Comparison of ventricular arrhythmia burden, therapeutic interventions, and survival, in patients < 75 and patients >or= 75 years of age treated with implantable cardioverter defibrillators.

AIM: Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) reduce arrhythmic mortality in a wide range of patients with poor left ventricular (LV) function. However, whether ICD therapy is equally effective in younger and older patients remains uncertain. To address this question, we compared ICD-documented ventricular tachyarrhythmia burden in patients < 75 years of age (Group 1) and >or= 75 years of age (Group 2). METHODS: Data were obtained from 208 consecutive ICD-treated patients: 159 Group 1 (mean age 59 +/- 12), and 49 Group 2 (mean age 79 +/- 3). Demographic and clinical features including presenting arrhythmias, LV ejection fraction, and nature of heart disease were similar. Medications were comparable except that amiodarone use was more frequent in Group 2. RESULTS: The numbers of combined ventricular tachycardia (VT) and ventricular fibrillation (VF) episodes per month were 0.4 +/- 2 and 0.3 +/- 2 for groups 1 and 2, respectively (P = 0.7). Individually, VT episodes per month were 0.4 +/- 2 and 0.3 +/- 2 (P = 0.7) and VF episodes per month were 0.003 +/- 0.01 and 0.03 +/- 0.2 (P = 0.2) for the two groups, respectively. The mean duration and average cycle length of arrhythmias were 3.1 +/- 20.4 s and 275 +/- 119 ms in Group 1, and 6 +/- 45 s and 285 +/- 114 ms in Group 2 (P values, 0.6 and 0.8). The mean time between the ICD implantation and the first episode of a device-treated arrhythmia was comparable in the two groups. Thirty-six patients died during follow-up; 22 (14%) Group 1 and 14 (29%) Group 2 (P = 0.02), almost exclusively on a non-sudden cardiac basis. Thus, despite higher ultimate mortality in older patients, both the nature and characteristics of spontaneous arrhythmia recurrence, and the time to first apparently beneficial therapy, were similar during follow-up in the two groups. CONCLUSION: In terms of reversing potentially life-threatening arrhythmias, the rationale for ICD therapy is comparable in older and younger individuals.

Prostate brachytherapy seed migration to the right coronary artery associated with an acute myocardial infarction.

PURPOSE: We report a case of prostate brachytherapy seed migration to the right coronary artery (RCA) associated with an acute myocardial infarction (AMI). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A 69-year-old male was diagnosed with Prostate Adenocarcinoma Stage II (T(1c)N0M0) in October 2003. He underwent percutaneous transperineal interstitial permanent prostate brachytherapy with the implantation of 94 loose iodine (125I) seeds under transrectal ultrasound guidance on 15 December, 2003. The implantation was designed to deliver a minimum dose of 144 Gy. RESULTS: Postimplant pelvic radiography at Day 30 showed five seeds missing. No chest radiography was done until hospital admission on October 10, 2005 for AMI. Cine radiography from cardiac catheterization revealed 86 metallic seeds remaining in the pelvic region, 4 that had migrated to the lungs (2 left and 2 right) and 2 to the heart. Two seeds were unaccounted for. Of the two cardiac seeds, one was lodged in the right ventricle endocardium and the other in the midsegment of the RCA at the site of a severely stenotic lesion that resulted in an AMI. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first case of brachytherapy seed migration to the RCA associated with an AMI. Echocardiography before brachytherapy seed implantation might be considered in patients felt to be at high risk for cardiac shunting.

Impact of upgrade to cardiac resynchronization therapy on ventricular arrhythmia frequency in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators.

OBJECTIVES: This study compared cardiac resynchronization therapy's (CRT) impact on ventricular tachyarrhythmia susceptibility in patients who, due to worsening heart failure (HF) symptoms, underwent a replacement of a conventional implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) with a CRT-ICD. BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy is an effective addition to conventional treatment of HF in many patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction. However, whether CRT-induced improvements in HF status also reduce susceptibility to life-threatening arrhythmias is less certain. METHODS: Clinical and ICD electrogram data were evaluated in 18 consecutive ICD patients who underwent an upgrade to CRT-ICD. Pharmacologic HF therapy was not altered during follow-up. The definition of ventricular tachycardia (VT) and ventricular fibrillation (VF) for each patient was as determined by device programming. Statistical comparisons used paired t tests. RESULTS: Findings were recorded during two time periods: 47 +/- 21 months (range 24 to 70 months) before and 14 +/- 2 months (range 9 to 18 months) after CRT upgrade. At time of upgrade, patient age was 69 +/- 11 years and ejection fraction was 21 +/- 8%. Before CRT the frequency of VT, VF, and appropriate ICD shocks was 0.31 +/- 1.23, 0.047 +/- 0.083, and 0.048 +/- 0.085 episodes/month/patient, respectively. After CRT-ICD, VT and VF arrhythmia burdens and frequency of shocks were respectively 0.13 +/- 0.56, 0.001 +/- 0.004, and 0.003 +/- 0.016 episodes/month/patient (p = 0.59, 0.03, and 0.05 vs. pre-CRT). CONCLUSIONS: Arrhythmia frequency and number of appropriate ICD treatments were reduced after upgrade to CRT-ICD for HF treatment. Thus, apart from hemodynamic benefits, CRT may also ameliorate ventricular tachyarrhythmia susceptibility in HF patients.

Comparison of ventricular arrhythmia frequency in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy versus nonischemic cardiomyopathy treated with implantable cardioverter defibrillators.

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators have been shown to provide similar survival benefits for patients who have left ventricular dysfunction due to ischemic heart disease and for subsets of patients who have nonischemic cardiomyopathy. Findings in this study extend these observations by showing that patients who have ischemic or nonischemic heart disease and receive implantable cardioverter defibrillators not only have comparable mortality rates but also similar tachyarrhythmia frequencies during follow-up; further, mortality and tachyarrhythmia outcomes are independent of initial arrhythmia indication.

Biventricular implantable cardioverter defibrillators improve survival compared with biventricular pacing alone in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction.

INTRODUCTION: Biventricular cardiac pacemakers provide important hemodynamic benefit in selected patients with heart failure and severe left ventricular (LV) dysfunction. Nevertheless, these patients remain at high mortality risk. To address this issue, we examined mortality outcome in patients with heart failure treated with biventricular pacemakers alone and those treated with biventricular implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs). METHODS AND RESULTS: The study population consisted of 126 consecutive patients with LV dysfunction and heart failure who received either a biventricular ICD (n = 62) or a biventricular pacemaker (n = 64) between January 1998 and December 2002. A minimum 12 months of follow-up was obtained in all survivors. ICD indications were conventional in all patients. Kaplan-Meier actuarial method and log rank statistics were used to calculate and compare survival rates in both groups. Comparison of mortality rates utilized Chi-square test. The two groups had similar clinical and demographic features, LV ejection fraction, and medication use. Average follow-up times were 13 +/- 11.8 months (range 4-60) and 18 +/- 13.2 months (range 0.5-53) for biventricular ICD and pacemaker groups, respectively. Overall mortality rate was significantly lower in the biventricular ICD group (13%, 8 deaths) compared to the pacemaker group (41%, 26 deaths) (P = 0.01). Further, the predominant survival benefit for ICD-treated patients becomes evident after the first 12 months of follow-up. CONCLUSION: The findings in this study, although necessarily limited in their interpretation by the absence of treatment randomization, suggest that biventricular ICDs offer a survival benefit compared to biventricular pacing alone. Furthermore, this benefit may be most apparent if other clinical factors do not preclude patient survival >1 year postimplant.

Comparison of automatic and patient-activated arrhythmia recordings by implantable loop recorders in the evaluation of syncope.

The implantable loop recorder (ILR) has become an important tool for evaluating patients with recurrent syncope. Second generation ILRs have the ability to record events either automatically (auto activated) or by manual activation (patient activated). In an attempt to evaluate the relative utility of the auto-activation feature, this study stratified ILR events based on a grading system designed to classify detected arrhythmias in terms of the likelihood that they provide a diagnostic basis for syncope. Data from 50 patients (27 men, mean age 64 +/- 22 years) who underwent ILR implantation for investigation of recurrent syncope were assessed. The arrhythmia syncope grading system used 5 levels, ranging from grade 0 (rhythm recorded during syncope) to grade IV (rhythm unlikely to provide a diagnostic basis for syncope). Thirty-six patients (72%) demonstrated > or =1 auto-activated or patient-activated recording during a follow-up of 14.3 +/- 7.9 months. Of the total of 529 recordings, 223 (194 after auto activation [86.9%]) from 30 patients showed a rhythm abnormality. Auto activation was more effective for documenting arrhythmias that were recorded during syncope or those with highest probability of providing a syncope diagnosis (grade 0 or I arrhythmias: auto activated, 19 patients, patient activated, 3 patients). Times from ILR implantation to first grade 0 and grade I arrhythmias were 13.4 and 7.8 months, respectively. The ILR auto-activation feature proved effective in providing a high probability basis for syncope (196 arrhythmia recordings [87.1%] in 27 patients) and enhanced the diagnostic effectiveness of the device compared with patient activation alone (29 arrhythmia recordings [12.9%] in 6 patients).

Improved survival of cardiac transplantation candidates with implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy: role of beta-blocker or amiodarone treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Survival in patients awaiting cardiac transplantation is poor due to the severity of left ventricular dysfunction and the susceptibility to ventricular arrhythmia. The potential role of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) in this group of patients has been the subject of increasing interest. The aims of this study were to ascertain whether ICDs improve the survival rate of patients on the waiting list for cardiac transplantation and whether any improvement is independent of concomitant beta-blocker or amiodarone therapy. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data comprised findings from 310 consecutive patients at a single center who were evaluated and deemed suitable for cardiac transplantation and placed on the waiting list. Kaplan-Meier actuarial approach was used for survival analysis. Survival analysis censored patients at time of transplantation or death. Of the 310 patients, 111 (35.8%) underwent successful cardiac transplantation and 164 (52.9%) died while waiting; 35 patients remain on the waiting list. Fifty-nine (19%) patients had ICD placement for ventricular arrhythmias prior to or after being listed. Twenty-nine (49.1%) ICD patients survived until cardiac transplantation, 13 (22%) patients died, and 17 (28.8%) remain on the waiting list. Among non-ICD patients, 82 (32.7%) received transplants, 151 (60.2%) died, and 18 (7.2%) remain on the waiting list. Survival rates at 6 months and 1, 2, 3, and 4 years were better for all ICD patients compared to non-ICD patients (log-rank x2, P = 0.0001). By multivariate analysis, ICD therapy and beta-blocker treatment were the strongest predictors of survival. Further, ICD treatment was associated with improved survival independent of concomitant treatment with beta-blocker or amiodarone. Among ICD and non-ICD patients treated with a beta-blocker or amiodarone, survivals at the 1 and 4 years were 93% vs 69% and 57% vs 32%, respectively (log-rank x2, P = 0.003). CONCLUSION: ICD therapy is associated with improved survival in high-risk cardiac transplant candidates, and ICD benefit appears to be independent of concomitant treatment.