Key result
ICD eligibility in HCM is linked to ~439% higher risk of bradyarrhythmia requiring pacing.
Why the study?
Few studies have evaluated the incidence of bradyarrhythmia in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, particularly among those at risk for sudden cardiac death who are eligible for an implantable cardiac defibrillator.
Does eligibility for ICD implantation predict future symptomatic bradyarrhythmia requiring pacing therapy in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy?
Cohort (n=161)
No
Does eligibility for ICD implantation predict future symptomatic bradyarrhythmia requiring pacing therapy in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy?
Patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy who are eligible for ICD implantation, particularly for secondary prevention, have a significantly higher risk of developing symptomatic bradyarrhythmia requiring pacing therapy.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports closer bradyarrhythmia monitoring in ICD-eligible HCM patients; leaves open prospective validation before changing device strategies.
BACKGROUND: A few studies to evaluate an incidence of bradyarrhythmia in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) have been reported. METHODS: We enrolled 161 patients with HCM to evaluate their bradyarrhythmia risk, especially the risk of patients who were at risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD) and eligible for implantation of an implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD). We defined symptomatic bradyarrhythmia requiring a pacing therapy as a bradyarrhythmia event and collected the data on an occurrence of the event after the time of diagnosis of HCM. The incidence of bradyarrhythmia events was compared between patients with ICD indications (ICD-candidate group) and those without (non-ICD-candidate group). Furthermore, we investigated the associated factors with bradyarrhythmia events using a Cox proportional-hazards model. RESULTS: During 5.5 ± 4.4 years follow-up, bradyarrhythmia events occurred in 8% (13 patients) of whole patients, and in 15% of the ICD-candidate group (n = 74). In contrast, only 2 events (2%) occurred in the non-ICD-candidate group. The incidence of bradyarrhythmia in the ICD-candidate group was significantly higher than that in the non-ICD-candidate group (log-rank p = 0.015). In the ICD-candidate group, a Cox proportional-hazards model demonstrated that lower heart rate at the time of diagnosis (HR: 1.072, 95%CI: 1.012 to 1.135, p = 0.018), and an eligibility of ICD implantation for secondary prevention of SCD (HR: 9.092, 95%CI: 2.644 to 31.258, p < 0.001) were significantly associated with future bradyarrhythmia. CONCLUSIONS: HCM patients with eligibility for ICD implantation, especially for secondary prevention of SCD, more frequently suffered from bradyarrhythmia events.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nakasuka et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (n=161). Eligibility for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD-candidate) vs. Non-ICD-candidate was evaluated on Symptomatic bradyarrhythmia requiring pacing therapy (HR 5.387, 95% CI 1.188-24.430, p=0.029). Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy patients eligible for an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator had a significantly higher risk of bradyarrhythmia requiring pacing therapy compared to non-candidates (HR 5.387).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: