Cargando…
Defibrillation testing during S-ICD implantation: How relevant? Results from a multicenter study
FUNDING ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: Type of funding sources: None. INTRODUCTION: Defibrillation testing (DFT) is still recommended in patients with subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) to ensure proper detection of ventricular fibrillation and confirm effective defibrillation. Given the...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10207133/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/europace/euad122.426 |
_version_ | 1785046383160459264 |
---|---|
author | Ben Kilani, M Jacon, P Badenco, N Marquie, C Ollitrault, P Behar, N Khattar, P Carabelli, A Venier, S Defaye, P |
author_facet | Ben Kilani, M Jacon, P Badenco, N Marquie, C Ollitrault, P Behar, N Khattar, P Carabelli, A Venier, S Defaye, P |
author_sort | Ben Kilani, M |
collection | PubMed |
description | FUNDING ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: Type of funding sources: None. INTRODUCTION: Defibrillation testing (DFT) is still recommended in patients with subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) to ensure proper detection of ventricular fibrillation and confirm effective defibrillation. Given the significant risk of complications, recent studies, are reconsidering the interest of the DFT in S-ICD. The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical "real-life" outcomes of DFT over a mid-term follow-up period after third-generation S-ICD implantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: 368 patients (pts) (47.9 ± 15.5 years old; male 72.8%) implanted with Generation 3 S-ICD system were included in this retrospective multicenter registry-based study. Mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 40.8% (primary prevention 56.1%). For 99.2% pts, S-ICD implantation was performed using the two-incision technique and intermuscular positioning of the generator was performed for all pts. 81% pts underwent ICD testing during implantation. Reasons for not performing DFT were: very low LVEF (3.5%), intracardiac thrombus (2.4%) and VF induction failure. In 2.2% (8 pts) DFT was unsuccessful, causes were: induction of ventricular tachycardias with rates falling below the shock zone for 3 pts while shocks were ineffective for 5 pts. One patient required revision for contralateral lead implantation, while sensing vector reprogramming and shock polarity modification were efficient for the others. The mean impedance was 68.4 (±14.7) Ω and time to shock therapy ranged from 10 to 33 s, with a mean of 16.7 (±4) s. A total of 36 appropriate shocks (10.1%) have been observed after a FU period of 11.02±8.8 months (1.8 shocks per patient, several shocks for 12pts, failure of the first shock for 5 patients). 17 patients (4.6%) underwent S-ICD system extraction. The reasons were pocket site complication (7 pts), pacing indication for cardiac resynchronization therapy or bradycardia (3 pts), and S-ICD lead dysfunction (4 pts). Extraction after heart transplant was needed in 3 pts. Among the 4 pts explanted for system dysfunction, only one patient had a DFT during implantation. After a mean follow-up of 19±12.1 months, the mortality rate was 3.8% (no S-ICD-related deaths were reported). There was no significant difference between the 2 groups of pts with and without DFT testing (p=0.629). CONCLUSION: The DFT remains for the moment highly recommended during S-ICD implantations. Results from randomized studies are still needed to confirm the relevance of DFT during S-ICD implantation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10207133 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-102071332023-05-25 Defibrillation testing during S-ICD implantation: How relevant? Results from a multicenter study Ben Kilani, M Jacon, P Badenco, N Marquie, C Ollitrault, P Behar, N Khattar, P Carabelli, A Venier, S Defaye, P Europace 14.2 - Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator (ICD) FUNDING ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: Type of funding sources: None. INTRODUCTION: Defibrillation testing (DFT) is still recommended in patients with subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) to ensure proper detection of ventricular fibrillation and confirm effective defibrillation. Given the significant risk of complications, recent studies, are reconsidering the interest of the DFT in S-ICD. The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical "real-life" outcomes of DFT over a mid-term follow-up period after third-generation S-ICD implantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: 368 patients (pts) (47.9 ± 15.5 years old; male 72.8%) implanted with Generation 3 S-ICD system were included in this retrospective multicenter registry-based study. Mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 40.8% (primary prevention 56.1%). For 99.2% pts, S-ICD implantation was performed using the two-incision technique and intermuscular positioning of the generator was performed for all pts. 81% pts underwent ICD testing during implantation. Reasons for not performing DFT were: very low LVEF (3.5%), intracardiac thrombus (2.4%) and VF induction failure. In 2.2% (8 pts) DFT was unsuccessful, causes were: induction of ventricular tachycardias with rates falling below the shock zone for 3 pts while shocks were ineffective for 5 pts. One patient required revision for contralateral lead implantation, while sensing vector reprogramming and shock polarity modification were efficient for the others. The mean impedance was 68.4 (±14.7) Ω and time to shock therapy ranged from 10 to 33 s, with a mean of 16.7 (±4) s. A total of 36 appropriate shocks (10.1%) have been observed after a FU period of 11.02±8.8 months (1.8 shocks per patient, several shocks for 12pts, failure of the first shock for 5 patients). 17 patients (4.6%) underwent S-ICD system extraction. The reasons were pocket site complication (7 pts), pacing indication for cardiac resynchronization therapy or bradycardia (3 pts), and S-ICD lead dysfunction (4 pts). Extraction after heart transplant was needed in 3 pts. Among the 4 pts explanted for system dysfunction, only one patient had a DFT during implantation. After a mean follow-up of 19±12.1 months, the mortality rate was 3.8% (no S-ICD-related deaths were reported). There was no significant difference between the 2 groups of pts with and without DFT testing (p=0.629). CONCLUSION: The DFT remains for the moment highly recommended during S-ICD implantations. Results from randomized studies are still needed to confirm the relevance of DFT during S-ICD implantation. Oxford University Press 2023-05-24 /pmc/articles/PMC10207133/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/europace/euad122.426 Text en © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com |
spellingShingle | 14.2 - Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator (ICD) Ben Kilani, M Jacon, P Badenco, N Marquie, C Ollitrault, P Behar, N Khattar, P Carabelli, A Venier, S Defaye, P Defibrillation testing during S-ICD implantation: How relevant? Results from a multicenter study |
title | Defibrillation testing during S-ICD implantation: How relevant? Results from a multicenter study |
title_full | Defibrillation testing during S-ICD implantation: How relevant? Results from a multicenter study |
title_fullStr | Defibrillation testing during S-ICD implantation: How relevant? Results from a multicenter study |
title_full_unstemmed | Defibrillation testing during S-ICD implantation: How relevant? Results from a multicenter study |
title_short | Defibrillation testing during S-ICD implantation: How relevant? Results from a multicenter study |
title_sort | defibrillation testing during s-icd implantation: how relevant? results from a multicenter study |
topic | 14.2 - Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator (ICD) |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10207133/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/europace/euad122.426 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT benkilanim defibrillationtestingduringsicdimplantationhowrelevantresultsfromamulticenterstudy AT jaconp defibrillationtestingduringsicdimplantationhowrelevantresultsfromamulticenterstudy AT badencon defibrillationtestingduringsicdimplantationhowrelevantresultsfromamulticenterstudy AT marquiec defibrillationtestingduringsicdimplantationhowrelevantresultsfromamulticenterstudy AT ollitraultp defibrillationtestingduringsicdimplantationhowrelevantresultsfromamulticenterstudy AT beharn defibrillationtestingduringsicdimplantationhowrelevantresultsfromamulticenterstudy AT khattarp defibrillationtestingduringsicdimplantationhowrelevantresultsfromamulticenterstudy AT carabellia defibrillationtestingduringsicdimplantationhowrelevantresultsfromamulticenterstudy AT veniers defibrillationtestingduringsicdimplantationhowrelevantresultsfromamulticenterstudy AT defayep defibrillationtestingduringsicdimplantationhowrelevantresultsfromamulticenterstudy |