RESUMO
BACKGROUND: In patients with Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy (HCM) S-ICD is usually the preferred option as pacing is generally not indicated. However, limited data are available on its current practice adoption and long-term follow-up. METHODS: Consecutive HCM patients with S-ICD implanted between 2013 and 2021 in 3 international centers were enrolled in this observational study. Baseline, procedural and follow-up data were regularly collected. Efficacy and safety were compared with a cohort of HCM patients implanted with a tv-ICD. RESULTS: Seventy patients (64% males) were implanted with S-ICD at 41 ± 15 years, whereas 168 patients with tv-ICD at 49 ± 16 years. For S-ICD patients, mean ESC SCD risk score was 4,5 ± 1.9%: 25 (40%) at low-risk, 17 (27%) at intermediate and 20 (33%) at high-risk. Patients were followed-up for 5.1 ± 2.3 years. Two patients (0.6 per 100-person-years, vs 0.4 per 100 person-years with tv-ICD, p = 0.45) received an appropriate shock on VF, 17 (24%) were diagnosed with de-novo AF. Inappropriate shocks occurred in 4 patients (1.2 per 100-person-years, vs 0.9 per 100 person-years with tv-ICD, p = 0.74), all before Smart-Pass algorithm implementation. Four patients experienced device-related adverse events (1.2 per 100-person-years, vs 1 per 100 person-years with tv-ICD, p = 0.35%). CONCLUSIONS: S-ICDs were often implanted in patients with an overall low-intermediate ESC SCD risk, reflecting both the inclusion of additional risk markers and a lower decision threshold. S-ICDs in HCM patients followed for over 5 years showed to be effective in conversion of VF and safe. Greater scrutiny may be required to avoid overtreatment in patients with milder risk profiles.
