Why the study?
There is uncertainty regarding the appropriate use of primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in older patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.
What are the trends in utilization and factors associated with mortality and ventricular arrhythmia hospitalization in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy receiving primary prevention ICDs?
What are the trends in utilization and factors associated with mortality and ventricular arrhythmia hospitalization in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy receiving primary prevention ICDs?
In patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy receiving primary prevention ICDs, utilization has increased over time, and factors like older age, lower LVEF, higher NYHA class, and history of NSVT are strongly associated with adverse outcomes.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Older age, NYHA III/IV, and LVEF ≤35% identify higher mortality risk in HCM primary-prevention ICD recipients; hypothesis-generating for refined stratification.
Background There is uncertainty about the appropriate use of primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) among older patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Methods and Results Patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy who received a primary prevention ICD between 2010 and 2016 were identified using the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry. Trends in ICD utilization and patient characteristics were assessed over time. Using linked Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Service claims data, Cox proportional hazard models assessed factors associated with mortality and postdischarge hospitalization for cardiac arrest/ventricular arrhythmia. Of 5571 patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, 1511 (27.1%) were ≥65 years old. ICD utilization increased over time in all age groups. There were no changes in the prevalence of risk factors for sudden cardiac death over time. The variables most strongly associated with postdischarge mortality were older age (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.80 [95% CI, 1.47-2.21]), New York Heart Association class (III/IV versus I/II aHR 2.17 [95% CI, 1.57-2.98]), and left ventricular ejection fraction (left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% versus >50% aHR 2.34 [95% CI, 1.58-3.48]; left ventricular ejection fraction 36%-50% versus >50% aHR 2.98 [95% CI, 2.02-4.40]), while history of nonsustained ventricular tachycardia (aHR 2.38 [95% CI, 1.62-3.51]) and New York Heart Association class (III/IV versus I/II aHR 1.84 [95% CI, 1.22-2.78]) were strongly associated with hospitalization for ventricular arrhythmia/cardiac arrest. Conclusions Primary prevention ICD utilization in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy increased over time, including among those ≥65 years old. Among older patients, the strongest risk factors for hospitalization for ventricular arrhythmia/cardiac arrest following ICD implantation were history of nonsustained ventricular tachycardia and New York Heart Association class.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Goldstein et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: