Key result
Secondary prevention ICDs linked to ~64% higher 3-year sustained ventricular arrhythmia incidence vs primary prevention.
Why the study?
Observational large-scale data on the incidence of arrhythmias in patients with up-to-date ICDs implanted according to current guidelines are scarce.
What is the incidence of arrhythmias and shocks in a modern cohort of patients with ICDs?
Observational (n=1,514)
Blinded outcome assessment
Yes
What is the incidence of arrhythmias and shocks in a modern cohort of patients with ICDs?
In a modern real-world cohort, ICD patients experience low rates of appropriate and inappropriate shocks, with lower risk of sustained ventricular arrhythmias in secondary prevention than previously reported in RCTs.
AIMS: The benefit of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) in patients at risk of sudden death has been established in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) using the ICD models available at the time. However, observational large-scale data on the incidence of arrhythmias in up-to-date ICDs implanted according to the current guidelines are scarce. The aim was to assess the incidence of arrhythmias in a large, current ICD population based on a blinded peer review of the detected episodes. METHODS AND RESULTS: UMBRELLA is a multicentre, observational registry of ICD patients followed by remote monitoring. Stored episodes were classified by a blinded committee of experts. Subgroup analyses were based on clinical profiles established by previous pivotal RCTs of ICDs. Of 1514 enrolled patients, 605 (39.9%) patients had 5951 episodes after 26 ± 17 months follow-up, being 3353 of them (56.3%) sustained ventricular arrhythmias (SVA), and 13.2% of SVA were self-terminated. Appropriate and inappropriate shocks occurred in 11.6 and 5% of patients, respectively. The 3 years cumulative incidence of SVA was 25% (95% CI: 21-28%) in primary prevention patients and 41% (95% CI: 36-47%) in secondary prevention patients (P < 0.001). Male gender, secondary prevention, and atrial fibrillation as basal rhythm were significantly related to a higher incidence of SVA. CONCLUSION: This real-world analysis suggests that modern ICD patients have a low rate of appropriate and inappropriate shocks. The risk of SVA in secondary prevention patients is less than what has been reported in RCTs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fontenla et al. (2015) conducted an observational in Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients (n=1,514). Secondary prevention ICD vs. Primary prevention ICD was evaluated on 3-year cumulative incidence of sustained ventricular arrhythmias (p=<0.001). Secondary prevention ICD patients had a higher 3-year cumulative incidence of sustained ventricular arrhythmias compared to primary prevention patients (41% vs 25%; P<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: