Key result
Defibrillation testing during S-ICD implantation was not associated with a significant difference in the primary combined arrhythmic outcome compared to no testing (p=0.656).
Why the study?
Guidelines recommend defibrillation testing during S-ICD implantation, but it is unnecessary in transvenous ICDs and real-world avoidance after S-ICD implantation is growing.
Does avoiding defibrillation testing impact arrhythmic outcomes or safety in patients undergoing S-ICD implantation?
Cohort (n=420)
Yes
Does avoiding defibrillation testing impact arrhythmic outcomes or safety in patients undergoing S-ICD implantation?
Avoiding defibrillation testing during S-ICD implantation does not appear to compromise the safety of defibrillation therapy or overall patient survival.
BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend defibrillation testing (DT) performance in patients with a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD), theoretically to reduce the amount of ineffective shocks. DT, however, has been proven unnecessary in transvenous ICD and real-world data show a growing trend in avoidance of DT after S-ICD implantation. METHODS: All patients undergoing S-ICD implant at nine associated Italian centers joining in the ELISIR registry (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04373876) were enrolled and classified upon DT performance. Long-term follow-up events were recorded and compared to report the long-term efficacy and safety of S-ICD implantations without DT in a real-world setting. RESULTS: A total of 420 patients (54.0 ± 15.5 years, 80.0% male) were enrolled in the study. A DT was performed in 254 (60.5%) patients (DT+ group), while in 166 (39.5%) was avoided (DT- group). Over a median follow-up of 19 (11-31) months, a very low rate (0.7%) of ineffective shocks was observed, and no significant differences in the primary combined arrhythmic outcome were observed between the two groups (p = .656). At regression analysis, the only clinical predictor associated with the primary combined outcome was S-ICD placement for primary prevention (odds ratio: 0.42; p = .013); DT performance instead was not associated with a reduction in primary outcome (p = .375). CONCLUSION: Implanting an S-ICD without DT does not appear to impact the safety of defibrillation therapy and overall patients' survival.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ricciardi et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) implantation (n=420). Defibrillation testing (DT) vs. No defibrillation testing (DT avoidance) was evaluated on Primary combined arrhythmic outcome (p=0.656). Defibrillation testing during S-ICD implantation was not associated with a significant difference in the primary combined arrhythmic outcome compared to no testing (p=0.656).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: