Why the study?
What are the factors determining the choice between subcutaneous and transvenous ICDs in Poland compared to other European countries?
What are the factors determining the choice between subcutaneous and transvenous ICDs in Poland compared to other European countries?
S-ICD is underutilized in Poland compared to other European countries, and is primarily reserved for patients with advanced heart failure, prior infections, or lack of venous access rather than young age.
S-ICD underused in Poland with selection favoring advanced HF versus other Europe; leaves open regional determinants of device choice.
BACKGROUND: Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) may be an alternative to transvenous ICD (TV-ICD). AIM: We sought to evaluate factors determining the choice of S-ICD vs. TV-ICD in Polish patients in comparison to other European countries. METHODS: All consecutive patients who underwent TV-ICD or S-ICD implantation in centres participating in the European Heart Rhythm Association prospective snapshot survey were included. RESULTS: During an eight-week study period, 429 patients were recruited, including 136 (31.7%) ICD patients from Poland (eight with S-ICD). In comparison to other European centres, the proportion of S-ICD implantations in Poland was lower (7% vs. 26%, p < 0.001), whereas the ratio of cardiac resynchronisation therapy defibrillator implantations was higher (43% vs. 26%; p < 0.001). Subjects receiving S-ICD in Poland were more often over 75 years old (25% vs. 0%, p < 0.001), in New York Heart Association class II (87.5% vs. 29.4%, p = 0.001), with chronic kidney disease (37.5% vs. 5.9%, p = 0.003), and with lower left ventricular ejection fraction (32% [14%-50%] vs. 50% [25%-60%], p = 0.04), compared to other European countries. Additionally, in comparison to subjects from other European centres, Polish patients were significantly more often implanted with S-ICD due to prior infection (37.5% vs. 1.5%, p < 0.001) and a lack of venous access (25% vs. 0%, p < 0.001), whereas the largest subset of patients in other European countries were implanted with S-ICD because of young age (50% vs. 25%, p = NS). CONCLUSIONS: The main reasons leading to S-ICD implantations in Polish patients differ from the indications adopted in other European countries. In Poland, patients referred for TV-ICD or S-ICD implantation had more advanced heart failure and more comorbidities in comparison to subjects from other European countries. S-ICD is still underused in Polish patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jędrzejczyk‐Patej et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: