Why the study?
While the S-ICD is emerging as a suitable option for most ICD candidates, open issues regarding its sensing algorithm remain.
Does the type of coronary syndrome (STEMI, NSTE-ACS, CCS) and revascularization status affect the success rate of S-ICD automated screening?
Observational (n=75)
Does the type of coronary syndrome (STEMI, NSTE-ACS, CCS) and revascularization status affect the success rate of S-ICD automated screening?
Effect estimate: OR 10.68 (95% CI 2.77-41.38)
Absolute Event Rate: 95% vs 19%
p-value: p=0.001
Acute ischemic events, particularly STEMI, significantly impair S-ICD automated screening success, but this impairment resolves after percutaneous revascularization.
BACKGROUND: The Subcutaneous-ICD (S-ICD) is emerging as a suitable option for most ICD candidates, however some open issues regarding the sensing algorithm still remain. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to examine the performance of the S-ICD sensing algorithm in patients hospitalized for ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) or chronic coronary syndrome (CCS), before and after revascularization. METHODS: We performed a S-ICD automated screening on 75 patients, 21 hospitalized for STEMI, 23 for NSTE-ACS and 31 for CCS, before and after percutaneous revascularization, regardless their eligibility to ICD implantation. RESULTS: Patients did not differ in clinical, electrocardiographic and echocardiographic parameters. Rates of screening pass were significantly lower in STEMI patients compared to NSTE-ACS and CCS (5% vs 56.7% vs 81% respectively, p < .0001). The viability of the primary vector was lower in STEMI patients compared to NSTE-ACS and CCS (33% vs 56% vs 71%, p .027 respectively). After revascularization, there were no more significant differences between groups. Pairing subjects at baseline and after revascularization, STEMI subjects percentages of screening success were respectively 5% and 81% (p < .001) and the rates of primary vector viability were 33% and 81% (p .002). STEMI was the only independent predictor of screening failure at multivariate logistic regression analysis (odds ratio 10.68 confidence interval 2.77-41.38, p = .001). CONCLUSION: The performance of the S-ICD and possible malfunction detections in the context of an acute ischemic event deserve further evaluation. Adequate patient selection and the development of dynamic device programming are warranted.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Narducci et al. (2021) conducted an observational in Acute coronary syndromes (STEMI, NSTE-ACS) and chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) (n=75). STEMI (exposure) vs. NSTE-ACS and CCS was evaluated on S-ICD automated screening failure (OR 10.68, 95% CI 2.77-41.38, p=0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: