Why the study?
Does high-rate cut-off ICD programming (shock-only >220 bpm) safely reduce ICD shocks in primary prevention patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction?
Does high-rate cut-off ICD programming (shock-only >220 bpm) safely reduce ICD shocks in primary prevention patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction?
High-rate cut-off ICD programming (shock-only >220 b.p.m.) in primary prevention patients with reduced LVEF appears safe over long-term follow-up and results in a low rate of deleterious shocks.
Supports long-term safety of high-rate cut-off programming in primary prevention; leaves open need for randomized confirmation of shock reduction.
AIMS: Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are efficient in reducing mortality in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction. High-rate cut-off programming may be effective in reducing appropriate and inappropriate therapies, but as the long-term consequences on morbidity and mortality remain unclear, it is underutilized. METHODS AND RESULTS: We prospectively studied 365 consecutive patients (mean age 60 ± 10 years), with ischaemic (63%) or non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy and left ventricular dysfunction (mean ejection fraction 25 ± 7%), who were implanted with an ICD in primary prevention of sudden cardiac death (41% single chamber, 31% dual chamber, and 28% biventricular). All devices were programmed with a shock-only zone over 220 beats per minute (b.p.m.) and a monitoring zone between 170 and 220 b.p.m. During a median follow-up of 40 months, 41 patients received appropriate shocks (11.2%) and 24 inappropriate shocks (6.6%). Then, 306 patients never experienced any ICD shock (84%). Inappropriate discharges were related to supraventricular tachyarrhythmia in 10 patients, and noise/oversensing in 14 patients. Ventricular tachycardia episodes, sustained or not, were recorded in the monitoring zone in 43 patients (11.8%). Seven of these patients were symptomatic (1.9%), without lethal consequence. Sixty-two patients (17%) died: 35 from end-stage heart failure, 1 from unexplained sudden death, and 26 from a documented non-cardiac cause. CONCLUSION: High-rate cut-off (220 b.p.m.) shock-only ICD programming, in primary prevention patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, appeared to be safe during a long-term follow-up. It also resulted in a very low rate of discharges, which are known to be deleterious in this population.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Clémenty et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: