 10% of transplant recipients, attributed to various nonarrhythmic factors such as acute rejection, late graft failure, and cardiac allograft vasculopathy-induced ischemia. This review offers a comprehensive analysis of the existing data concerning the role of PPMs and ICDs in this population, encompassing leadless PPMs, subcutaneous ICDs, unique considerations, and future directions.

Is it time to consider a "time-out" before primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator placement in currently or recently hospitalized older patients with heart failure?

BACKGROUND

Trajectories of mortality after primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) placement for older patients with heart failure during or soon after acute hospitalization have not been assessed.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare trajectories of mortality after primary prevention ICD placement during or soon after acute cardiac or non-cardiac hospitalization.

METHODS

We identified older patients with heart failure undergoing primary prevention ICD placement using 20% Medicare data (2008-2018). Placement settings were as follows: (1) Current-H-during current hospitalization, (2) Recent-H-within 90 days of hospitalization, or (3) Chronic stable. Hospitalization was categorized as cardiac vs non-cardiac. Interval mortality rates and hazard ratios (HRs) using Cox regression were estimated at 0-30, 31-90, and 91-365 days after ICD placement.

RESULTS

Of the 61,710 patients (mean age 76 years; 35% female; 85% white), 19% (11,947), 25% (15,147), and 56% (34,616) had ICDs in Current-H, Recent-H, and Chronic stable settings. Mortality rates (per 100 person-years) were highest during 0-30 days, with 38 (34-42) and 22 (19-24) for Current-H and Recent-H, which declined to 21 (20-22) and 16 (15-17) during 91-365 days, respectively. Compared to Chronic stable, HRs were highest during 0-30 days post-ICD placement (5.5 [4.5-6.8] for Current-H and 3.4 [2.8-4.2] for Recent-H) and decreased during 91-365 days (2.0 [1.8-2.1] for Current-H and 1.6 [1.5-1.7] for Recent-H). HR pattens were similar for cardiac and non-cardiac hospitalizations.

CONCLUSION

Primary prevention ICD placement during or soon after hospitalization for any reason was associated with worse mortality with diminishing risks after 90 days. Hospitalization likely identifies a sicker population in whom early mortality with or without ICD may be higher. Our results support careful consideration regarding ICD placement during the 90 days after hospitalization.

A Patch Wearable Cardioverter-Defibrillator for Patients at Risk of Sudden Cardiac Arrest

BACKGROUND

For many patients, sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) risk is elevated temporarily. Wearable cardioverter-defibrillators (WCDs) can monitor and treat SCA during these temporary periods. Traditional WCDs can be uncomfortable, require frequent maintenance, and cannot be used when showering, resulting in poor compliance and avoidable SCA deaths. The Jewel is a novel, water-resistant patch-wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (P-WCD) with a machine learning detection algorithm designed to improve compliance and protection against SCA.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to demonstrate the safety and clinical effectiveness of a novel P-WCD.

METHODS

The Jewel IDE Study, a prospective, single-arm study conducted at 30 U.S. sites, enrolled patients at SCA risk due to ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation who were not candidates for or refused an implantable defibrillator. The primary safety endpoint was <15% patients with clinically significant cutaneous adverse device effects and the primary effectiveness endpoint was <2 inappropriate shocks/100 patient-months. Secondary endpoints were ≥1 successful ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation conversion and wear time compliance of >14.1 h/d.

RESULTS

A total of 305 patients (mean age: 57.9 years; 30.2% female, 27.9% non-White) were enrolled, of which 290 had available device data. The clinically significant cutaneous adverse device effect rate was 2.30% (upper 1-sided 98% CI: 4.80); none were severe. No device-related deaths or serious adverse events were reported. The inappropriate shock rate was 0.36/100 patient-months (upper 1-sided 98% CI: 1.53). Of 11 shocks in 9 patients, 9 shocks were adjudicated to be appropriate. Eight of 9 shocks were successful with a single shock. Median wear time compliance was 23.5 (20.7-23.9) h/d.

CONCLUSIONS

The novel P-WCD is a safe and effective WCD with high patient compliance. There were no deaths due to noncompliance and a high number of successful conversions (Jewel IDE study [A Clinical Evaluation of the Jewel P-WCD in Subjects at High Risk for Sudden Cardiac Arrest]; NCT05201495).

No beneficial use of the wearable cardioverter defibrillator among patients suffering from inherited and congenital heart disease: data from a European multicenter registry

Background

Data on the use of the wearable cardioverter defibrillator in patients suffering from inherited and congenital heart disease are limited. Consequently, evidence for guideline recommendations in this patient population is lacking.

Methods

In total 1,675 patients were included in a multicenter registry of eight European centers. In the present cohort, we included 18 patients suffering from congenital and inherited heart disease.

Results

Nine patients (50%) were male with a mean age of 41.3 ± 16.4 years. Four patients suffered from hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), four patients suffered from non-compaction cardiomyopathy (NCCM), two patients were diagnosed with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) and one patient suffered from muscular dystrophy of the limb-girdle type with cardiac involvement, secondary cardiomyopathy. Three patients presented with Brugada syndrome (BrS). One patient suffered from long-QT syndrome type 1 (LQTS1). Furthermore, two patients had congenital heart defects and one patient suffered from cardiac sarcoidosis (CS). There were no appropriate/inappropriate shocks with the WCD in this cohort. One patient had recurrent self-limiting sustained ventricular tachycardia during the wear time, but actively inhibited a shock and was hospitalized. The compliance rate in this cohort was 77.8% with a mean wear time of 45.3 ± 26.9 days with a mean follow-up time of 570 ± 734 days. 55.6% (10/18) of the patients received an ICD after WCD wear time.

Conclusions

This retrospective study of patients with inherited and congenital heart disease shows that WCD use is not beneficial in the majority of patients with inherited and congenital heart disease.

First human safety and effectiveness study of defibrillation with a novel patch wearable cardioverter-defibrillator

AIMS

Wearable cardioverter-defibrillators (WCDs) are indicated in patients at risk of sudden cardiac arrest who are not immediate candidates for implantable defibrillator therapy. Limitations of existing WCDs include poor compliance and high false alarm rates. The Jewel is a novel patch-WCD (P-WCD) that addresses these limitations with an adhesive-based design for near-continuous wear and a machine learning algorithm designed to minimize inappropriate detections. This was a first-in-human study of the Jewel P-WCD conducted in an electrophysiology (EP) lab to determine the safety and effectiveness of the device in terminating ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF) with a single shock. The aim was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of terminating VT/VF with a single shock using the Jewel P-WCD.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This was a first-in-human, prospective, single-arm, single-centre study in patients scheduled for an EP procedure in which VT/VF was expected to either spontaneously occur or be induced. The Jewel P-WCD was placed on consented patients; upon confirmation of VT/VF, a single shock (150 J) was delivered via the device. A group sequential design and Pocock alpha spending function was used to measure the observed proportion of successful VT/VF single-shock terminations. The endpoint was achieved if the lower confidence limit exceeded the performance goal of 62%, using a one-sided lower 97.4% exact confidence bound. Of 18 eligible subjects, 16 (88.9%, 97.4% confidence bound: 65.4%) were successfully defibrillated with a single shock, exceeding the primary endpoint performance goal with no adverse events.

CONCLUSION

This first-in-human evaluation of the Jewel P-WCD demonstrated the safety and effectiveness of terminating VT/VF.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/; Unique identifier: NCT05490459.

Prior history of atrial fibrillation and arrhythmic outcomes: Data from the WEARIT-II prospective registry

INTRODUCTION

Wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) is utilized in patients with assumed but not yet confirmed risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD). Many of these patients also present with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, the rate of WCD-detected ventricular or atrial arrhythmia events in this specific high-risk cohort is not well understood.

METHODS

In WEARIT-II, the cumulative probability of any sustained or nonsustained VT/VF (WCD-treated and nontreated), and atrial/supraventricular arrhythmias during WCD use was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method by prior AF, with comparisons by the log-rank test. The incidence of ventricular and atrial arrhythmia events were expressed as events per 100 patient-years, and were analyzed by prior AF using negative binomial regression.

RESULTS

WEARIT-II enrolled 2000 patients, 557 (28%) of whom had AF before enrollment. Cumulative probability of any sustained or nonsustained WCD-detected VT/VF during WCD use was significantly higher among patients with a history of AF than without AF (6% vs. 3%, p = .001). Similarly, the recurrent rate of any sustained or nonsustained VT/VF was significantly higher in patients with prior AF versus no prior AF (131.5 events per 100 patient-years vs. 22.7 events per 100 patient-years, p = .001). Patients with prior AF also had a significantly higher burden of any WCD-detected atrial arrhythmias/SVT/inappropriate arrhythmias therapy (183.2 events per 100 patient-years vs. 74.8 events per 100 patient-years, p < .001).

CONCLUSION

Our results demonstrate that patients with a history of AF wearing the WCD for risk assessment have a higher incidence of ventricular arrhythmias that may facilitate the decision making for ICD implantation.

Expanded application of wearable cardioverter defibrillators beyond current guidelines: proposal for a European register explained through single clinical scenarios

The wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) is becoming a more and more widely used instrument for the prevention of sudden cardiac death of patients either with a secondary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillator indication or with a transient high risk of sudden cardiac death. Although clinical practice has demonstrated a benefit of protecting patients for a period as long as 3-6 months with such devices, the current European guidelines concerning ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death are still extremely restrictive in the patient selection in part because of the costs derived from such a prevention device, in part because of the lack of robust randomised trials.To illustrate expanded use cases for the WCD, four real-life clinical cases are presented where patients received the device slightly outside the established guidelines. These cases demonstrate the broader utility of WCDs in situations involving acute myocarditis, thyrotoxicosis, pre-excited atrial fibrillation and awaiting staging/prognosis of a lung tumour. The findings prompt expansion of the existing guidelines for WCD use to efficiently protect more patients whose risk of arrhythmic cardiac death is transient or uncertain. This could be achieved by establishing a European register of the patients who receive a WCD for further analysis.

Post-Shock Asystole in Patients Dying Out of Hospital While Wearing a Cardioverter Defibrillator

BACKGROUND

The wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) prevents sudden cardiac death due to ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) but does not pace for post-shock asystole (PS-A) or bradycardia (PS-B;<50 beats/ min).

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to assess PS-A and PS-B in patients dying out of hospital (OOH) while wearing a WCD.

METHODS

The database of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Manufacturers and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) was queried for manufacturers' reports of OOH deaths while patients were wearing a WCD. Excluded were patients who did not receive a shock or were initially shocked for asystole or during resuscitation.

RESULTS

From January 2017 to March 2022, 313 patients received an initial WCD shock for VF (n = 150), VT (n = 90), and non-VF/VT rhythms (n = 73). PS-A occurred in 204 patients (65.2%), and PS-B occurred in 111 (35.5%); 85 (41.7%) PS-A patients also had PS-B. Most PS-A patients (n = 185; 90.7%) had an initial shocked rhythm of VF or VT, but 19 patients (9.3%) were initially inappropriately shocked for atrial fibrillation/supraventricular tachycardia (n = 7) and idioventricular (n = 8) or sinus (n = 4) rhythm. PS-A occurred after the first WCD shock in 118 (63.8%) and after the first, second, or third shocks in 159 patients (85.9%). Seven patients had post-shock heart block. Eight patients had permanent pacemakers; 1 became nonfunctional after 1 shock, and 7 showed noncapture and/or asystole after 1 to 4 shocks.

CONCLUSIONS

Post-shock asystole appears to be common in patients who die OOH after being shocked by a WCD for VF or VT. PS-A also occurs after inappropriate WCD shocks for non-VF/VT rhythms. Implanted pacemakers may not prevent PS-A after a WCD shock. WCD backup pacing should be explored.

Wearable Cardioverter Defibrillator Shortens the Lengths of Stay in Patients with Left Ventricular Dysfunction after Myocardial Infarction: A Single-Centre Real-World Experience

The wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) has been proven to be effective in preventing sudden cardiac death (SCD) in patients soon after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35%. The aim of this study was to assess whether a WCD may shorten the length of an initial hospital stay (total length, days in the intensive care unit (ICU) and in the acute cardiac care unit (ACCU)) among these patients. This was a single-centre, retrospective observational study of patients referred for the management of SCD risk post-AMI and LVEF ≤35%, in a tertiary care hospital. The clinical characteristics and length of index hospitalization of the group of patients discharged, with or without WCD, were compared. A propensity score analysis was performed, then weighted regression models were conducted. A total of 101 patients in the WCD group and 29 in the control group were enrolled in the analysis. In the weighted regression models, WCD significantly reduced the days spent in ACCU (p < 0.001). WCD patients had significantly fewer days spent in ACCU (5.5 ± 2.6 vs. 8.4 ± 12.8 days, p < 0.001) and shorter hospitalizations (10.2 ± 5.7 vs. 13.4 ± 17.6 days, p = 0.005), compared with the control group. It was concluded that the WCD appears to reduce the total length of hospitalization and lengths of stay in ACCU for patients post-AMI and with left ventricular dysfunction.

Causes and clinical consequences of inappropriate shocks experienced by patients wearing a cardioverter-defibrillator

BACKGROUND

The LifeVest® wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) prevents sudden cardiac death in at-risk patients who are not candidates for an implantable defibrillator. The safety and efficacy of the WCD may be impacted by inappropriate shocks (IAS).

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess the causes and clinical consequences of WCD IAS in survivors of IAS events.

METHODS

The Food and Drug Administration's Manufacturers and User Facility Device Experience database was searched for IAS adverse events (AE) that were reported during 2021 and 2022.

RESULTS

A total of 2568 IAS-AE were found (average number of IAS per event: 1.5 ± 1.9; range 1-48). IAS were caused by tachycardias (1255 [48.9%]), motion artifacts (840 [32.7%]), and oversensing (OS) of low-level electrical signals (473 [18.4%]) (P <.001). Tachycardias included atrial fibrillation (AF) (828 [32.2%]), supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) (333 [13.0%]), and nonsustained ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation (NSVT/VF) (87 [3.4%]). Activities responsible for motion-induced IAS included riding a motorcycle, lawnmower, or tractor (n = 128). In 19 patients, IAS induced sustained ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation that subsequently were terminated by appropriate WCD shocks. Thirty patients fell and suffered physical injuries. Conscious patients (n = 1905) did not use the response buttons to abort shocks (47.9%) or used them improperly (20.2%). IAS resulted in 1190 emergency room visits or hospitalizations, and 17.3% of patients (421/2440) discontinued the WCD after experiencing IAS, especially multiple IAS.

CONCLUSIONS

The LifeVest WCD may deliver IAS caused by AF, SVT, NSVT/VF, motion artifacts, and oversensing of electrical signals. These shocks may be arrhythmogenic, result in injuries, precipitate WCD discontinuation, and consume medical resources. Improved WCD sensing, rhythm discrimination, and methods to abort IAS are needed.

ANMCO position paper: guide to the appropriate use of the wearable cardioverter defibrillator in clinical practice for patients at high transient risk of sudden cardiac death

Extended risk stratification and optimal management of patients with a permanently increased risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) are becoming increasingly important. There are several clinical conditions where the risk of arrhythmic death is present albeit only transient. As an example, patients with depressed left ventricular function have a high risk of SCD that may be only transient if there will be a significant recovery of function. It is important to protect the patients while receiving and titrating to the optimal dose the recommended drugs that may lead to an improved left ventricular function. In several other conditions, a transient risk of SCD can be observed even if the left ventricular function is not compromised. Examples are patients with acute myocarditis, during the diagnostic work-up of some arrhythmic conditions or after extraction of infected catheters while eradicating the associated infection. In all these conditions, it is important to offer a protection to these patients. The wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) is of particular importance as a temporary non-invasive technology for both arrhythmia monitoring and therapy in patients with increased risk of SCD. Previous studies have shown the WCD to be an effective and safe therapy for the prevention of SCD caused by ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation. The aim of this ANMCO position paper is to provide a recommendation for clinical utilization of the WCD in Italy, based upon current data and international guidelines. In this document, we will review the WCD functionality, indications, clinical evidence, and guideline recommendations. Finally, a recommendation for the utilization of the WCD in routine clinical practice will be presented, in order to provide physicians with a practical guidance for SCD risk stratification in patients who may benefit from this device.

Patient-reported outcomes using a wearable cardioverter-defibrillator: results from a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of the wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) on patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in adult patients with high risk for sudden cardiac arrest.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search in Medline (via PubMed) and Cochrane Library in February 2022 and included studies with a study population ≥18 years and prescribed WCD. PRO include health-related quality of life (QoL), symptoms, utilities, or satisfaction ratings. Study selection was done by two reviewers independently using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Quality assessment of studies as well as data extraction was performed by one author and approved by a second author. Results of the included studies are presented quantitatively.

RESULTS

One randomized controlled trial (RCT), one comparative non-randomized trial, and three single-arm trials were included. QoL was assessed in four studies, but with different assessment tools. One study additionally evaluated the change in depressive symptoms and anxiety and one study focused on acceptability of WCD but evaluated items that are closely related to QoL. Results of the RCT show no statistically significant difference in QoL assessed by SF-36 and EQ-5D comparing WCD and Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy (GDMT) versus GDMT alone. One comparative study reports an improvement in depressive symptoms and anxiety within groups but no significant difference between groups. Further, one single-arm study reported improvement in QoL between baseline and day 90 and day 180.

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence demonstrates that the usage of WCD is not affecting PRO, like QoL, depressive symptoms or anxiety negatively.

Evaluation of a Standardized Training and Adherence Surveillance Programme to Overcome Quality-of-Life Impairments and Enhance Compliance in Patients Treated with Wearable Cardioverter Defibrillator

BACKGROUND

Treatment with wearable cardioverter defibrillators (WCD) is a non-invasive, transient therapy option for prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in patients with temporary contraindications for implantation of a permanent cardioverter defibrillator. Due to the constant risk of fatal arrhythmias, compliance is the fundamental requirement for effectiveness of a WCD, but this might be hindered by the poor quality-of-life (QoL) during WCD therapy. In this retrospective single-center study, we examined if a standardized WCD training and adherence surveillance programme could enhance compliance and QoL.

METHODS

All patients with a prescription for WCD treatment from January 2017 to August 2019 were included and received a standardized WCD training programme. QoL was validated using the modified EQ-5D-3L questionnaire. The findings were compared to a historical, previously published, retrospective cohort from our center (WCD prescription period 03/2012-02/2016), not receiving the additional training programme. Endpoints comprised therapy adherence, arrhythmic episodes, and dimensions of QoL.

RESULTS

Ninety-two patients underwent WCD treatment in the study cohort for a median of 49 days. Median daily wear time was enhanced in the study cohort (historical cohort vs study cohort 21.9 vs 23.3 hours/per day, p<0.01) and artefact alarms occurred less frequently (67.9% vs 48.9%, p 0.01). Major restrictions in QoL in the study cohort were found in mobility (48%), daily routine (44%), and sleep (49%), but the dimensions pain (36% vs 4%, p<0.01), mental health (43% vs 29%, p 0.03), and restrictions in daily routine (48% vs 30%, p 0.04) improved.

CONCLUSION

A standardized training and adherence surveillance programme might have beneficial effects on compliance and QoL. As these findings are essential for therapy success, they might potentially lead to a reduction in arrhythmic deaths in upcoming WCD trials.

Sudden cardiac death while waiting: do we need the wearable cardioverter-defibrillator?

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is the most frequent cause of cardiovascular death in industrialized nations. Patients with cardiomyopathy are at increased risk for SCD and may benefit from an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). The risk of SCD is highest in the first months after myocardial infarction or first diagnosis of severe non-ischemic cardiomyopathy. On the other hand, left ventricular function may improve in a subset of patients to such an extent that an ICD might no longer be needed. To offer protection from a transient risk of SCD, the wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) is available. Results of the first randomized clinical trial investigating the role of the WCD after myocardial infarction were recently published. This review is intended to provide insight into data from the VEST trial, and to put these into perspective with studies and clinical experience. As a non-invasive, temporary therapy, the WCD may offer advantages over early ICD implantation. However, recent data demonstrate that patient compliance and education play a crucial role in this new concept of preventing SCD.

Wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (life-vest): A feasible bridging treatment in adult congenital heart disease

BACKGROUND

Wearable cardioverter-defibrillators (WCDs) are currently used in patients at temporarily heightened risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD) who are temporarily unable to receive an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). WCD can safely record and terminate life-threatening arrhythmias through a non-invasive electrode-based system. The current clinical indications for WCD use are varied and keep evolving as experience with this technology increases.

METHODS

We reviewed and explored the data behind indications for WCD use and discuss its usefulness in congenital heart disease (CHD) patients.

RESULTS

We considered 8 consecutive patients (mean age 35.25 years, range 18-51 years, average duration of WCD use 4 months, range 3-6 months) with complex CHD, in which a WCD was used between June 2018 and January 2022. No sustained ventricular arrhythmias requiring shocks were recorded in the observation period. No inappropriate shocks were recorded. All the patients showed a good compliance and a very high mean wear time per day (21.2 ± 1 h a day). Four patients implanted a permanent device (3 CRT-D, 1 ICD), three underwent cardiac surgery at the end of the WCD period and one is still on the waiting list for the operation.

CONCLUSIONS

Larger trial could confirm the possible conceivable benefit from an extended use of the WCD in certain populations with complex CHD as in our case series, especially in patients with life-treating ventricular arrhythmias waiting for surgery for residual cardiac defects or in the early phases following the surgical/hemodynamic interventions, patients with tachycardiomyopathy expected to improve after the arrhythmias are removed and patients awaiting implantation of an ICD at high risk due to active infection.

Sex differences and adherence of patients treated with wearable cardioverter-defibrillator: insights from an international multicenter register

AIMS

Treatment with the wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) may protect against sudden cardiac death (SCD) as a bridging therapy until a cardioverter-defibrillator may be implanted. We analyzed in a multicenter setting a consecutive patient cohort wearing WCD to explore sex differences.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We analyzed 708 consecutive patients, 579 (81.8%) from whom were males and 129 (18.2%) females (age, 60.5±14 vs. 61.6±17 years old; p=0.44). While the rate of ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) as a cause of prescription of WCD was significantly higher in males as compared to females (42.7% vs. 26.4%; p=0.001), females received it more frequently due to non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) (55.8% vs. 42.7%); p=0.009). The wear time of WCD was equivalent in both groups (21.1±4.3 hours/days in males vs. 21.5±4.4 hours/days in females; p=0.27; and 62.6±44.3 days in males vs. 56.5±39 days in females; p=0.15). Mortality was comparable in both groups at 2-year-follow-up (6.8% in males vs. 9.7% in females; p=0.55). Appropriate WCD shocks and the incidence of ICD implantations were similar in both groups (2.4% in males vs. 3.9% in females; p=0.07) (35.1% in males vs. 31.8% in females; p=0.37), respectively. In age tertile analysis, compliance was observed more in 73-91 years old group as compared to 14-51 years old group (87.8% vs. 68.3%; p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Compliance for wearing WCD was excellent regardless of sex. Furthermore, mortality and the incidence of ICD implantations were comparable in both sexes. Appropriate WCD shocks were similar in both sexes. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Application of industry 4.0 technology in containing Covid-19 spread and its challenges

The pandemic of Covid-19, an epidemic outbreak created many challenges and increased the demand for medical equipments, medicines, and related accessories and most of them had to be imported from abroad. The advanced information technology (Industry 4.0) was considered imperative to track and monitor the spread of the SARS-2 Virus that is Covid-19. A detailed review of literature is done to understand the challenges and the remedial action taken so far during the Covid-19 epidemic outbreak had been gone through using appropriate search engines and databases like Google-search, Science Direct, Scopus, Research Gate, and relevant blogs. The case reports were also considered in this study. We have found ten significant challenges (barriers) and identified several useful technology of industry 4.0 to control and manage the Covid-19 pandemic. This research paper is an attempt to examine and discuss the application of 4.0 technologies in containing the pandemic outbreak. Ten challenges were identified and those could be overcome by promptly applying appropriate technologies of industry 4.0 to control the spread of virus. These technologies help to educate and communicate the public and make them aware of the hazardous attack of Covid-19 virus when properly used.

A Wearable Cardioverter Defibrillator with a Low False Alarm Rate

BACKGROUND

A wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) is indicated in appropriate patients to reduce risk for sudden cardiac death. Challenges for patients wearing a WCD have been frequent false shock alarms primarily due to ECG noise and wear discomfort.

OBJECTIVE

To test a contemporary WCD designed for reduced false shock alarms and improved comfort.

METHODS

130 patients with LVEF ≤ 40% and an active implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) were fitted with the ASSURE WCD (Kestra Medical Technologies) and followed 30 days. WCD detection was enabled and shock alarm markers recorded, but shocks and shock alarms disabled. All WCD episodes and ICD VT/VF episodes were adjudicated. The primary endpoint was the false positive shock alarm rate with a performance goal of 1 every 3.4 days (0.29 per patient-day).

RESULTS

Of 163 WCD episodes, 4 were VT/VF and 159 non-VT/VF (121 rhythms with noise, 32 uncertain with noise, 6 atrial flutter without noise). Only 3 false positive shock alarm markers were recorded; 1 false positive shock alarm every 1,333 patient-days (0.00075 per patient-day, 95% CI: 0.00015-0.00361; p < 0.001). No ICD recorded VT/VF episodes meeting WCD detection criteria (≥ 170 bpm for ≥ 20 seconds) were missed by the WCD during 3,501 patient-days of use. Median wear was 31.0 days (IQR 2.0) and median daily use 23.0 hours (IQR 1.7). Adverse events were mostly mild: skin irritation (19.4%) and musculoskeletal discomfort (8.5%).

CONCLUSION

The ASSURE WCD demonstrated a low false positive shock alarm rate, low patient-reported discomfort, and no serious adverse events. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Experience with a Wearable Cardioverter-defibrillator in 436 Patients

The aim of the present study was to review the safety and efficiency of wearable cardioverter-defibrillators (WCDs) under current guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT). We retrospectively analyzed 436 consecutive WCD patients seen in the years 2014–2020. Detected automatic arrhythmia alarm (AA) episodes were validated and classified as correct or incorrect. The positive predictive value (PPV) was calculated. GDMT was optimized in our outpatient clinic to maximal tolerated doses. During a total wear time (WT) of 23,527 days, 3,135 AAs were transmitted from 206 of 436 (47.2%) patients. Visual analysis revealed correct diagnoses of non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) in 38 AAs from 6 patients (total PPV, 1.21%; PPV in VT patients, 41%); the remaining AAs were artifacts. No appropriate or inappropriate shocks and fatalities were recorded. LVEF significantly improved (P < .001) during the WT from 25% (range, 20%–30%) to 40% (range, 34%–46%). Defibrillators were implanted in 109 patients (27%). The PPV for VT of the WCD was very low. There were fewer instances of true VT than previously reported, and no shocks (appropriate or inappropriate) were delivered. The majority of patients greatly improved with GDMT, and device implantation rates were lower than previously reported. Improvements in arrhythmia detection algorithms are warranted. Based on our results, WCDs are rarely needed for lifesaving shocks under optimal GDMT.

Rate of Recovery of Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction in a Real-World Population of Patients Receiving a Wearable Cardioverter Defibrillator

Background

This study aimed to investigate the rate of early improvement in ejection fraction (EF) within 21 - 60 days among patients with cardiomyopathy who were provided with a wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD).

Methods

This was a retrospective study of patients who received a WCD at our institution to determine the rate of improvement in left ventricular EF (LVEF) to ≥ 35-40%. Among 990 patients who received a WCD during the study period, 101 had an echocardiogram performed during the subsequent 21 - 60 days. Patients were stratified according to their initial EF, as well as age, gender, number of heart failure medications, and ischemic vs. nonischemic cardiomyopathy. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the influence of these variables on the subsequent improvement in EF.

Results

There were 39 patients who had improvement in their EF to ≥ 35-40%. The only significant predictor of EF recovery was the initial EF. There was a direct correlation between initial EF category and the likelihood of improvement in EF. For every unit increase in initial EF category, the odds of improvement increased 1.73 times (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.22 - 2.45). Age (P = 0.20), gender (P = 0.10), ischemic cardiomyopathy (P = 0.40), and number of heart failure medications at the time of WCD placement (P = 0.26) were not significant predictors of improved LVEF.

Conclusions

This study showed a rate of improvement in EF to ≥ 35-40% of 39% within 21 - 60 days of placement of a WCD among patients with both ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy. The only significant clinical predictor of EF improvement was initial EF.

Multiparameter Monitoring with a Wearable Cardioverter Defibrillator

A wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) is a temporary treatment option for patients at high risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD) and for patients who are temporarily not candidates for an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). In addition, the need for telemedical concepts in the detection and treatment of heart failure (HF) and its arrhythmias is growing. The WCD has evolved from a shock device detecting malignant ventricular arrhythmias (VA) and treating them with shocks to a heart-failure-monitoring device that captures physical activity and cardioacoustic biomarkers as surrogate parameters for HF to help the treating physician surveil and guide the HF therapy of each individual patient. In addition to its important role in preventing SCD, the WCD could become an important tool in heart failure treatment by helping prevent HF events by detecting imminent decompensation via remote monitoring and monitoring therapy success.

Real-world experience with the wearable cardioverter defibrillator: clinical effectiveness and wear-time adherence in patients at high risk for sudden cardiac death

BACKGROUND

Previous studies established a role for the wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) to effectively and safely bridge temporary risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD) in patients with advanced heart failure. The prognostic relevance of the WCD remains controversial.

OBJECTIVES

The authors investigated adherence to, as well as the safety and effectiveness of, WCD use in a real-world cohort of patients at high risk for SCD.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

All consecutive patients (n = 83) receiving a WCD at a German tertiary care hospital between April 2012 and December 2019 were retrospectively included in this analysis. Patient characteristics were collected at the time of the index hospitalization. Using the Zoll® lifeVest® (ZOLL Medical Corporation, Chelmsford, MA, USA) network database, two separate investigators evaluated adherence to the WCD as well as arrhythmic events during WCD wear time.

RESULTS

During 3680 wearing days (mean WCD wear time, 44 days) with a median daily wear time of 23.1 h, three arrhythmic events of relevance (sustained ventricular tachycardia, VT) occurred, one of which was sufficiently terminated by WCD shock. Another patient died from sudden cardiac death while pausing his WCD. Right bundle branch block correlated significantly with sustained VT occurrence (r = 0.3315; 95% CI -0.1265 to 0.3014; p = 0.0022). In 30 patients (36.1%) a cardioverter/defibrillator was implanted.

CONCLUSION

In a real-life clinical setting, the use of WCD in patients at high risk for sudden cardiac death is effective and safe and adherence to the device is high. The event rate for VA was lower than in comparable patient cohorts. Adherence remains a crucial issue as one patient in the present series died while not wearing the device.

Wearable cardioverter-defibrillators after myocardial infarction: a review of its clinical utility and unmet needs in current clinical practice

Sudden cardiac death is one of the leading causes of death in the older population. Compared with the general population, patients who experienced a myocardial infarction are four to six times more likely to experience sudden cardiac death. Though primary percutaneous coronary intervention considerably reduces mortality in patients who experienced a myocardial infarction, a non-negligible number of sudden cardiac deaths still occurs. Despite the high incidence rate of sudden cardiac deaths during the first month after myocardial infarction, prophylactic use of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators has so far failed to convey a survival benefit. Therefore, current clinical guidelines recommend that cardioverter-defibrillator implantation is contraindicated until 90 days after myocardial infarction. Wearable cardioverter-defibrillators were first approved for clinical use in 2002 and are currently considered as a bridge to therapy in patients with myocardial infarction with a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction in whom cardioverter-defibrillator implantation is temporarily not indicated. However, there is insufficient recognition among interventional cardiologists of the use of wearable cardioverter-defibrillators for preventing sudden cardiac death after myocardial infarction. Hence, we reviewed the evidence of the efficacy of wearable cardioverter-defibrillators used in patients following myocardial infarction to achieve better management of sudden cardiac death.

Wearable cardioverter defibrillator: bridging for implantable defibrillators in left ventricular assist device patients

There is currently conflicting data available regarding the use of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) in left ventricular assist device (LVAD) patients. While the benefit of an ICD in heart failure patients is well demonstrated, such benefit has failed to reach the LVAD population. In lack of randomized control trial data on the topic of ICD use in LVAD recipients, major societal guidelines are in disagreement when comes to the topic of routine implantation of a permanent defibrillator in prospective ventricular assist device patients. Alternative permanent defibrillator strategies have been suggested for the LVAD population such as subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillators (S-ICDs) but eligibility of patients for such practice remains disappointing. Although most of the heart failure patients undergoing LVAD implantation already bear an ICD, clinicians are left with the decision of de novo implanting an ICD in an important number of patients. Wearable cardioverter defibrillators could prove beneficial in LVAD recipients by utilizing them as a bridge to decision towards the implantation of a permanent defibrillator.

Keeping up to date: a current review of wearable cardioverter defibrillator use

The introduction of wearable cardioverter defibrillators (WCD) provides a novel means of protection in select patients at high risk for sudden cardiac death. The WCD can safely record and terminate life-threatening arrhythmias. In this review, we explore the data behind indications for WCD use and discuss its limitations. We searched PubMed, Google Scholar and Cochrane Central Register of controlled trials for relevant studies. The VEST trial, the first randomised controlled trial on WCD use, did not show statistical significance in utility of the WCD in post-myocardial infarction patients with low ejection fraction. While the use of WCD in this select patient population showed no benefit, the findings of the trial merit closer inspection. Various other indications of WCD use still exist and others require exploration. Select subsets of patients who stand to benefit for other indications include severely decreased left ventricular function post-revascularization with high arrhythmic burden, severe non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy, patients awaiting heart transplant and patients who have had their implantable cardioverter device temporarily removed. The role of the WCD is also being explored in children, peripartum cardiomyopathy, haemodialysis patients, and in syncope secondary to high-risk arrhythmias.

Comparison of the Outcome of Patients Protected by the Wearable Cardioverter Defibrillator (WCD) for <90 Wear Days versus ≥90 Wear Days

BACKGROUND/AIM

The wearable cardioverter/defibrillator (WCD) is recommended to prevent sudden cardiac death (SCD). Guidelines suggest a 90 days' period, but prolongation of WCD wear time until increasing the ejection fraction (≥35%) might be suggested.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A cohort of 153 patients with prescribed WCD were divided into two groups: A <90 wear days' group (n=112) vs. ≥90 wear days' group (n=41) and followed.

RESULTS

In the first group, WCD shock occurred in 3.6% of patients, 47.3% improved in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) after 3 months, and 37.5% had a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation with appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) shock events occurring in 6 patients. Two of these patients already received WCD shock therapy due to ventricular fibrillation. A 20.5% improved in LVEF after 6-12 months, but 73% were already implanted with ICD. In the second group, 4.9% received WCD shock, 34.1% improved in LVEF after 3 months, 48.8% were implanted with ICD, and 2 had ICD shocks during follow up time. LVEF improvement after 6-12 months occurred in 26.8%. ICD implantation was prevented in 7.3% of patients due to LVEF recovery.

CONCLUSION

Prolonging wearing days of WCD may reduce the number of inappropriate ICD implantation.

Integration of novel monitoring devices with machine learning technology for scalable cardiovascular management

Ambulatory monitoring is increasingly important for cardiovascular care but is often limited by the unpredictability of cardiovascular events, the intermittent nature of ambulatory monitors and the variable clinical significance of recorded data in patients. Technological advances in computing have led to the introduction of novel physiological biosignals that can increase the frequency at which abnormalities in cardiovascular parameters can be detected, making expert-level, automated diagnosis a reality. However, use of these biosignals for diagnosis also raises numerous concerns related to accuracy and actionability within clinical guidelines, in addition to medico-legal and ethical issues. Analytical methods such as machine learning can potentially increase the accuracy and improve the actionability of device-based diagnoses. Coupled with interoperability of data to widen access to all stakeholders, seamless connectivity (an internet of things) and maintenance of anonymity, this approach could ultimately facilitate near-real-time diagnosis and therapy. These tools are increasingly recognized by regulatory agencies and professional medical societies, but several technical and ethical issues remain. In this Review, we describe the current state of cardiovascular monitoring along the continuum from biosignal acquisition to the identification of novel biosensors and the development of analytical techniques and ultimately to regulatory and ethical issues. Furthermore, we outline new paradigms for cardiovascular monitoring.

Advances in cardiovascular monitoring technologies have resulted in an influx of consumer-targeted wearable sensors that have the potential to detect numerous heart conditions. In this Review, Krittanawong and colleagues describe processes involved in biosignal acquisition and analysis of cardiovascular monitors, as well as their associated ethical, regulatory and legal challenges.

Advances in the use of cardiovascular monitoring technologies, such as the development of novel portable sensors and machine learning algorithms that can provide near-real-time diagnosis, have the potential to provide personalized care.

Wearable sensor technologies can detect numerous biosignals, such as cardiac output, blood-pressure levels and heart rhythm, and can integrate multiple modalities.

The use of novel biosignals for diagnosis raises concerns regarding accuracy and actionability within clinical guidelines, in addition to medical, legal and ethical issues.

Machine learning-based interpretation of biosensor data can facilitate rapid evaluation of the haemodynamic consequences of heart failure or arrhythmias, but is limited by the presence of noise and training data that might not be representative of the real-world clinical setting.

The use of data derived from cardiovascular monitoring devices is associated with numerous challenges, such as data security, accessibility and ownership, in addition to other ethical and regulatory concerns.

Cardiac arrest in takotsubo syndrome: results from the InterTAK Registry

AIMS

We aimed to evaluate the frequency, clinical features, and prognostic implications of cardiac arrest (CA) in takotsubo syndrome (TTS).

METHODS AND RESULTS

We reviewed the records of patients with CA and known heart rhythm from the International Takotsubo Registry. The main outcomes were 60-day and 5-year mortality. In addition, predictors of mortality and predictors of CA during the acute TTS phase were assessed. Of 2098 patients, 103 patients with CA and known heart rhythm during CA were included. Compared with patients without CA, CA patients were more likely to be younger, male, and have apical TTS, atrial fibrillation (AF), neurologic comorbidities, physical triggers, and longer corrected QT-interval and lower left ventricular ejection fraction on admission. In all, 57.1% of patients with CA at admission had ventricular fibrillation/tachycardia, while 73.7% of patients with CA in the acute phase had asystole/pulseless electrical activity. Patients with CA showed higher 60-day (40.3% vs. 4.0%, P < 0.001) and 5-year mortality (68.9% vs. 16.7%, P < 0.001) than patients without CA. T-wave inversion and intracranial haemorrhage were independently associated with higher 60-day mortality after CA, whereas female gender was associated with lower 60-day mortality. In the acute phase, CA occurred less frequently in females and more frequently in patients with AF, ST-segment elevation, and higher C-reactive protein on admission.

CONCLUSIONS

Cardiac arrest is relatively frequent in TTS and is associated with higher short- and long-term mortality. Clinical and electrocardiographic parameters independently predicted mortality after CA.

Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices Following Heart Transplantation

Permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation is required in a subset of patients (∼10%) for sinus node dysfunction or atrioventricular block both early and late after heart transplantation. The incidence of PPM implantation has decreased to <5% with the advent of bicaval anastamosis transplantation surgery. Pacing dependence upon follow-up has been variably reported. An even smaller percentage of transplantation recipients (1.5% to 3.4%) undergo implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) placement. Rigorous data are lacking for the use of ICDs in the transplantation population and is largely derived from cohort studies and case series. Sudden cardiac death occurs in approximately 10% of transplantation recipients, but multiple nonarrhythmic factors are believed to be responsible, including acute rejection, late graft failure with electromechanical dissociation, and ischemia due to cardiac allograft vasculopathy. This review provides a comprehensive analysis of the existing data regarding the role for PPMs and ICDs in this population, including leadless PPMs and subcutaneous ICDs, special considerations, and future directions.

NAD+ Metabolism as an Emerging Therapeutic Target for Cardiovascular Diseases Associated With Sudden Cardiac Death

In addition to its central role in mediating oxidation reduction in fuel metabolism and bioenergetics, nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD+) has emerged as a vital co-substrate for a number of proteins involved in diverse cellular processes, including sirtuins, poly(ADP-ribose) polymerases and cyclic ADP-ribose synthetases. The connection with aging and age-associated diseases has led to a new wave of research in the cardiovascular field. Here, we review the basics of NAD+ homeostasis, the molecular physiology and new advances in ischemic-reperfusion injury, heart failure, and arrhythmias, all of which are associated with increased risks for sudden cardiac death. Finally, we summarize the progress of NAD+-boosting therapy in human cardiovascular diseases and the challenges for future studies.

Management of nonischemic-dilated cardiomyopathies in clinical practice: a position paper of the working group on myocardial and pericardial diseases of Italian Society of Cardiology

: Nonischemic-dilated cardiomyopathy (NIDCM) is an entity that gathers extremely heterogeneous diseases. This awareness, although leading to continuous improvement in survival, has increased the complexity of NIDCM patients' management. Even though the endorsed 'red-flags' approach helps clinicians in pursuing an accurate etiological definition in clinical practice, it is not clear when and how peripheral centers should interact with referral centers with specific expertise in challenging scenarios (e.g. postmyocarditis and genetically determined dilated cardiomyopathy) and with easier access to second-line diagnostic tools and therapies. This position paper will summarize each step in NIDCM management, highlighting the multiple interactions between peripheral and referral centers, from first-line diagnostic workup and therapy to advanced heart failure management and long-term follow-up.

Effectiveness, efficacy, and safety of wearable cardioverter-defibrillators in the treatment of sudden cardiac arrest - Results from a health technology assessment

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness, efficacy, and safety of a wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) in adult persons with high risk for sudden cardiac arrest and for which an implantable cardioverter is currently not applicable.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and CRD-databases. Study selection was performed by two reviewers independently. Data were presented quantitatively; due to heterogeneity of studies no meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

One randomized-controlled trial (RCT), one non-randomized comparative trial, and forty-four non-comparative trials were included. The RCT reported an overall mortality of 3.1 percent in the WCD group versus 4.9 percent in controls (relative risk [RR]: .64; 95 percent confidence interval [CI], .43-.98, p = .04), but no significant effect on arrhythmia-related mortality. The RR for arrhythmia-related mortality amounted to .67 (95 percent CI, .37-1.21, p = .18) as assessed in the RCT. Appropriate shocks were observed in 1.3 percent of patients in both comparative studies, and inappropriate shocks in .6 percent of patients in the RCT. Termination of ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) was successful in 75 to 100 percent of appropriate shocks in all studies. Adverse events assessed in the RCT showed a lower incidence of shortness of breath (38.8 percent vs. 45.3 percent; p = .004), higher incidence of rash at any location (15.3 percent vs. 7.1 percent; p < .001), and higher incidence of itching at any location (17.2 percent vs. 6.4 percent; p < .001) for WCD.

CONCLUSIONS

Available evidence demonstrates that the WCD detects and terminates VT/VF events reliably and shows a high rate of appropriate shocks in mixed patient populations. Data of large registries confirm that the WCD is a safe intervention.

Wearable cardioverter-defibrillator as bridging to ICD in pediatric hypertrophic cardiomyopathy with myocardial bridging - a case report

Background

There is only limited experience with wearable cardioverter-defibrillators (WCD) in pediatric patients. We report on the successful application of a WCD in an adolescent patient with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and myocardial bridging.

Case presentation

A 15-year-old girl presented with a history of recurrent syncope, dyspnea, and vertigo with exercise. Diagnostic work-up revealed non-obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and signs of myocardial ischemia with exercise. Given this high-risk constellation, the patient was scheduled for prophylactic implantation of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). One month after initial presentation and days prior to the planned ICD implantation, the patient collapsed during an episode of sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) while running. VT was terminated by WCD shock delivery. Following this event, computerized tomography scan revealed myocardial bridging of the left anterior descending coronary artery causing a 90% stenosis in systole. After coronary surgery, life threatening arrhythmias have not recurred, but due to progressive heart failure, the patient underwent successful heart transplantation after 2 years.

Conclusions

The reported case highlights the importance and applicability of WCDs and the potentially malign nature of myocardial bridging in pediatric high-risk patients.

Protected risk stratification with the wearable cardioverter-defibrillator: results from the WEARIT-II-EUROPE registry

Background

The prospective WEARIT-II-EUROPE registry aimed to assess the value of the wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) prior to potential ICD implantation in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction considered at risk of sudden arrhythmic death.

Methods and results

781 patients (77% men; mean age 59.3 ± 13.4 years) with heart failure and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were consecutively enrolled. All patients received a WCD. Follow-up time for all patients was 12 months. Mean baseline LVEF was 26.9%. Mean WCD wearing time was 75 ± 47.7 days, mean daily WCD use 20.3 ± 4.6 h. WCD shocks terminated 13 VT/VF events in ten patients (1.3%). Two patients died during WCD prescription of non-arrhythmic cause. Mean LVEF increased from 26.9 to 36.3% at the end of WCD prescription (p < 0.01). After WCD use, ICDs were implanted in only 289 patients (37%). Forty patients (5.1%) died during follow-up. Five patients (1.7%) died with ICDs implanted, 33 patients (7%) had no ICD (no information on ICD in two patients). The majority of patients (75%) with the follow-up of 12 months after WCD prescription died from heart failure (15 patients) and non-cardiac death (15 patients). Only three patients (7%) died suddenly. In seven patients, the cause of death remained unknown.

Conclusions

Mortality after WCD prescription was mainly driven by heart failure and non-cardiovascular death. In patients with HFrEF and a potential risk of sudden arrhythmic death, WCD protected observation of LVEF progression and appraisal of competing risks of potential non-arrhythmic death may enable improved selection for beneficial ICD implantation.

Graphic abstract

Wearable cardioverter-defibrillators: A review of evidence and indications

The wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) was first approved for clinical use in 2002, and is routinely used in select populations at high risk for sudden cardiac death. WCDs are frequently considered as a bridge to definitive therapy or in circumstances where insertion of conventional implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) is temporarily contraindicated. In this review, we summarize the literature on WCDs. From prospective trials to the first randomized controlled trial with WCD, there is a growing body of evidence that suggests that the WCD is safe and effective. In the first randomized controlled trial of the WCD (VEST Trial), there was no reduction in arrhythmia death but there was a reduction in all-cause mortality. We discuss the mortality impact, rate of inappropriate shocks, compliance, and potential quality of life implications with the WCD. Finally, we present the evidence for WCD use in select populations (e.g., post-myocardial infarction, device extraction), and the current guideline recommendations for WCD use.

Key components of a community response to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) remains a leading cause of death worldwide, with substantial geographical, ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in outcome. Successful resuscitation efforts depend on the 'chain of survival', which includes immediate recognition of cardiac arrest and activation of the emergency response system, early bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) with an emphasis on chest compressions, rapid defibrillation, basic and advanced emergency medical services and integrated post-cardiac arrest care. Well-orchestrated telecommunicator CPR programmes can improve rates of bystander CPR - a critical link in the chain of survival. High-performance CPR by emergency medical service providers includes minimizing interruptions in chest compressions and ensuring adequate depth of compressions. Developing local, regional and statewide systems with dedicated high-performing cardiac resuscitation centres for post-resuscitation care can substantially improve survival after OHCA. Innovative digital tools for recognizing cardiac arrest where and when it occurs, notifying potential citizen rescuers and providing automated external defibrillators at the scene hold the promise of improving survival after OHCA. Improved implementation of the chain of survival can save thousands of lives each year.

Who Should Receive a Wearable Defibrillator Vest at Hospital Discharge?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To discuss the role of wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) vests in preventing sudden cardiac death (SCD) in at-risk populations.

RECENT FINDINGS

The impact of randomized-controlled trials with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) therapy is well established in randomized clinical trials in ischemic cardiomyopathy. Although the benefits are not as clear in non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, meta-analyses show significant mortality benefits from immediate electrical cardioversion strategies. The role of WCDs in at-risk populations in whom ICD therapy is temporarily not indicated is not as well-established. Smaller cohort trials have shown efficacy in patients with newly-diagnosed cardiomyopathy, requiring temporary ICD explantation, and others with less common indications for WCD therapy. The Vest Prevention of Early Sudden Death Trial was a landmark randomized control study seeking to examine the benefits of WCD therapy in at-risk population, and although the primary endpoint of reducing arrhythmic death was not reached, the structure of the trial and significant differences in total mortality make a compelling case for continued use of WCD therapies in our healthcare systems.

Sudden Cardiac Death: Who Is at Risk?

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is a leading cause of death in the United States. Despite improvements in therapy, the incidence of SCD as a proportion of overall cardiovascular death remains relatively unchanged. This article aims to answer the question, "Who is at risk for SCD?" In the process, it reviews the definition, pathophysiology, epidemiology, and risk factors of SCD. Patients at risk for SCD and appropriate treatment strategies are discussed.

Extended use of the wearable cardioverter-defibrillator in patients at risk for sudden cardiac death

Aims

Data on outcomes in patients using the wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) > 90 days are limited. We aimed to analyse the clinical course of patients with WCD use ≤90 days vs. WCD use >90 days.

Methods and results

We assessed arrhythmia events during WCD use, and ejection fraction (EF) improvement/implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation at the end of WCD use in patients with WCD use ≤90 days vs. WCD use >90 days enrolled in the WEARIT-II registry, further assessed by disease aetiology (ischaemic vs. non-ischaemic vs. congenital/inherited heart disease). There were 981 (49%) patients with WCD use >90 days, and 1019 patients with WCD use ≤90 days (median 120 vs. 55 days). There was a lower incidence of sustained ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF) events (11 vs. 50 events per 100 patient-years, P < 0.001), WCD treated VT/VF events (1 vs. 8 events per 100 patient-years, P < 0.001), and non-sustained VT events (21 vs. 51 events per 100 patient-years, P = 0.008) with WCD use >90 vs. WCD use ≤90 days. Non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy patients presented with similar rates of sustained VT/VF events during WCD use >90 vs. ≤90 days (13.4 vs. 13.7 events per 100 patient-years, P = 0.314), while most of these events terminated spontaneously. One-third of the patients with extended WCD use further improved their EF and they were not implanted with an ICD, with similar rates among ischaemic and non-ischaemic patients.

Conclusions

In WEARIT-II, patients with extended WCD use >90 days remain at risk for ventricular arrhythmia events. One-third of the patients with WCD use >90 days further improved their EF, avoiding the need to consider ICD implantation.

Life-threatening peripartum cardiomyopathy-Not expected when expecting

Peripartum cardiomyopathy is challenging to diagnose as it mimics symptoms present in normal pregnancy. The clinical course and prognosis are various. In selected cases, a cardioverter implantable defibrillator with/without cardiac resynchronization therapy, mechanical ventricular assist device treatment, and transplantation is indicated.