Key result
Intraoperative supine PRAETORIAN score shows ~98% concordance with conventional standing assessment for S-ICD positioning.
Why the study?
The usefulness of assessing the PRAETORIAN score intraoperatively in the supine position to predict optimal S-ICD placement has not yet been established.
Does intraoperative supine PRAETORIAN score assessment accurately match conventional standing assessment for predicting defibrillation failure risk in patients undergoing S-ICD implantation?
Observational (n=124)
No
Does intraoperative supine PRAETORIAN score assessment accurately match conventional standing assessment for predicting defibrillation failure risk in patients undergoing S-ICD implantation?
Intraoperative supine PRAETORIAN score assessment exhibits 98% concordance with conventional standing assessment in a Japanese cohort, validating it as a reliable tool to guide optimal real-time S-ICD positioning.
Supports intraoperative supine PRAETORIAN scoring feasibility; leaves open impact on defibrillation outcomes pending prospective validation.
Background The PRAETORIAN score (PS) estimates the risk of defibrillation failure after subcutaneous implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator (S‐ICD) implantation based on postoperative chest radiography in the standing position. However, the usefulness of assessing the PS in the supine position intraoperatively has not yet been established. Methods We evaluated conventional (standing) and intraoperative supine PS in 124 consecutive Japanese patients undergoing S‐ICD implantation. Changes between conventional and supine PS values were analyzed in two ways: (1) the presence of any difference in the absolute PS values regardless of the risk category, and (2) changes in clinically relevant risk categories for conversion failure (low, intermediate, or high risk). Predictors of discordance between the two assessments were also investigated. Results The median conventional PS was 30; 116 and 8 patients were classified as having low and intermediate risk of conversion failure, respectively. Numerical differences between the conventional and supine PS values were observed in 13 patients. However, clinically meaningful risk reclassification occurred in only two patients, suggesting that intraoperative supine PS assessment may underestimate PRAETORIAN score–based risk classification in a small subset of patients. Among patients with numerical PS changes, supine PS was significantly lower than conventional PS. An elevated BMI was strongly associated with PS discordance. Exploratory receiver operating characteristic curve analysis identified a BMI cutoff of 25.6 kg/m 2 for discriminating patients with numerical PS discordance. Conclusions Intraoperative supine PS assessment shows excellent concordance with conventional standing PS and may provide a practical tool for confirming appropriate system positioning in most Japanese patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yamazaki et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) implantation (n=124). Intraoperative supine PRAETORIAN score assessment vs. Conventional standing PRAETORIAN score assessment was evaluated on Concordance in PRAETORIAN score risk stratification categories (low vs. intermediate or high risk of conversion failure) between intraoperative supine and conventional standing assessments. Intraoperative supine PRAETORIAN score assessment demonstrated 98% concordance in risk stratification with conventional standing assessment, supporting its feasibility to confirm S-ICD positioning.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: