Long Detection Programming in Single-Chamber Defibrillators Reduces Unnecessary Therapies and Mortality: The ADVANCE III Trial.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the effects of programming a long detection in single-chamber (VVI) implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) in the multicenter prospective ADVANCE III (Avoid DeliVering TherApies for Non-sustained Arrhythmias in ICD PatiEnts III) trial. BACKGROUND: Programming strategies may reduce unnecessary ICD shocks and their adverse effects but to date have been described only for dual-chamber ICDs. METHODS: A total of 545 subjects (85% male; atrial fibrillation 25%, left ventricular ejection fraction 31%, ischemic etiology 68%, secondary prevention indications 32%) receiving a VVI ICD were randomized to long detection (30 of 40 intervals) or standard programming (18 of 24 intervals) based on device type, atrial fibrillation history, and indication. In both arms, antitachycardia pacing (ATP) therapy during charging was programmed for episodes with cycle length 320 to 200 ms and shock only for cycle length <200 ms. Wavelet and stability functions enabled. Therapies delivered were compared using a negative binomial regression model. RESULTS: A total of 267 patients were randomized to long detection and 278 to the control group. Median follow-up was 12 months. One hundred twelve therapies (shocks and ATP) occurred in the long detection arm versus 257 in the control arm, for a 48% reduction with 30 of 40 intervals (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.36 to 0.76; p = 0.002). In the long detection arm, overall shocks were reduced by 40% compared to the control arm (48 vs. 24; 95% CI: 0.38 to 0.94; p = 0.026) and appropriate shocks by 51% (34 vs. 74; 95% CI: 0.26 to 0.94; p = 0.033). Syncopal events did not differ between arms, but survival improved in the long detection arm. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients implanted with a VVI ICD, programming with the long detection interval significantly reduced appropriate therapies, shocks, and all-cause mortality. (Avoid DeliVering TherApies for Non-sustained Arrhythmias in ICD PatiEnts III [ADVANCEIII]; NCT00617175).

Different impact of long-detection interval and anti-tachycardia pacing in reducing unnecessary shocks: data from the ADVANCE III trial.

AIMS: A long-detection interval (LDI) (30/40 intervals) has been proved to be superior to a standard-detection interval (SDI) (18/24 intervals) in terms of reducing unnecessary implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapies. To better evaluate the different impact of LDI and anti-tachycardia pacing (ATP) on reducing painful shocks, we assessed all treated episodes in the ADVANCE III trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 452 fast (200 ms < cycle length ≤ 320 ms) arrhythmic episodes were recorded: 284 in 138 patients in the SDI arm and 168 in 82 patients in the LDI arm (106/452 inappropriate detections). A total of 346 fast ventricular tachycardias (FVT) were detected in 169 patients: 208 in 105 patients with SDI and 138 in 64 patients with LDI. Setting LDI determined a significant reduction in appropriate but unnecessary therapies [208 in SDI vs. 138 in LDI; incidence rate ratio (IRR): 0.61 (95% CI 0.45-0.83), P = 0.002]. Anti-tachycardia pacing determined another 52% reduction in unnecessary shocks [208 in SDI with hypothetical shock-only programming vs. 66 in LDI with ATP; IRR: 0.37 (95% CI 0.25-0.53, P < 0.001)]. The efficacy of ATP in terminating FVT was 63% in SDI and 52% in LDI (P = 0.022). No difference in the safety profile (acceleration/degeneration and death/cardiovascular hospitalizations) was observed between the two groups. CONCLUSION: The combination of LDI and ATP during charging is extremely effective and significantly reduces appropriate but unnecessary therapies. The use of LDI alone yielded a 39% reduction in appropriate but unnecessary therapies; ATP on top of LDI determined another 52% reduction in unnecessary shocks. The strategy of associating ATP and LDI could be considered in the majority of ICD recipients.

Efficacy of long detection interval implantable cardioverter-defibrillator settings in secondary prevention population: data from the Avoid Delivering Therapies for Nonsustained Arrhythmias in ICD Patients III (ADVANCE III) trial.

BACKGROUND: Three trials demonstrated recently that a long detection window reduces implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy in primary prevention patients. Avoid Delivering Therapies for Nonsustained Arrhythmias in ICD Patients III (ADVANCE III) was the only trial that enrolled both primary and secondary prevention patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Of the 1902 patients enrolled in the ADVANCE III trial, 477 received a defibrillator for secondary prevention; 248 patients were randomly assigned to a long detection setting (30 of 40 intervals) and 229 to the nominal setting (18 of 24 intervals) for ventricular arrhythmias with cycle length ≤ 320 ms. Eight-five percent of patients were men, with a mean age of 65 ± 12 years, a previous history of ventricular fibrillation in 37% of the cases, and a mean ejection fraction of 38 ± 13%. The ICD device mix was 37% single chamber, 47% dual chamber, and 16% triple chamber. Over a median period of 12 months, the long detection period was associated with a 25% reduction in the number of overall therapies (115.6 versus 86.8 per 100 patient-years; incidence rate ratio, 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.93; P=0.008) and a 34% reduction in the number of shocks (rate per 100 patient-years, 51.2 versus 38.1; incidence rate ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-0.89; P=0.007). Appropriate therapies (89.7 versus 67.7; incidence rate ratio, 0.77; 95% confidence interval, 0.60-0.97; P=0.029) and appropriate shocks (37.1 versus 28.1; incidence rate ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.93; P=0.018) were also reduced. CONCLUSIONS: ADVANCE III is the first randomized trial to assess a long detection window setting in ICDs in both primary and secondary prevention populations and demonstrates a reduction of overall therapies and shocks in the subgroup of secondary prevention patients. These data suggest that even the secondary prevention population may benefit from programming that combines a long detection period with antitachycardia pacing during charging. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www/clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00617175.

Effect of long-detection interval vs standard-detection interval for implantable cardioverter-defibrillators on antitachycardia pacing and shock delivery: the ADVANCE III randomized clinical trial.

IMPORTANCE: Using more intervals to detect ventricular tachyarrhythmias has been associated with reducing unnecessary implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapies. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether using 30 of 40 intervals to detect ventricular arrhythmias (VT) (long detection) during spontaneous fast VT episodes reduces antitachycardia pacing (ATP) and shock delivery more than 18 of 24 intervals (standard detection). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized, single-blind, parallel-group trial that enrolled 1902 primary and secondary prevention patients (mean [SD] age, 65 [11] years; 84% men; 75% primary prevention ICD) with ischemic and nonischemic etiology undergoing first ICD implant at 1 of 94 international centers (March 2008-December 2010). INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to programming with long- (n = 948) or standard-detection (n = 954) intervals. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Total number of ATPs and shocks delivered for all episodes (primary outcomes) and inappropriate shocks, mortality, and syncopal rate (secondary outcomes). RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 12 months (interquartile range, 11-13), long-detection group had 346 delivered therapies (42 therapies per 100 person-years, 95% CI, 38-47) vs 557 in the standard-detection group (67 therapies per 100 person-years [95% CI, 62-73]; incident rate ratio [IRR], 0.63 [95% CI, 0.51-0.78]; P < .001). The long- vs the standard-detection group experienced 23 ATPs per 100 person-years (95% CI, 20-27) vs 37 ATPs per 100 person-years (95% CI, 33-41; IRR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.47-0.72]; P < .001); 19 shocks per 100 person-years (95% CI, 16-22) vs 30 shocks per 100 person-years (95% CI, 26-34; IRR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.59-1.01]; P = .06), with a significant difference in the probability of therapy occurrence (P < .001); and a reduction in first occurrence of inappropriate shock (5.1 per 100 patient-years [95% CI, 3.7-6.9] vs 11.6 [95% CI, 9.4-14.1]; IRR, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.36-0.85]; P = .008). Mortality (5.5 [95% CI, 4.0-7.2] vs 6.3 [95% CI, 4.8-8.2] per 100 patient-years; HR, 0.87; P = .50) and arrhythmic syncope rates (3.1 [95% CI, 2.6-4.6] vs 1.9 [95% CI, 1.1-3.1] per 100 patient-years; IRR, 1.60 [95% CI, 0.76-3.41]; P = .22) did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients receiving an ICD, the use of a long- vs standard-detection interval resulted in a lower rate of ATP and shocks, and inappropriate shocks. This programming strategy may be an appropriate alternative. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00617175.

Influence of time between last myocardial infarction and prophylactic implantable defibrillator implant on device detections and therapies. "Routine Practice" data from the SEARCH MI registry.

BACKGROUND: A multicenter European Registry, SEARCH-MI, was instituted in the year 2002 in order to assess patients' outcomes and ICD interventions in patients with a previous MI and depressed LV function, treated with an ICD according to MADIT II results. In this analysis, we evaluate the influence of the time elapsed between last myocardial infarction (MI) and prophylactic cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implant on device activations. METHODS: 643 patients with left ventricular dysfunction (mean LVEF 26 ± 5%) and NYHA class I-III were prospectively followed for 1.8 ± 1.2 years in a multicenter registry. The population was divided into 3 groups according to the time between last MI and ICD implant: [1] from 40 days to less than 1.5 years; [2] from 1.5 to less than 7 years and [3] at least 7 years. RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of ventricular tachyarrhymias and appropriate device therapy (ATP or shock) were higher in patients implanted longer time from last MI (Gray's Test p=0.002 and p=0.013 respectively). No significant differences were seen in all cause mortality (Gray's Test p=0.618) or sudden cardiac death across the MI stratification groups (Gray's Test p=0.663). CONCLUSIONS: Patients implanted with an ICD longer after the MI have a higher chance of presenting ventricular tachyarrhythmias and appropriate ICD therapy, while no differences were seen in overall mortality. These observations may be important for improving patient targeting in sudden death prevention.

BIVentricular versus right ventricular antitachycardia pacing to terminate ventricular tachyarrhythmias in patients receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy: the ADVANCE CRT-D Trial.

BACKGROUND: This multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled, parallel trial compares the efficacy of biventricular (BIV) versus right ventricular (RV) antitachycardia pacing (ATP) in terminating all kinds of ventricular tachycardia (VT). METHODS: Five hundred twenty-six patients implanted with a cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator (CRT-D) device were enrolled and randomized 1:1 to either BIV (266) or RV (260) ATP (single burst 8 pulse, 88% coupling interval) and were followed up for 12 months. RESULTS: During 12 months' follow-up, 1,077 ventricular episodes in 180 patients were detected and classified: 634 true VTs divided into 69 ventricular fibrillation (VF) (11%), 202 fast ventricular tachycardia (FVT) (32%), and 363 VT (57%). A comparable first ATP efficacy (BIV 65% vs RV 68%, P = .59) was observed in FVT + VT, in VT zone (BIV 62% vs RV 71%, P = .25), and in FVT zone (BIV 71% vs RV 61%, P = .34). A trend toward lower accelerations during ATP applied to FVT was observed in the BIV group (3.5% BIV vs 10.2% RV, P = .163). No syncope/presyncope occurred during ATP for FVT in the BIV group versus 4 events (3.2%) in the RV group (P = .016). biventricular ATP was more effective in treating FVT in coronary artery disease (CAD) patients (P = .032), whereas both modalities presented similar efficacy in patients with non-CAD etiology (P = .549). CONCLUSIONS: Antitachycardia pacing is effective in patients implanted with a CRT-D device. No significant differences in efficacy emerged between BIV- and RV-delivered ATP in the general population, whereas BIV ATP seems to present a safer profile in ischemic patients.

Prospective multicenter randomized trial of fast ventricular tachycardia termination by prolonged versus conventional anti-tachyarrhythmia burst pacing in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients-Atp DeliVery for pAiNless ICD thErapy (ADVANCE-D) Trial results.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the trial was to quantify and compare the efficacy of two different sequences of burst anti-tachycardia pacing (ATP) strategies for the termination of fast ventricular tachycardia. METHODS: The trial was prospective, multicenter, parallel and randomized, enrolling patients with an indication for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation. RESULTS: From February 2004, 925 patients were randomized and followed-up for 12 months. Eight pulses ATP terminated 64% of episodes vs. 70% in the 15-pulse group (p = 0.504). Fifteen pulses proved significantly better in patients without a previous history of heart failure (p = 0.014) and in patients with LVEF >or= 40% (p = 0.016). No significant differences between groups were observed with regard to syncope/near-syncope occurrence. CONCLUSION: In the general population, 15-pulse ATP is as effective and safe as eight-pulse ATP. The efficacy of ATP on fast ventricular arrhythmias confirmed once more the striking importance of careful device programming in order to reduce painful shocks.

A randomized study to compare ramp versus burst antitachycardia pacing therapies to treat fast ventricular tachyarrhythmias in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators: the PITAGORA ICD trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs), antitachycardia pacing (ATP) is highly effective in terminating fast ventricular tachycardias (FVTs) and lowers the use of high-energy shocks, without increasing the risk of arrhythmia acceleration or syncope. METHODS AND RESULTS: The aim of the PITAGORA ICD trial was to randomly compare 2 ATP strategies (88% coupling interval burst versus 91% coupling interval ramp, both 8 pulses) in terms of ATP efficacy, arrhythmia acceleration, and syncope. Two hundred six ICD patients (83% male, 67+/-11 years) were enrolled. FVT episodes with cycle lengths between 240 and 320 ms were treated by 1 ATP sequence and, in the event of failure, by shocks. Over a median follow-up of 36 months, 829 spontaneous ventricular tachyarrhythmia episodes were detected in 79 patients. Episode review identified 595 episodes as true ventricular arrhythmias in 72 patients; devices classified 111 (18.7%) episodes as VF, 216 (36.3%) as FVT, and 268 (45.0%) as VT. Fifty-six patients had 214 treated FVT episodes-2 FVTs self-terminated before ATP release; 44 (79%) of these had at least 1 effective ATP intervention, and 34 (61%) were spared ICD shocks. Burst terminated 100 of 133 (75.2%) FVT episodes, whereas ramp terminated 44 of 81 (54.3%; P=0.015). Acceleration occurred in 9 of 214 (4.2%) FVT episodes treated: 6 episodes in 3 ramp patients and 3 episodes in 3 burst patients. Two patients-1 in each group-suffered 1 syncopal event associated to a nonterminated FVT episode. CONCLUSIONS: Burst is significantly more efficacious than ramp in terminating FVT episodes. As the first therapy for FVT episodes, ATP carries a low risk of acceleration or syncopal events.

Primary prevention implantation of cardioverter defibrillator without defibrillation threshold testing: 2-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Even though the intraoperative threshold testing of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) may cause hemodynamic impairment or be unfeasible, it is still considered required standard practice at the time of implantation. We compared the outcome of ICD recipients who underwent defibrillation threshold testing (DFT) with that of patients in whom no testing was performed. METHODS: A total of 291 subjects with ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy received transvenous ICDs between January 2000 and December 2004 in five Italian cardiology centers. In two centers, DFT was routinely performed in 137 patients (81% men; mean age 69+/-9 years; mean ejection fraction 26+/-4%) (DFT group), while three centers never performed DFT in 154 patients (90% men; mean age 69+/-9 years; mean ejection fraction 27+/-5%) (no-DFT group). RESULTS: We compared total mortality, total cardiovascular mortality, sudden cardiac death (SCD), and spontaneous episodes of ventricular arrhythmia (sustained ventricular tachycardia, VT, and ventricular fibrillation, VF) between these groups 2 years after implantation (median 23 months, 25th-75th percentile, 12-44 months). On comparing the DFT and no-DFT groups, we found an overall mortality rate of 20% versus 16%, cardiovascular mortality of 13% versus 10%, SCD of 3% versus 0.6%, VT incidence of 8% versus 10%, and VF incidence of 6% versus 4% (no significant difference in any comparison). CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences in the incidence of clinical outcomes considered emerged between no-DFT and DFT groups. These results should be confirmed in larger prospective studies.

Clinical and arrhythmic outcomes after implantation of a defibrillator for primary prevention of sudden death in patients with post-myocardial infarction cardiomyopathy: The Survey to Evaluate Arrhythmia Rate in High-risk MI patients (SEARCH-MI).

AIMS: To evaluate clinical and arrhythmic outcomes in post-infarction cardiomyopathy patients implanted with a defibrillator (ICD) for primary prevention of sudden death. METHODS AND RESULTS: The SEARCH-MI registry is a European multi-centre, prospective, observational study enrolling patients after myocardial infarction, chronic left ventricular dysfunction and an ICD implanted for primary prevention of sudden death. Data on 556 patients with at least one recorded follow-up are presented. Survey to Evaluate Arrhythmia Rate in High-risk MI (SEARCH-MI) patients were sicker than those enrolled in MADIT-II with higher New York Heart Association class and left bundle branch block. Total mortality was 10.4%. Close to one-third (30%) of patients experienced episodes of sustained ventricular arrhythmia. One-quarter (23%) received at least one appropriate therapy and 10% inappropriate therapy. Gender (25% males vs. 5% females, P = 0.0009) and history of non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (24% with vs. 18% without P = 0.037) were predictive of appropriate ventricular therapy. CONCLUSION: SEARCH-MI represents the current clinical management of post-MI patients with left ventricular dysfunction indicated to defibrillator implant for primary prevention. European routine clinical practice was influenced by landmark trials and guidelines which impacted on the implantation of cardiac resynchronization therapy in over 25% of such patients. Non-sustained ventricular tachycardia identifies subjects with a higher incidence of appropriate ICD therapy.

Avoid delivering therapies for nonsustained fast ventricular tachyarrhythmia in patients with implantable cardioverter/defibrillator: the ADVANCE III Trial.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this investigation is to evaluate whether a prolonged detection interval for life threatening ventricular tachyarrhythmia (VT) is able to reduce therapies (Rx) delivered by an implantable cardioverter/defibrillator (ICD). Until now, only the PREPARE trial demonstrated a reduction of ICD Rx in a cohort of primary prevention patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: The ADVANCE III study is a prospective, randomized, parallel trial with 2 arms evaluating different intervals to detect (NID), i.e., 18/24 (as currently used) versus 30/40. The primary endpoint is to demonstrate a 20% reduction of ICD Rx (antitachycardia pacing or shocks) delivered to terminate spontaneous VT with a cycle length < or =320 ms in patients with Class I-IIA indication for ICD therapy, regardless of cardiac resynchronization capabilities. The worldwide investigation started in spring 2008 and is expected to be finished in 2011. CONCLUSIONS: The ADVANCE III trial is the first randomized investigation evaluating the reduction of ICD Rx for fast VT due to a prolongation of NID in a general ICD patient cohort.