Key result
Antibradycardia pacing ICDs are linked to ~5-fold higher sudden death risk in transvenous recipients.
Why the study?
Little is known about terminal events and potential causes and mechanisms of sudden death in recipients of transvenous ICD systems.
What are the causes and predictors of sudden death in patients with transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator systems?
Observational (n=74)
Yes
What are the causes and predictors of sudden death in patients with transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator systems?
In transvenous ICD recipients, sudden death is predominantly tachyarrhythmic and associated with advanced age, reduced LVEF, and antibradycardia pacing ICDs, often occurring despite appropriate therapies.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Terminal events in transvenous ICD recipients merit case-level review; leaves open mechanisms of sudden death and requires prospective validation.
INTRODUCTION: Transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) systems are very effective in preventing sudden death; however, little is known about terminal events and potential causes and mechanisms of sudden death in recipients of these devices. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analyzed 74 cases of sudden death among patients enrolled in several clinical investigations of transvenous ICD systems. Eighty-one percent were men (mean age 68+/-10 years), 86% had coronary artery disease, mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 0.27+/-0.11, and two thirds presented with sustained ventricular tachycardia. The final event was witnessed in 65 patients (81%). Based on reported ICD shocks, documented rhythm, and/or postmortem device data, sudden death was deemed tachyarrhythmic in 49 cases (66%), nontachyarrhythmic in 12 (16%), and indeterminate in the remaining 13 (18%). Multivariate analysis of several clinical and nonclinical factors found advanced age (> 65 years, P = 0.03, odds ratio [OR] 1.75, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.05 to 2.92), reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (< 0.35, P < 0.01, OR 3.51, CI 1.66 to 7.40), and having antibradycardia pacing ICDs (P = 0.02, OR 5.26, CI 1.37 to 20.0) to be independent predictors of sudden death. One or more predisposing factors and/or potential causes of sudden death were identified in 21 patients (28%). CONCLUSION: In this select group of transvenous ICD recipients, (1) sudden death was associated with ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation in at least two thirds of cases, (2) nearly one third of patients had one or more factors, some device related, that could have been associated with sudden death, and (3) death ensued despite appropriate ICD therapies and, in many cases, external resuscitation, suggesting acute adverse events as common terminal factors.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pires et al. (1999) conducted an observational in Sudden death in transvenous ICD recipients (n=74). Antibradycardia pacing ICDs vs. ICDs without antibradycardia pacing was evaluated on Sudden death (OR 5.26, 95% CI 1.37-20.0, p=0.02). Among transvenous ICD recipients, having antibradycardia pacing ICDs was an independent predictor of sudden death (OR 5.26; 95% CI 1.37-20.0; P=0.02), alongside reduced LVEF and advanced age.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: