Key result
Holter-documented non-sustained ventricular tachycardia was modestly associated with an increased risk of first appropriate ICD therapy (HR 1.82) but not with ventricular fibrillation or mortality.
Why the study?
The prognostic significance of non-sustained ventricular tachycardia in Japanese patients receiving ICDs for primary prevention remained unclear.
Does the presence of non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT) predict appropriate ICD therapy or mortality in patients with structural heart disease receiving an ICD for primary prevention?
Observational (n=638)
Yes
Does the presence of non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT) predict appropriate ICD therapy or mortality in patients with structural heart disease receiving an ICD for primary prevention?
Hazard Ratio: 1.82 (95% CI 1.04–3.18)
p-value: p=0.035
NSVT has limited utility as a standalone predictor for appropriate ICD therapy or mortality in patients with reduced LVEF, challenging its role as a primary determinant for ICD indications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
NSVT on Holter has limited standalone prognostic value in primary-prevention ICD patients; supports current guidelines while leaving open refined risk models.
BACKGROUND: The prognostic significance of non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT) in Japanese patients receiving implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) for primary prevention remains unclear. This study aimed to verify the prognostic value of NSVT as recommended in the 2018 Japanese Circulation Society guideline. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analyzed 638 patients with structural heart disease who received an ICD or cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator for primary prevention in the Nippon Storm Study. Analysis 1 (n=429) evaluated the association between NSVT history and predefined endpoints in patients with ischemic heart disease (IHD) or non-ischemic heart disease (non-IHD) and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. Analysis 2 (n=357) assessed the prognostic impact of NSVT documented by Holter electrocardiography across 2 subgroups: Subgroup 1, IHD and non-IHD; and Subgroup 2, other cardiac diagnoses. Endpoints included appropriate ICD therapy, electrical storm, ventricular fibrillation (VF), shock therapy, and mortality. In Analysis 1, a history of NSVT was not significantly associated with appropriate ICD therapy or other major adverse outcomes. In Analysis 2, Holter-documented NSVT was independently associated only with appropriate ICD therapy (hazard ratio [HR] 1.82; 95% confidence interval 1.04-3.18; P=0.035). This association was significant in Subgroup 2, but not in Subgroup 1. CONCLUSIONS: NSVT was modestly associated (HR 1.82) with appropriate ICD therapy but not with VF or mortality, suggesting reconsideration of its clinical role.
Yasuoka et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Structural heart disease (n=638). Holter-documented non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT) vs. Absence of Holter-documented NSVT was evaluated on First appropriate ICD therapy (HR 1.82, 95% CI 1.04-3.18, p=0.035). Holter-documented non-sustained ventricular tachycardia was modestly associated with an increased risk of first appropriate ICD therapy (HR 1.82) but not with ventricular fibrillation or mortality.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: