Cardiac defibrillator implantation in patients with syncope and inducible ventricular arrhythmia: insights from the German DEVICE registry

FUNDING ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: Type of funding sources: None. BACKGROUND: Programmed ventricular stimulation may be considered for risk stratification of sudden cardiac death. The history of syncope is an independent predictor for appropriate device discharge and sudden cardiac death, but data remain sparse among different populations. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the prognostic value of previous syncope and inducible ventricular arrhythmia (VA) during programmed stimulation in patients undergoing defibrillator implantation. METHODS: Among 4,196 patients enrolled in the prospective, multi-centre German DEVICE Registry undergoing defibrillator implantation, patients with syncope and inducible VA (n=285, 6.8%) vs. those with a secondary preventive indication (n=1,885, 45.2%) serving as a control group were studied. In an additional analysis of patients with inducible VA, those with vs. without (n=86, 2.1%) previous syncope were compared. RESULTS: Patients with syncope and inducible VA (64.9±14.4 years, 81.1% male) presented less often with congestive heart failure (15.1% vs. 29.1%; P<0.001) and any underlying structural heart disease (84.9% vs. 89.3%; P=0.030) with a higher left ventricular ejection fraction (43.7±14.2% vs. 38.1±14.2%; P<0.001) than patients with a secondary preventive indication (65.0±13.8 years, 81.0% male). Whereas dilated cardiomyopathy (16.8% vs. 23.8%; P=0.009) was less common in patients with syncope and inducible VA, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (5.6% vs. 2.8%; P=0.010) and Brugada syndrome (2.1% vs. 0.3%; P<0.001) were found more frequently. Device implantation was performed more often urgently in patients with syncope and inducible VA (46.4% vs. 22.5%; P=0.005). During 1 year of follow-up, mortality (5.1% vs. 8.9%; P=0.036) and the rate of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (5.8% vs. 10.0%; P=0.027) were lower in patients with previous syncope and inducible VA compared to patients with a secondary preventive indication. Among patients with inducible VA, post-procedural adverse events including rehospitalization (27.6% vs. 21.7%; P=0.37), defibrillator shocks (16.0% vs. 15.0%; P=0.85) and recurrent syncope (3.0% vs. 0%; P=0.32) did not differ between those with vs. without syncope. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a history of syncope and inducible VA present less frequently with most cardiac comorbidities resulting in better outcomes following defibrillator implantation than patients with a secondary preventive indication. Nevertheless, patients with inducible VA experience a relevant number of post-procedural adverse events not differing between those with vs. without syncope, which underlines the importance of VA inducibility, potentially irrespective of the history of syncope. [Figure: see text] [Figure: see text]