Near elimination of ventricular pacing in SafeR mode compared to DDD modes: a randomized study of 422 patients.

AIMS: SafeR performance versus DDD/automatic mode conversion (DDD/AMC) and DDD with a 250-ms atrioventricular (AV) delay (DDD/LD) modes was assessed toward ventricular pacing (Vp) reduction. METHODS: After a 1-month run-in phase, recipients of dual-chamber pacemakers without persistent AV block and persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) were randomly assigned to SafeR, DDD/AMC, or DDD/LD in a 1:1:1 design. The main endpoint was the percentage of Vp (%Vp) at 2 months and 1 year after randomization, ascertained from device memories. Secondary endpoints include %Vp at 1 year according to pacing indication and 1-year AF incidence based on automatic mode switch device stored episodes. RESULTS: Among 422 randomized patients (73.2±10.6 years, 50% men, sinus node dysfunction 47.4%, paroxysmal AV block 30.3%, bradycardia-tachycardia syndrome 21.8%), 141 were assigned to SafeR versus 146 to DDD/AMC and 135 to DDD/LD modes. Mean %Vp at 2 months was 3.4±12.6% in SafeR versus 33.6±34.7% and 14.0±26.0% in DDD/AMC and DDD/LD modes, respectively (P<0.0001 for both). At 1 year, mean %Vp in SafeR was 4.5±15.3% versus 37.9±34.4% and 16.7±28.0% in DDD/AMC and DDD/LD modes, respectively (P<0.0001 for both). The proportion of patients in whom Vp was completely eliminated was significantly higher in SafeR (69%) versus DDD/AMC (15%) and DDD/LD (45%) modes (P<0.0001 for both), regardless of pacing indication. The absolute risk of developing permanent AF or of remaining in AF for >30% of the time was 5.4% lower in SafeR than in the DDD pacing group (ns). CONCLUSIONS: In this selected patient population, SafeR markedly suppressed unnecessary Vp compared with DDD modes.

Arrhythmia discrimination by physician and defibrillator: importance of atrial channel.

BACKGROUND: Many ICD carriers experience inappropriate shocks, but the relative merits of dual- /single-chamber devices for arrhythmia discrimination still remain unclear. We explored possible advantages of the atrial data provided by dual-chamber implantable defibrillators (ICD) for discrimination of real-life supraventricular/ventricular tachyarrhythmias (SVT/VT). METHODS: 100 dual-chamber traces from 24 ICD were blindly reviewed in dual-chamber and simulated single-chamber (with/without discriminator data) reading modes by five electrophysiologists who determined chamber of origin and provided Likert-scale "confidence" ratings. We assessed 1) intra/interobserver concordance; 2) diagnostic accuracy, using expert diagnoses as a reference standard; 3) ROC curves of sensitivity/specificity of "likelihood perception" scores, generated by combining chamber-of-origin diagnostic judgments with Likert-scale "confidence" ratings. We also assessed diagnostic accuracy of automated discrimination by all possible dual-/single-chamber algorithm configurations. RESULTS: Interobserver concordance was "substantial" (modified Cohen kappa-test values for dual-/single-chamber, 0.79/0.68); intraobserver concordance "almost complete" (kappa ≥ 0.89). Dual-chamber mode provided best diagnostic sensitivity/specificity (99%/92%) and highest reader confidence (p<0.001). Area under ROC curves of sensitivity/specificity values for the "likelihood perception" score (representing electrophysiologists' perceptions of the likelihood that an episode was of ventricular origin) was highest in dual-chamber mode (0.98 vs. 0.93 for both single-chamber modes; p<0.001). Regarding automated discrimination, all four dual-chamber configurations conferred 100% sensitivity (specificity values ranged 39%-88%), whereas single-chamber configurations appeared inferior (best sensitivity/specificity combination, 89%/64%). CONCLUSIONS: Availability of the atrial channel helps in reducing inappropriate ICD therapies by providing relevant advantages in terms of both appropriate cardiologist's post-hoc discrimination of SVT/VT (improving program tailoring) and automated arrhythmia discrimination.

Outcome of cardioverter-defibrillator implant in patients with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy.

The aim of the present study was to investigate outcomes of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) treatment in patients with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC). We reviewed baseline/follow-up data of 15 consecutive ARVC patients (mean age 55 +/- 15 years) and 30 randomly drawn patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) (mean age 60 +/- 10 years) with matching durations of follow-up (all implanted with ICDs for primary/secondary prevention of sudden death). At implant, appropriate placement of the RV lead was more difficult in ARVC patients. During follow-up (median 41 months), appropriate interventions for any ventricular tachyarrhythmias occurred in 8 (53%) ARVC patients and 17 (57%) CAD patients, but the occurrence of high rate (>240 beats/min) ventricular tachyarrhythmias was higher in ARVC patients. Inappropriate ICD interventions occurred in 5 (33%) ARVC patients and 10 (33%) CAD patients. Lead-related adverse events requiring surgical revision occurred in 7 (47%) ARVC patients as compared with 4 (13%) CAD patients (P = 0.0004). While ICD implantation is highly effective for prevention of sudden death in ARVC, it does carry elevated burdens of long-term lead-related adverse events. These findings underline the need of careful follow-up in ARVC aimed at early recognition of complications that can impair ICD function.

Implications of cardiac resynchronization therapy and prophylactic defibrillator implantation among patients eligible for heart transplantation.

This study analyzed the relations and time-related changes in eligibility for cardiac resynchronization therapy and prophylactic defibrillator implantation in 161 potential candidates for heart transplantation. Although up to 62% of patients who fulfilled the severity criteria for heart transplantation were eligible for either device, this percentage increased as clinical/instrumental parameters of heart failure severity worsened.

Rhythm discrimination by rate branch and QRS morphology in dual chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillators.

Morphology Discrimination is a discriminator based on QRS morphology analysis that has been recently implemented in dual chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs). Detected events are initially classified according to median atrial and ventricular rates (Rate Branch). Then, a series of discriminators (Morphology Discrimination, Stability, Sudden Onset) analyze the rhythm according to specific criteria and the number of discriminators required for VT diagnosis (i.e., requiring "any" or "all" of the specific discriminators to indicate VT). The discriminating accuracy of the algorithm was evaluated in 645 detections recorded during the follow-up of 25 patients. The overall specificity for 397 supraventricular arrhythmias was 73.5% (292/397) with the tachycardia diagnosis criteria set to "any" and 90.9% (361/397) with the tachycardia diagnosis criteria set to "all." Sensitivity for VT was 100% and 98.7% (231/234) with the tachycardia diagnosis criteria set to "any" and "all," respectively. With the tachycardia diagnosis criteria set to "any," specificity for atrial fibrillation was 88.6%, for atrial flutter 40.3%, for atrial tachycardia 0%, and for sinus tachycardia 97.0%. With the tachycardia diagnosis criteria set to "all," specificity for atrial fibrillation was 92.40%, for atrial flutter 93.5%, for atrial tachycardia 54.7%, and for sinus tachycardia 99.0%. The contribution of Morphology Discrimination was crucial to improve the specificity of the Rate Branch algorithm. The implementation of Morphology Discrimination in a dual chamber ICD with Rate Branch rhythm classification allows the attainment of high specificity and high sensitivity for ventricular tachyarrhythmias.

Clinical relevance of atrial fibrillation/flutter, stroke, pacemaker implant, and heart failure in Emery-Dreifuss muscular dystrophy: a long-term longitudinal study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Emery-Dreifuss muscular dystrophy (EDMD) is a rare inherited disorder associated with cardiac involvement. We investigated the spectrum and relevance of the cardiac manifestations of EDMD, focusing on bradyarrhythmias and tachyarrhythmias (including atrial fibrillation/flutter), embolic stroke, and heart failure. METHODS AND RESULTS: Eighteen patients (age 42.8+/-19.6 years) with genetically confirmed X-linked (n=10, including 3 carriers) or autosomal dominant (n=8) EDMD were followed for a period ranging from 1 to 30 years in a research center for neuromuscular diseases and in a university cardiological department. Pacemakers were required by 10 of 18 (56%) patients for bradyarrhythmia, and related complications occurred in 3 of 10 (30%) cases. Atrial fibrillation/flutter developed in 11 of 18 (61%) patients, with atrial standstill subsequently occurring in 5 of 11 (45%) cases and embolic stroke (most often disabling) in 4 of 11 (36%). Heart failure requiring transplantation occurred in 1 of 18 (6%) patients, and asymptomatic left ventricular dysfunction in a further 3 (17%). No relationship was evident between neuromuscular impairment and cardiac involvement. CONCLUSIONS: Both X-linked and autosomal dominant EDMD patients risk not only bradyarrhythmia (requiring pacemaker implant) but also atrial fibrillation/flutter, which often anticipates atrial standstill and can cause disabling embolic stroke at a relatively young age. Antithromboembolic prophylaxis has to be recommended in EDMD patients with atrial fibrillation/flutter or atrial standstill. With careful monitoring, survival after pacemaker implant may be long. Heart failure, which seems to occur only in a minority of patients, may be severe.