Key result
MRSS and SHFM scores identify ~20% of prophylactic ICD candidates who gain no survival benefit.
Why the study?
Many patients with symptomatic HF and low EF never use their prophylactic ICD or develop complications, making scoring systems essential to identify subgroups with differential survival benefit.
Can risk scoring systems, cardiac MRI, and genetic analysis predict survival benefit from prophylactic ICDs in patients with symptomatic heart failure and low ejection fraction?
Can risk scoring systems, cardiac MRI, and genetic analysis predict survival benefit from prophylactic ICDs in patients with symptomatic heart failure and low ejection fraction?
Risk scoring systems like MRSS and SHFM, along with CMR, can help identify subgroups of heart failure patients who derive the most survival benefit from prophylactic ICDs, aiding decision-making in borderline cases.
Current guidelines advocate for the use of prophylactic implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) for all patients with symptomatic heart failure (HF) with low ejection fraction (EF). As many patients will never use their device and some are prone to device-related complications, scoring systems for delineating subgroups with differential ICD survival benefits are crucial to maximize ICD benefit and mitigate complications. This review summarizes the main scores, including MADIT trial-based Risk Stratification Score (MRSS) and Seattle Heart Failure Model (SHFM), which are based on randomized trials with a control group (HF medication only) and validated on large cohorts of 'real-world' HF patients. Recent studies using cardiac MRI (CMR) to predict ventricular arrhythmia (VA) are mentioned as well. The review shows that most scores could not delineate sustained VA incidence, but rather mortality without prior appropriate ICD therapies. Multiple scores could identify high-risk subgroups with extremely high probability of early mortality after ICD implant. On the other hand, low-risk subgroups were defined, in whom a high ratio of appropriate ICD therapy versus death without prior appropriate ICD therapy was found, suggesting significant ICD survival benefit. Moreover, MRSS and SHFM proved actual ICD survival benefit in low- and medium-risk subgroups when compared with control patients, and no benefit in high-risk subgroups, consisting of 16-20% of all ICD candidates. CMR reliably identified areas of myocardial scar and 'channels', significantly associated with VA. We conclude that as for today, multiple scoring models could delineate patient subgroups that would benefit differently from prophylactic ICD. Due to their modest-moderate predictability, these scores are still not ready to be implemented into clinical guidelines, but could aid decision regarding prophylactic ICD in borderline cases, as elderly patients and those with multiple co-morbidities. CMR is a promising technique which might help delineate patients with a low- versus high-risk for future VA, beyond EF alone. Lastly, genetic analysis could identify specific mutations in a non-negligible percent of patients, and a few of these mutations were found to predict an increased arrhythmic risk.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rav et al. (2024) conducted a review in Symptomatic heart failure with low ejection fraction. Scoring systems for ICD survival benefit prediction (e.g., MRSS, SHFM) was evaluated. Scoring models like MRSS and SHFM can identify subgroups with differential survival benefits from prophylactic ICDs, showing no benefit in high-risk subgroups (16-20% of candidates).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: