Abstract:Introduction Young patients have greater risks of longer-term complications including inappropriate therapy (IT) from Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators (ICD) than older ICD patients. In prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), these complications are critical in determining treatment thresholds. When comparing transvenous ICDs (TV), subcutaneous ICDs (SICD) may have different risks & benefits that define their relative utility. We investigated TV & SICD outcomes in a propensity matched cohort of HCM patients. Methods We used electronic health records in a retrospective study of HCM patients receiving an ICD between 2006-22 at tertiary centre. Indications for ICD implantation, including type of device, were determined by the treating cardiomyopathy team according to ESC guidance. All TV device types were included & eligibility for SICD included passing screening in at least 1 sensing vector. Outcome data included patients lost to follow-up until the last device check & patients who had both device types were included twice. Patients were censored after their first IT for an analysis of IT, & their first 'ICD complication' for that analysis. ICD complications are defined as all other complications that resulted in a re-intervention procedure (excl SICD battery advisory), or extra procedure at box change. The audit was registered with local institutional review board for ethical approval. Propensity scoring was used for stratification and covariate adjustment. Matching was conducted using the 12 baseline variables. Associations with IT, ICD complications and their composite were assessed using proportional hazard regression (Cox) models, with time to event starting at implant date. Univariable & multivariable regression analyses were used as appropriate. Hazard ratios (HRs) of 95% confidence intervals were estimated by fitting a model with the propensity score and dichotomous variable (TV vs SICD). A p value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Analyses were conducted using R- Version 2023.06.0+421. Results Mean age was 55±14.2 years with follow-up of 73±63 months; 70.7% were male. Of a total of 611 patients, with 469 in the TV group & 164 in the SICD. SICD patients had fewer complications, with no differences in IT across all and propensity matched analyses (CI 0.64), fig 1. Conclusion In HCM, when compared to TV, SICDs are associated with fewer ICD complications & not associated with more frequent IT. Intriguingly, there was a higher rate of IT with the first generation SICD, causing the wide IT errors at longer durations. Complications over long term follow up require more assessment, but the absence of TV lead intervention creates reduced risks for SICD complications. In HCM patients without pacing needs, SICDs may be preferred for HCM-SCD prevention. In addition, the lower risks associated with SICD could lead to lower treatment thresholds for people with elevated lifetime HCM-SCD risk.

Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation Outcomes In Patients With Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillators: A Case Series

Left ventricular assist device in the presence of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator: Data from a multicenter experience

Appropriate and Inappropriate ICD Shocks in Patients with LVADS: Prevalence, Associated Factors, and Etiologies

Inappropriate Shocks With Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator in a Young Patient: A Case Report

Shock Without Wires: A Look at Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Compared to Transvenous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator for Ventricular Arrhythmias

Feasibility of entirely subcutaneous ICD™ systems in patients with coronary artery disease

Outcomes of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in patients with a left ventricular assist device: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Ventricular Arrhythmias and Sudden Cardiac Death in Left Ventricular Assist Device Patients Without Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators

Real‐world data of patients affected by advanced heart failure treated with implantable cardioverter defibrillator and left ventricular assist device: Results of a multicenter observational study

Risk of Appropriate Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Therapies and Sudden Cardiac Death in Patients With Heart Failure With Improved Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction

Echocardiographic Predictors of Ventricular Arrhythmias in Patients With Left Ventricular Assist Devices and Implantable Cardioverter‐Defibrillator

Electrical storm after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation

Perioperative Safety and Early Patient and Device Outcomes Among Subcutaneous Versus Transvenous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Implantations : A Randomized, Multicenter Trial

Comparative outcomes of subcutaneous and transvenous cardioverter-defibrillators.

Short- and long-term adverse events in patients on temporary circulatory support before durable ventricular assist device: An IMACS registry analysis

Eligibility of cardiac resynchronization therapy patients for subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillators

long term follow up of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators (ICD) in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: is subcutaneous the way forward?

Long-term assist device patients admitted to ICU: Tips and pitfalls

Performance and Safety of the Extravascular Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Through Long-Term Follow-Up: Final Results From the Pivotal Study

A Rare Case of Left Ventricular Non-Compaction with Coronary Artery Anomaly Complicated by ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Subcutaneous Defibrillator Implantation

Early Stroke Following Durable Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD) Implantation: An Analysis of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Intermacs National Database