Cargando…
Device-related complications in subcutaneous versus transvenous ICD: a secondary analysis of the PRAETORIAN trial
BACKGROUND: The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) is developed to overcome lead-related complications and systemic infections, inherent to transvenous ICD (TV-ICD) therapy. The PRAETORIAN trial demonstrated that the S-ICD is non-inferior to the TV-ICD with regard to the com...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9748587/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36030464 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehac496 |
_version_ | 1784849855243354112 |
---|---|
author | Knops, Reinoud E Pepplinkhuizen, Shari Delnoy, Peter Paul H M Boersma, Lucas V A Kuschyk, Juergen El-Chami, Mikhael F Bonnemeier, Hendrik Behr, Elijah R Brouwer, Tom F Kaab, Stefan Mittal, Suneet Quast, Anne-Floor B E van der Stuijt, Willeke Smeding, Lonneke de Veld, Jolien A Tijssen, Jan G P Bijsterveld, Nick R Richter, Sergio Brouwer, Marc A de Groot, Joris R Kooiman, Kirsten M Lambiase, Pier D Neuzil, Petr Vernooy, Kevin Alings, Marco Betts, Timothy R Bracke, Frank A L E Burke, Martin C de Jong, Jonas S S G Wright, David J Jansen, Ward P J Whinnett, Zachary I Nordbeck, Peter Knaut, Michael Philbert, Berit T van Opstal, Jurren M Chicos, Alexandru B Allaart, Cornelis P Borger van der Burg, Alida E Dizon, Jose M Miller, Marc A Nemirovsky, Dmitry Surber, Ralf Upadhyay, Gaurav A Weiss, Raul de Weger, Anouk Wilde, Arthur A M Olde Nordkamp, Louise R A |
author_facet | Knops, Reinoud E Pepplinkhuizen, Shari Delnoy, Peter Paul H M Boersma, Lucas V A Kuschyk, Juergen El-Chami, Mikhael F Bonnemeier, Hendrik Behr, Elijah R Brouwer, Tom F Kaab, Stefan Mittal, Suneet Quast, Anne-Floor B E van der Stuijt, Willeke Smeding, Lonneke de Veld, Jolien A Tijssen, Jan G P Bijsterveld, Nick R Richter, Sergio Brouwer, Marc A de Groot, Joris R Kooiman, Kirsten M Lambiase, Pier D Neuzil, Petr Vernooy, Kevin Alings, Marco Betts, Timothy R Bracke, Frank A L E Burke, Martin C de Jong, Jonas S S G Wright, David J Jansen, Ward P J Whinnett, Zachary I Nordbeck, Peter Knaut, Michael Philbert, Berit T van Opstal, Jurren M Chicos, Alexandru B Allaart, Cornelis P Borger van der Burg, Alida E Dizon, Jose M Miller, Marc A Nemirovsky, Dmitry Surber, Ralf Upadhyay, Gaurav A Weiss, Raul de Weger, Anouk Wilde, Arthur A M Olde Nordkamp, Louise R A |
author_sort | Knops, Reinoud E |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) is developed to overcome lead-related complications and systemic infections, inherent to transvenous ICD (TV-ICD) therapy. The PRAETORIAN trial demonstrated that the S-ICD is non-inferior to the TV-ICD with regard to the combined primary endpoint of inappropriate shocks and complications. This prespecified secondary analysis evaluates all complications in the PRAETORIAN trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: The PRAETORIAN trial is an international, multicentre, randomized trial in which 849 patients with an indication for ICD therapy were randomized to receive an S- ICD (N = 426) or TV-ICD (N = 423) and followed for a median of 49 months. Endpoints were device-related complications, lead-related complications, systemic infections, and the need for invasive interventions. Thirty-six device-related complications occurred in 31 patients in the S-ICD group of which bleedings were the most frequent. In the TV-ICD group, 49 complications occurred in 44 patients of which lead dysfunction was most frequent (HR: 0.69; P = 0.11). In both groups, half of all complications were within 30 days after implantation. Lead-related complications and systemic infections occurred significantly less in the S-ICD group compared with the TV-ICD group (P < 0.001, P = 0.03, respectively). Significantly more complications required invasive interventions in the TV-ICD group compared with the S-ICD group (8.3% vs. 4.3%, HR: 0.59; P = 0.047). CONCLUSION: This secondary analysis shows that lead-related complications and systemic infections are more prevalent in the TV-ICD group compared with the S-ICD group. In addition, complications in the TV-ICD group were more severe as they required significantly more invasive interventions. This data contributes to shared decision-making in clinical practice. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9748587 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97485872022-12-15 Device-related complications in subcutaneous versus transvenous ICD: a secondary analysis of the PRAETORIAN trial Knops, Reinoud E Pepplinkhuizen, Shari Delnoy, Peter Paul H M Boersma, Lucas V A Kuschyk, Juergen El-Chami, Mikhael F Bonnemeier, Hendrik Behr, Elijah R Brouwer, Tom F Kaab, Stefan Mittal, Suneet Quast, Anne-Floor B E van der Stuijt, Willeke Smeding, Lonneke de Veld, Jolien A Tijssen, Jan G P Bijsterveld, Nick R Richter, Sergio Brouwer, Marc A de Groot, Joris R Kooiman, Kirsten M Lambiase, Pier D Neuzil, Petr Vernooy, Kevin Alings, Marco Betts, Timothy R Bracke, Frank A L E Burke, Martin C de Jong, Jonas S S G Wright, David J Jansen, Ward P J Whinnett, Zachary I Nordbeck, Peter Knaut, Michael Philbert, Berit T van Opstal, Jurren M Chicos, Alexandru B Allaart, Cornelis P Borger van der Burg, Alida E Dizon, Jose M Miller, Marc A Nemirovsky, Dmitry Surber, Ralf Upadhyay, Gaurav A Weiss, Raul de Weger, Anouk Wilde, Arthur A M Olde Nordkamp, Louise R A Eur Heart J Fast Track CONGRESS BACKGROUND: The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) is developed to overcome lead-related complications and systemic infections, inherent to transvenous ICD (TV-ICD) therapy. The PRAETORIAN trial demonstrated that the S-ICD is non-inferior to the TV-ICD with regard to the combined primary endpoint of inappropriate shocks and complications. This prespecified secondary analysis evaluates all complications in the PRAETORIAN trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: The PRAETORIAN trial is an international, multicentre, randomized trial in which 849 patients with an indication for ICD therapy were randomized to receive an S- ICD (N = 426) or TV-ICD (N = 423) and followed for a median of 49 months. Endpoints were device-related complications, lead-related complications, systemic infections, and the need for invasive interventions. Thirty-six device-related complications occurred in 31 patients in the S-ICD group of which bleedings were the most frequent. In the TV-ICD group, 49 complications occurred in 44 patients of which lead dysfunction was most frequent (HR: 0.69; P = 0.11). In both groups, half of all complications were within 30 days after implantation. Lead-related complications and systemic infections occurred significantly less in the S-ICD group compared with the TV-ICD group (P < 0.001, P = 0.03, respectively). Significantly more complications required invasive interventions in the TV-ICD group compared with the S-ICD group (8.3% vs. 4.3%, HR: 0.59; P = 0.047). CONCLUSION: This secondary analysis shows that lead-related complications and systemic infections are more prevalent in the TV-ICD group compared with the S-ICD group. In addition, complications in the TV-ICD group were more severe as they required significantly more invasive interventions. This data contributes to shared decision-making in clinical practice. Oxford University Press 2022-10-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9748587/ /pubmed/36030464 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehac496 Text en © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Cardiology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com |
spellingShingle | Fast Track CONGRESS Knops, Reinoud E Pepplinkhuizen, Shari Delnoy, Peter Paul H M Boersma, Lucas V A Kuschyk, Juergen El-Chami, Mikhael F Bonnemeier, Hendrik Behr, Elijah R Brouwer, Tom F Kaab, Stefan Mittal, Suneet Quast, Anne-Floor B E van der Stuijt, Willeke Smeding, Lonneke de Veld, Jolien A Tijssen, Jan G P Bijsterveld, Nick R Richter, Sergio Brouwer, Marc A de Groot, Joris R Kooiman, Kirsten M Lambiase, Pier D Neuzil, Petr Vernooy, Kevin Alings, Marco Betts, Timothy R Bracke, Frank A L E Burke, Martin C de Jong, Jonas S S G Wright, David J Jansen, Ward P J Whinnett, Zachary I Nordbeck, Peter Knaut, Michael Philbert, Berit T van Opstal, Jurren M Chicos, Alexandru B Allaart, Cornelis P Borger van der Burg, Alida E Dizon, Jose M Miller, Marc A Nemirovsky, Dmitry Surber, Ralf Upadhyay, Gaurav A Weiss, Raul de Weger, Anouk Wilde, Arthur A M Olde Nordkamp, Louise R A Device-related complications in subcutaneous versus transvenous ICD: a secondary analysis of the PRAETORIAN trial |
title | Device-related complications in subcutaneous versus transvenous ICD: a secondary analysis of the PRAETORIAN trial |
title_full | Device-related complications in subcutaneous versus transvenous ICD: a secondary analysis of the PRAETORIAN trial |
title_fullStr | Device-related complications in subcutaneous versus transvenous ICD: a secondary analysis of the PRAETORIAN trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Device-related complications in subcutaneous versus transvenous ICD: a secondary analysis of the PRAETORIAN trial |
title_short | Device-related complications in subcutaneous versus transvenous ICD: a secondary analysis of the PRAETORIAN trial |
title_sort | device-related complications in subcutaneous versus transvenous icd: a secondary analysis of the praetorian trial |
topic | Fast Track CONGRESS |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9748587/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36030464 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehac496 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT knopsreinoude devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT pepplinkhuizenshari devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT delnoypeterpaulhm devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT boersmalucasva devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT kuschykjuergen devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT elchamimikhaelf devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT bonnemeierhendrik devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT behrelijahr devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT brouwertomf devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT kaabstefan devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT mittalsuneet devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT quastannefloorbe devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT vanderstuijtwilleke devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT smedinglonneke devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT develdjoliena devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT tijssenjangp devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT bijsterveldnickr devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT richtersergio devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT brouwermarca devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT degrootjorisr devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT kooimankirstenm devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT lambiasepierd devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT neuzilpetr devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT vernooykevin devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT alingsmarco devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT bettstimothyr devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT brackefrankale devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT burkemartinc devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT dejongjonasssg devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT wrightdavidj devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT jansenwardpj devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT whinnettzacharyi devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT nordbeckpeter devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT knautmichael devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT philbertberitt devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT vanopstaljurrenm devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT chicosalexandrub devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT allaartcornelisp devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT borgervanderburgalidae devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT dizonjosem devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT millermarca devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT nemirovskydmitry devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT surberralf devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT upadhyaygaurava devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT weissraul devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT dewegeranouk devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT wildearthuram devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial AT oldenordkamplouisera devicerelatedcomplicationsinsubcutaneousversustransvenousicdasecondaryanalysisofthepraetoriantrial |