Why the study?
It was unclear whether the long-term decrease in ICD R-wave amplitude in ARVC and HCM patients is higher than in patients without structural heart disease.
Does right ventricular apex ICD lead implantation maintain stable intracardiac parameters over 5 years in patients with ARVC and HCM compared to controls without structural heart disease?
Observational (n=50)
No
Does right ventricular apex ICD lead implantation maintain stable intracardiac parameters over 5 years in patients with ARVC and HCM compared to controls without structural heart disease?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In patients with ARVC, right ventricular apex ICD leads show significant deterioration in R-wave amplitude over 5 years compared to controls, suggesting the RV septum may be a preferable implantation site.
Patients with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) implanted with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) may show a large decrease in R-wave amplitude during long-term follow-up. However, it is unclear whether this decrease is higher in these patients than in those without structural heart disease. This study investigated ICD-lead intracardiac parameters over a long duration in patients with ARVC and HCM and compared these parameters with those of a control group. We included 50 patients (mean age, 55.2 ± 17.2 years; 26% female) with ICD leads in the right ventricular apex, and compared 7 ARVC and 14 HCM patients with 29 control patients without structural heart disease. ICD-lead parameters, including R-wave amplitude, pacing threshold, and impedance during follow-up, were compared. The difference in these parameters between the time of implantation and year 5 were also compared. There were no significant differences in R-wave amplitude at implantation among the 3 groups. The change in R-wave amplitude between the time of implantation and year 5 was significantly greater in the ARVC group (-3.3 ± 5.4 mV, P = 0.012) in comparison to the control group (1.3 ± 2.8 mV); the HCM group showed no significant difference (-0.4 ± 2.3 mV, P = 0.06). Thus, in the ARVC group, R-wave amplitude at year 5 was significantly lower than that in the control group (5.7 ± 4.8 mV versus 12.5 ± 4.5 mV, P = 0.001). In ARVC patients with ICDs, ventricular sensing is likely to deteriorate during long-term follow-up; however, in HCM patients, sensing may not deteriorate.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sagawa et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (n=50). Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) vs. No structural heart disease was evaluated on Change in R-wave amplitude between implantation and year 5 (mV) (p=0.012).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: