The cross-section of mutual fund fee dispersion

Giuliano Iannotta,Marco A. Navone

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JBANKFIN.2011.09.013

2012-03-01

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Inappropriate Therapy and Shock Rates Between the Subcutaneous and Transvenous Implantable Cardiac Defibrillator: A Secondary Analysis of the PRAETORIAN Trial

Louise R.A. Olde Nordkamp,Shari Pepplinkhuizen,Abdul Ghani,Lucas V.A. Boersma,Juergen Kuschyk,Mikhael F. El-Chami,Elijah R. Behr,Tom F. Brouwer,Stefan Kaab,Suneet Mittal,Anne-Floor B.E. Quast,Willeke van der Stuijt,Lonneke Smeding,Jolien A. de Veld,Jan G.P. Tijssen,Nick R. Bijsterveld,Sergio Richter,Marc A. Brouwer,Joris R. de Groot,Kirsten M. Kooiman,Pier D. Lambiase,Petr Neuzil,Kevin Vernooy,Marco Alings,Timothy R. Betts,Frank A.L.E. Bracke,Martin C. Burke,Jonas S.S.G. de Jong,David J. Wright,Ward P.J. Jansen,Zachary I. Whinnett,Peter Nordbeck,Michael Knaut,Berit T. Philbert,Jurren M. van Opstal,Alexandru B. Chicos,Cornelis P. Allaart,Alida E. Borger van der Burg,Jose M. Dizon,Marc A. Miller,Dmitry Nemirovsky,Ralf Surber,Gaurav A. Upadhyay,Raul Weiss,Anouk de Weger,Arthur A.M. Wilde,Reinoud E. Knops,on behalf of the PRAETORIAN Investigators

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/circep.124.012836

2024-12-04

Circulation Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology

Abstract:Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology, Ahead of Print. BACKGROUND:Inappropriate therapy (IAT) is an undesirable side effect of implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) therapy. Early studies with the subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) showed relatively high inappropriate shock (IAS) rates. The PRAETORIAN trial demonstrated that the S-ICD is noninferior to the transvenous ICD (TV-ICD) with regard to the combined end point of IAS and complications. This secondary analyses evaluates all IAT in the PRAETORIAN trial.METHODS:This international, multicenter trial randomized 849 patients with an indication for ICD therapy between S-ICD (n=426) and TV-ICD therapy (n=423). ICD programming was mandated by protocol. All analysis were performed in the modified intention-to-treat population.RESULTS:In both groups 42 patients experienced IAT (48-month Kaplan-Meier estimated cumulative incidence, 9.9% and 10.1%, respectively; hazard ratio (HR), 0.99 [95% CI, 0.65–1.52];P=0.97). There was no significant difference in patients experiencing IAS between both groups (P=0.14). In the S-ICD group, 81 IAT episodes with 124 IAS and 1 inappropriate antitachycardia pacing occurred versus 89 IAT episodes with 130 IAS and 124 inappropriate antitachycardia pacing in the TV-ICD group. IAT episodes were most frequently caused by supraventricular tachycardias in the TV-ICD group (n=83/89) versus cardiac oversensing in the S-ICD group (n=40/81). In the TV-ICD group, a baseline heart rate >80 bpm (HR, 1.99 [95% CI, 1.05–3.76];P=0.03), a history of atrial fibrillation (HR, 2.66 [95% CI, 1.41–5.02];P=0.003), and smoking (HR, 2.46 [95% CI, 1.31–4.09];P=0.005) were independent predictors for IAT. A QRS duration >120 ms was an independent predictor for IAT caused by cardiac oversensing in the S-ICD group (HR, 3.13 [95% CI, 1.34–7.31];P=0.008). Post-IAS interventions significantly reduced IAS recurrence in both groups (P=0.046).CONCLUSIONS:There was no significant difference in IAT and IAS rates between the S-ICD and TV-ICD in a conventional ICD population, but causes and predictors for IAT differed between the devices. After the first IAS, an intervention significantly reduced the recurrence rate of IAS.REGISTRATION:URL:https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01296022.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
Lost bits: particle shedding with polyvinyl chloride intravenous administration sets

P. Subramanian,P. Ainsworth,J. Cassey,D. Phelan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-002-0753-z

2002-09-12

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

Kevin Willy,Markus Bettin,Florian Reinke,Nils Bögeholz,Christian Ellermann,Benjamin Rath,Patrick Leitz,Julia Köbe,Lars Eckardt,Gerrit Frommeyer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392-019-01455-5

Abstract:Background: The subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD™) is an important advance in device therapy for the prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD). Although current guidelines recommend S-ICD™ use, long-term data are still limited, especially in subgroups. Among several cardiac diseases that prone to SCD, coronary artery disease (CAD) carries several peculiarities that may hamper S-ICD™ therapy in this cohort. CAD can lead to an ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) with a reduced left-ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and bundle branch blocks, which can be difficult for ICD sensing and discrimination of arrhythmia. CAD is mainly driven by risk factors such as diabetes mellitus, which put these patients at an elevated risk for infectious complications of cardiac devices. Furthermore, in ICM myocardial scars are frequent and are a potential substrate for ventricular tachycardia, which may be accessible for antitachycardia pacing. At the moment, it remains unclear if there is a value of S-ICD™ therapy in this subgroup. Therefore, this study analysed patients with CAD. Materials and methods: All S-ICD™ patients with CAD as the main indication for ICD implantation (n = 45 patients) in our large-scaled single-center S-ICD™ registry (n = 249 patients) were included in this study. Baseline characteristics, appropriate and inappropriate shocks, and complications were documented in a mean follow-up of 22.5 ± 8.3 months. Results: Primary prevention of SCD was the indication for implantation of an S-ICD™ in 28 patients (62%). Of all 45 patients with an overall mean age of 58.1 ± 11.4 years, 40 were male (88%). The mean LVEF was 37.7 ± 12.6%. Three episodes of ventricular arrhythmia (one monomorphic, one polymorphic, one ventricular fibrillation) were adequately terminated in three patients (7%). In only one patient, oversensing resulting in an inappropriate shock was observed, which could be managed by changing the sensing vector. 15 of the examined 45 patients previously had a transvenous ICD, which was explanted due to system-related infections. In only two patients, S-ICD™ was changed to transvenous ICD because of the need of antibradycardia stimulation. There were no S-ICD™ system-related infections. Conclusion: The S-ICD™ seems to be a valuable option for the prevention of SCD in CAD patients. Patients with systemic infections of a transvenous ICD and, therefore, a need for an alternative might benefit from the absence of intracardiac leads as the S-ICD™ is safe and works flawlessly in these patients. Inadequate shock delivery was very rare, while every episode of ventricular arrhythmia was terminated by the first shock.
Granular computing: Common practices and mathematical models

T. Lin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/FUZZY.2008.4630705

2008-06-01

Abstract:A very general formal model is proposed, it formalize almost all the known examples.
Equal performance of the subcutaneous and transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator across all age groups in the PRAETORIAN trial

S Pepplinkhuizen,L R A Olde Nordkamp,J Kuschyk,H Bonnemeier,M F El-Chami,A De Weger,W Van Der Stuijt,L Smeding,N R Bijsterveld,S Richter,L V A Boersma,T R Betts,A A M Wilde,R E Knops

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae666.425

IF: 39.3

2024-10-30

European Heart Journal

Abstract:Introduction The subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) is developed to overcome lead-related complications and systemic infections, inherent to transvenous ICD (TV-ICD) therapy. In the PRAETORIAN trial the S-ICD proved to be non-inferior to the TV-ICD with regard to inappropriate shocks (IAS) and complications. However, the S-ICD is still mainly the preferred choice in young patients with a long life expectancy and therefore higher risk for lead-related complications. We aimed to evaluate the impact of age on complications and IAS between the S-ICD and TV-ICD. Methods The PRAETORIAN trial is an investigator-initiated, international, multicenter, randomized, two-arm noninferiority trial that was conducted in the United States and Europe. In total 849 patients with a class I or IIa indication for ICD therapy and no pacing indication were randomized to receive an S-ICD (N=426) or TV-ICD (N=423) and followed for a median of 49 months. We compare the occurrence of complications and IAS between increasing quartiles of age. Results Quartile 1 (Q1) consisted of 203 patients aged <55 (109 S-ICD, 94 TV-ICD), Q2 of 199 patients aged 55-62 (100 S-ICD, 99 TV-ICD), Q3 of 232 patients aged 63-69 (111 S-ICD, 121 TV-ICD) and Q4 of 215 patients aged ≥70 (106 S-ICD, 109 TV-ICD). Between the quartiles, there were no significant differences in occurrence of device-related complications (P = 0.32) or IAS (P = 0.66). In Q1, there were 15 (7.4%) complications (5 S-ICD, 10 TV-ICD) and 13 (6.4%) IAS (7 S-ICD, 6 TV-ICD), compared to 20 (10.1%) complications (7 S-ICD, 13 TV-ICD) and 17 (8.5%) IAS (9 S-ICD, 8 TV-ICD) in Q2, 22 (9.5%) complications (12 S-ICD, 10 TV-ICD) and 19 (8.2%) IAS (11 S-ICD, 8 TV-ICD) in Q3 and 18 (8.4%) complications (7 S-ICD, 11 TV-ICD) and 21 (9.8%) IAS (14 S-ICD, 7 TV-ICD) in Q4 (Figure 1.). Figure 2. shows forest plots of the hazard ratios per quartile. Conclusions The S-ICD performed equal to the TV-ICD with regard to IAS and complications between quartiles of age, making the S-ICD a good alternative across all age groups.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
First-Line Catheter Ablation of Monomorphic Ventricular Tachycardia in Cardiomyopathy Concurrent With Defibrillator Implantation: The PAUSE-SCD Randomized Trial

Roderick Tung,Yumei Xue,Minglong Chen,Chenyang Jiang,Dalise Y. Shatz,Stephanie Besser,Hongde Hu,Fa-Po Chung,Shiro Nakahara,Young-Hoon Kim,Kazuhiro Satomi,Lishui Shen,Erpeng Liang,Hongtao Liao,Kai Gu,Ruhong Jiang,Jian Jiang,Yuichi Hori,Jong-Il Choi,Akiko Ueda,Yuki Komatsu,Shuichiro Kazawa,Kyoko Soejima,Shih-Ann Chen,Akihiko Nogami,Yan Yao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.122.060039

IF: 37.8

2022-01-01

Circulation

Abstract:BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation as first-line therapy for ventricular tachycardia (VT) at the time of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation has not been adopted into clinical guidelines. Also, there is an unmet clinical need to prospectively examine the role of VT ablation in patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy, an increasingly prevalent population that is referred for advanced therapies globally. METHODS: We conducted an international, multicenter, randomized controlled trial enrolling 180 patients with cardiomyopathy and monomorphic VT with an indication for ICD implantation to assess the role of early, first-line ablation therapy. A total of 121 patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to ablation plus an ICD versus conventional medical therapy plus an ICD. Patients who refused ICD (n=47) were followed in a prospective registry after stand-alone ablation treatment. The primary outcome was a composite end point of VT recurrence, cardiovascular hospitalization, or death. RESULTS: Randomly assigned patients had a mean age of 55 years (interquartile range, 46-64) and left ventricular ejection fraction of 40% (interquartile range, 30%-49%); 81% were male. The underlying heart disease was ischemic cardiomyopathy in 35%, nonischemic cardiomyopathy in 30%, and arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy in 35%. Ablation was performed a median of 2 days before ICD implantation (interquartile range, 5 days before to 14 days after). At 31 months, the primary outcome occurred in 49.3% of the ablation group and 65.5% in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.35-0.96]; P=0.04). The observed difference was driven by a reduction in VT recurrence in the ablation arm (hazard ratio, 0.51 [95%CI, 0.29-0.90]; P=0.02). A statistically significant reduction in both ICD shocks (10.0% versus 24.6%; P=0.03) and antitachycardia pacing (16.2% versus 32.8%; P=0.04) was observed in patients who underwent ablation compared with control. No differences in cardiovascular hospitalization (32.0% versus. 33.7%; hazard ratio, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.43-1.56]; P=0.55) or mortality (8.9% versus 8.8%; hazard ratio, 1.40 [95% CI, 0.38-5.22]; P=0.62]) were observed. Ablation-related complications occurred in 8.3% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with cardiomyopathy of varied causes, early catheter ablation performed at the time of ICD implantation significantly reduced the composite primary outcome of VT recurrence, cardiovascular hospitalization, or death. These findings were driven by a reduction in ICD therapies.
The extravascular implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: The pivotal study plan

Ian Crozier,David O'Donnell,Lucas Boersma,Francis Murgatroyd,Jaimie Manlucu,Bradley P Knight,Ulrika Maria Birgersdotter-Green,Christophe Leclercq,Amy Thompson,Robert Sawchuk,Sarah Willey,Christopher Wiggenhorn,Paul Friedman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jce.15190

Abstract:Background: Transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillators (TV ICD) provide life-saving therapy for millions of patients worldwide. However, they are susceptible to several potential short- and long- term complications including cardiac perforation and pneumothorax, lead dislodgement, venous obstruction, and infection. The extravascular ICD system's novel design and substernal implant approach avoids the risks associated with TV ICDs while still providing pacing features and similar generator size to TV ICDs. Study design: The EV ICD pivotal study is a prospective, multicenter, single-arm, nonrandomized, premarket clinical study designed to examine the safety and acute efficacy of the system. This study will enroll up to 400 patients with a Class I or IIa indication for implantation of an ICD. Implanted subjects will be followed up to approximately 3.5 years, depending on when the patient is enrolled. Objective: The clinical trial is designed to demonstrate safety and effectiveness of the EV ICD system in human use. The safety endpoint is freedom from major complications, while the efficacy endpoint is defibrillation success. Both endpoints will be assessed against prespecified criteria. Additionally, this study will evaluate antitachycardia pacing performance, electrical performance, extracardiac pacing sensation, asystole pacing, appropriate and inappropriate shocks, as well as a summary of adverse events. Conclusion: The EV ICD pivotal study is designed to provide clear evidence addressing the safety and efficacy performance of the EV ICD System.
Pleuropericardial lesion in Q fever.

J. Caughey

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/BMJ.1.6074.1447

1977-06-04

British Medical Journal

Abstract:
Performance of Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (S-ICD) in Chinese Population with Primary Prevention Indications: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study

Yaodong Li,Yangxin Chen,Jingfeng Wang,Jian Xu,Ruogu Li,Zhaohui Qiu,Lingyun Jiang,Farong Shen,Shubin Jiang,Bin Li,Yingjie Chu,Lang He,Lijin Pu,Xuebin Han,Xianping Long,Xiaolin Xue,Jianhong Tao,Yongquan Wu,Tao Guo,Yiqiang Yuan,Xianqing Wang,Jiang Wang,Jing Xu,Yujie Zhao,Zhihui Zhang,Wei Hua,Yangang Su,Baopeng Tang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12659/msm.942747

2024-01-01

Medical Science Monitor

Abstract:BACKGROUND:International studies have shown that use of a subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) could reduce lead-related complications while maintaining adequate defibrillation performance; however, data from the Chinese population or other Asian groups are limited. MATERIAL AND METHODS:SCOPE is a prospective, multicenter, observational cohort study. Two hundred patients with primary prevention indication for sudden cardiac death (SCD), who are candidates for S-ICD, will be enrolled. From the same population, another 200 patients who are candidates for transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (TV-ICD) will be enrolled after being matched for age, sex, SCD high-risk etiology (ischemic cardiomyopathy, and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, ion channel disease, and other) and atrial fibrillation in a 1: 1 ratio with enrolled S-ICD patients. All the patients will be followed for 18 months under standard of care. RESULTS:The primary endpoint is proportion of patients free from inappropriate shock (IAS) at 18 months in the S-ICD group. The lower 95% confidence bound of the proportion will be compared with a performance goal of 90.3%, which was derived from the previous meta-analysis. The comparisons between S-ICD and TV-ICD on IAS, appropriate shock, and complications will be used as secondary endpoints without formal assumptions. CONCLUSIONS:This is the first prospective multicenter study focusing on the long-term performance of S-ICD in a Chinese population. By comparing with the data derived from international historical studies and a matched TV-ICD group, data from SCOPE will allow for the assessment of S-ICD in the Chinese population in a contemporary real-world implantation level and programming techniques, which will help us to further modify the device implantation and programming protocol in this specific population in the future.
The development of the extravascular defibrillator with substernal lead placement: A new Frontier for device-based treatment of sudden cardiac arrest

Amy E Thompson,Brett Atwater,Lucas Boersma,Ian Crozier,Gregory Engel,Paul Friedman,J Rod Gimbel,Bradley P Knight,Jaimie Manlucu,Francis Murgatroyd,David O'Donnell,Juergen Kuschyk,Paul DeGroot

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jce.15511

Abstract:Introduction: The extravascular implantable cardioverter-defibrillato (EV ICD) system with substernal lead placement is a novel nontransvenous alternative to current commercially available ICD systems. The EV ICD provides defibrillation and pacing therapies without the potential long-term complications of endovascular lead placement but requires a new procedure for implantation with a safety profile under evaluation. Methods: This paper summarizes the development of the EV ICD, including the preclinical and clinical evaluations that have contributed to the system and procedural refinements to date. Results: Extensive preclinical research evaluations and four human clinical studies with >140 combined acute and chronic implants have enabled the development and refinement of the EV ICD system, currently in worldwide pivotal study. Conclusion: The EV ICD may represent a clinically valuable solution in protecting patients from sudden cardiac death while avoiding the long-term consequences of transvenous hardware. The EV ICD offers advantages over transvenous and subcutaneous systems by avoiding placement in the heart and vasculature; relative to subcutaneous systems, EV ICD requires less energy for defibrillation, enabling a smaller device, and provides pacing features such as antitachycardia and asystole pacing in a single system.
Subcutaneous and Transvenous Defibrillators in Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy

Weijia Wang,Alessio Gasperetti,Crystal Tichnell,Brittney Murray,Harikrishna Tandri,Hugh Calkins,Samuel F. Sears,Cynthia A. James

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacep.2022.09.020

2023-03-01

Abstract:BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence guiding the selection between subcutaneous and transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) in patients with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) at risk for sudden death.OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare clinical and quality-of-life outcomes between transvenous and subcutaneous ICDs among patients with ARVC.METHODS: Patients with a subcutaneous ICD (n = 57) were matched to patients with a transvenous ICD (n = 88) based on sex, proband status, primary prevention or secondary prevention, monomorphic ventricular tachycardia before implantation, and year of implantation. Appropriate therapy for ventricular arrhythmia, inappropriate shocks, and complications were compared. Quality-of-life surveys were conducted annually.RESULTS: The matched cohort (median age of 35 years, 43% men, 78% proband, and 37% secondary prevention device) were prospectively followed for 5.1 ± 2.5 years. No significant difference was observed in the rate of appropriate ICD shocks. The subcutaneous group had more inappropriate shocks (23% vs 10%) and fewer procedure-related complications (4% vs 14%) than the transvenous group (P < 0.05). The association between ICD type and the composite of inappropriate shock and complication was not statistically significant (subcutaneous vs transvenous adjusted HR: 1.43; 95% CI: 0.72-2.84). A subcutaneous ICD was associated with more body image concerns and range of motion than a transvenous ICD (P < 0.05).CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ARVC receiving an ICD, the risk of inappropriate shocks from a subcutaneous ICD should be balanced against the significant vascular complication risk from a transvenous ICD. Patients with a subcutaneous ICD had more concerns for body image and range of motion.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
Transvenous versus subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillators in young cardiac arrest survivors

Matthew B Morton,Justin A Mariani,Peter M Kistler,Hitesh Patel,Aleksandr Voskoboinik

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/imj.16259

Abstract:Secondary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are indicated in young patients presenting with aborted sudden cardiac death (SCD) because of ventricular arrhythmias. Transvenous-ICDs (TV-ICDs) are effective, established therapies supported by evidence. The significant morbidity associated with transvenous leads led to the development of the newer subcutaneous-ICD (S-ICD). This review discusses the clinical considerations when selecting an ICD for the young patient presenting with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The major benefits of TV-ICDs are their ability to pace (antitachycardia pacing [ATP], bradycardia support and cardiac resynchronisation therapy [CRT]) and the robust evidence base supporting their use. Other benefits include a longer battery life. Significant complications associated with transvenous leads include pneumothorax and tamponade during insertion and infection and lead failure in the long term. Comparatively, S-ICDs, by virtue of having no intravascular leads, prevent these complications. S-ICDs have been associated with a higher incidence of inappropriate shocks. Patients with an indication for bradycardia pacing, CRT or ATP (documented ventricular tachycardia) are seen as unsuitable for a S-ICD. If venous access is unsuitable or undesirable, S-ICDs should be considered given the patient is appropriately screened. There is a need for further randomised controlled trials to directly compare the two devices. TV-ICDs are an effective therapy for preventing SCD limited by significant lead-related complications. S-ICDs are an important development hindered largely by an inability to pace. Young patients stand to gain the most from a S-ICD as the cumulative risk of lead-related complications is high. A clinical framework to aid decision-making is presented.
Personalized Screening Before Subcutaneous Cardioverter Defibrillator Implantation: Usefulness and Outcomes in Clinical Practice – The S-ICD Screening SIS Prospective Study

Maxime de Guillebon,Rodrigue Garcia,Stéphane Debeugny,Hugues Bader,Vincent Probst,Nicolas Bidegain,Kumar Narayanan,Jacques Mansourati,Aymeric Menet,Ollitrault Pierre,Christelle Marquié,Benoît Guy-Moyat,Pierre Mondoly,Philippe Chevallier,Nicolas Badenco,Nathalie Behar,Laurence Jesel-Morel,Pierre Bertrand,Nicolas Lellouche,Jean-Claude Deharo,Peggy Jacon,Frédéric Anselme,Serge Boveda,Eloi Marijon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2024.05.043

IF: 6.779

2024-05-29

Heart Rhythm

Abstract:(WC=244) Background Electrocardiographic (ECG) screening prior to S-ICD implantation is unsuccessful in around 10% of cases. A personalized screening method, by slightly moving the electrodes, to obtain a better R/T ratio has been described to overcome traditional screening failure. Objective To assess to what extent a personalized screening method improves eligibility for S-ICD implantation and evaluate the inappropriate shock rate after such screening success. Methods All consecutive patients eligible for an S-ICD implantation were prospectively recruited across 20 French centers between December 2019 to January 2022 (NCT04101253). In case of traditional screening failure, patients received a second personalized screening. If at least one vector was positive, the personalized screening was considered as successful, and the patient was eligible for implantation. Results 474 patients were included in the study (mean age 50.4 ±14.1 years; 77.4% men). Traditional screening was successful in 456 (96.2%) cases. This figure rose to 98.3% (n=466; P=.002) when personalized screening was performed. All patients implanted after successful personalized screening had correct signal detection on initial device interrogation. Nevertheless, after one year follow-up, 3 (43%) of the 7 patients implanted with personalized experienced inappropriate shock (vs 18 (4.2%) out of the 427 patients with traditional screening and S-ICD implantation P=.003). Conclusion Traditional S-ICD screening was successful in our study in a very high proportion of patients. Considering the small improvement in success of screening and a higher rate of inappropriate shock, a strategy of personalized screening cannot be routinely recommended.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators for Sudden Cardiac Death Prevention in China: A Regional Analysis from the Improve SCA Clinical Trial

Dejia Huang,Yanchun Liang,Shu Zhang,Zhihui Zhang,Farong Shen,Jingfeng Wang,Liangrong Zheng,Baopeng Tang,Yangang Su,MarkL Brown,BrianM Van Dorn,JanetE O'Brien

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/ijhr.ijhr_7_20

2020-01-01

International Journal of Heart Rhythm

Abstract:Background: The improve sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) study was a nonrandomized prospective global study that identified a subset of primary prevention (PP) patients at an elevated risk for SCA labeled 1.5PP. These 1.5PP patients had one or more of the following additional risk factors: Syncope, nonsustained ventricular tachycardia, premature ventricular contractions >10/h, and left ventricular ejection fraction <25%. The purpose of this sub-analysis was to examine the China population cohort according to the improve SCA study's primary and secondary objectives. We aim to analyze the improve SCA study objective outcomes explicitly in the Chinese cohort to better understand the utility of PP implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy in China. Subjects and Methods: The improve SCA study enrolled patients (n = 4222) during March 2014 and July 2017, including 87 sites in 17 countries from the geographies of Asia, Latin America, Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. In this analysis, the China cohort of improve SCA patients (n = 1654) was analyzed according to the objectives of the main study; the primary objective compared time to first appropriate ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) therapy between 1.5PP (n = 904) and secondary prevention (SP) patients (n = 470). All-cause mortality rates of 1.5PP with ICDs versus no implant, and an analysis of ischemic versus nonischemic results (n = 280) were also analyzed. PP patients without an additional risk factor were labeled 1.0PP (n = 280). Cox-proportional hazards model was used for hazard ratio (HR) calculations. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of each participating institution and the associated national and local regulatory agencies, and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT02099721). Results: The time to first VT/VF therapy for 1.5PP was not within 30% of SP (HR = 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.31–0.56, P < 0.0001). However, there was a 49% reduction (HR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.35–0.74, P = 0.0004) in all-cause mortality in the 1.5PP implanted versus nonimplanted patients, and a 70% reduction (HR = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.09–0.99, P = 0.05) in 1.0PP implanted patients. Nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) 1.5PP patients showed a 51% reduction (HR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.34–0.77, P = 0.0012) in all-cause mortality compared to those who did not receive an ICD implant. Conclusion: The China populations of 1.0PP and 1.5PP patients obtain a significant benefit with implantable defibrillation therapy.
Diagnosis of allied functional bowel disorders using monoclonal antibodies and electronmicroscopy.

P. Puri,T. Fujimoto

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3468(88)80366-X

IF: 2.549

1988-06-01

Journal of Pediatric Surgery

Abstract:
Subcutaneous versus transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator among drug-induced type-1 ECG pattern Brugada syndrome: a propensity score matching analysis from IBRYD study

Vincenzo Russo,Alfredo Caturano,Federico Guerra,Federico Migliore,Giuseppe Mascia,Andrea Rossi,Martina Nesti,Vincenzo Ezio Santobuono,Emilio Attena,Gianfranco Tola,Luigi Sciarra,Giulio Conte,Alessandro Paoletti Perini,Pietro Francia,Gregory Dendramis,Zefferino Palamà,Stefano Albani,Andrea Ottonelli Ghidini,Leonardo Calò,Antonio D’Onofrio,Enrico Baldi,Gerardo Nigro,Ferdinando Carlo Sasso,Luca Barca,Italo Porto,Pasquale Notarstefano,Maria Antonietta Ruocco,Livia Franchetti Pardo,Carmen Adducci,Nicola Berlier,Berardo Sarubbi,Alessandro Vicentini,Roberto Floris,Emanuele Romeo,Paolo Golino,IBRYD Study Group

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00380-022-02204-x

2023-04-12

Heart and Vessels

Abstract:No real-world data are available about the complications rate in drug-induced type 1 Brugada Syndrome (BrS) patients with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). Aim of our study is to compare the device-related complications, infections, and inappropriate therapies among drug-induced type 1 BrS patients with transvenous- ICD (TV-ICD) versus subcutaneous-ICD (S-ICD). Data for this study were sourced from the IBRYD (Italian BRugada sYnDrome) registry which includes 619 drug-induced type-1 BrS patients followed at 20 Italian tertiary referral hospitals. For the present analysis, we selected 258 consecutive BrS patients implanted with ICD. 198 patients (76.7%) received a TV-ICD, while 60 a S-ICD (23.4%). And were followed-up for a median time of 84.3 [46.5–147] months. ICD inappropriate therapies were experienced by 16 patients (6.2%). 14 patients (7.1%) in the TVICD group and 2 patients (3.3%) in S-ICD group ( log-rank P = 0.64 ). ICD-related complications occurred in 31 patients (12%); 29 (14.6%) in TV-ICD group and 2 (3.3%) in S-ICD group ( log-rank P = 0.41 ). ICD-related infections occurred in 10 patients (3.88%); 9 (4.5%) in TV-ICD group and 1 (1.8%) in S-ICD group ( log-rank P = 0.80 ). After balancing for potential confounders using the propensity score matching technique, no differences were found in terms of clinical outcomes between the two groups. In a real-world setting of drug-induced type-1 BrS patients with ICD, no significant differences in inappropriate ICD therapies, device-related complications, and infections were shown among S-ICD vs TV-ICD. However, a reduction in lead-related complications was observed in the S-ICD group. In conclusion, our evidence suggests that S-ICD is at least non-inferior to TV-ICD in this population and may also reduce the risk of lead-related complications which can expose the patients to the necessity of lead extractions.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems,peripheral vascular disease
Long-Term Performance of Subcutaneous Implantable Defibrillators in Athletes: A Multicenter, Real-World Analysis of Sport Activities from the iSUSI Registry

Alessio Gasperetti,Marco Schiavone,Julia Vogler,Paolo Compagnucci,Mikael Laredo,Alexander Breitenstein,Simone Gulletta,Martin Martinek,Lukas Kaiser,Carlo Lavalle,Sean Gaine,Luca Santini,Antonio Dello Russo,Pietro Palmisano,Giovanni Rovaris,Antonio Curnis,Nicoletta Ventrella,Jürgen Kuschyk,Mauro Biffi,Roland Tilz,Luigi Di Biase,Claudio Tondo,Giovanni B Forleo,i-SUSI investigators

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2024.09.039

IF: 6.779

2024-09-20

Heart Rhythm

Abstract:Background: No data regarding subcutaneous-implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) technology in patients actively engaging in sports activities are available. Objective: This study aims to compare S-ICD performance between athletes and nonathletes. Methods: The primary outcome of the study was the comparison of overall device-related complications between athletes and nonathletes. Appropriate shocks, inappropriate shocks, and individual device-related complications were secondary outcomes. Results: A total of 1493 patients were extracted from the International Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Registry (iSUSI) registry, of whom 152 (10.2%) were athletes, mostly engaging in dynamic sports (54.2%). Brugada syndrome, myocarditis, and arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) were more common in athletes (11.2% vs 3.3%, P < .001; 19.1% vs 9.0%, P < .001; 8.6% vs 2.8%, P < .001, respectively). During a median follow-up time of 25.5 (12.0-41.2) months, athletes were more likely to experience appropriate shocks (yearly rate: 7.2 [4.9-10.7] % vs 4.3 [3.6-5.1] %, P = .028), occurring more frequently during exercise (3.9% vs 0.6%, P < .001). This finding lost significance when adjusting for confounders (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.440 [0.909-2.281], P = .120). No differences were found in overall device-related complications (yearly rate: 3.3% vs 3.4%, P = .448) and inappropriate shocks (yearly rate: 5.3% vs 3.7%, P = 0.111). Myopotential oversensing (4.0% vs 1.3%, P = .011) was more common in athletes, as were lead infections (3.3% vs 0.9%, P =.008), with the latter clustering in the early postimplantation period. Conclusion: The S-ICD is a valid therapeutic option for preventing sudden cardiac death in athletes. Sports practice was not associated with an increased risk of complications or inappropriate shocks, although athletes are exposed to a higher risk of S-ICD infections in the early postoperative period.
Ten years of subcutaneous defibrillator therapy: Consolidated clinical evidence and future perspectives

Silvia Magnani,Hussam Ali,Riccardo Cappato

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jce.16171

IF: 2.7

2024-01-30

Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology

Abstract:The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S‐ICD) was developed as an alternative to the traditional transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (TV‐ICD), aiming to provide easier implantation, simplified detection algorithm of malignant ventricular arrhythmias and prevention from placing components in the cardiovascular system. The S‐ICD is implanted subcutaneously or intramuscularly with the generator placed in the left midaxillary line and the lead tunneled subcutaneously in the left para‐sternal region. Preimplant electrocardiogram screening is recommended to prevent implantation in patients at high risk of T wave over‐sensing. Currently, the S‐ICD is unsuitable for patients requiring pacing or cardiac resynchronization. Since the beginning, the S‐ICD underwent extensive preclinical investigation until the first prospective multicentre trial demonstrating high efficacy and safety led to market release. While earlier studies focused on younger patients with higher ejection fraction, more recent studies showed favorable outcomes even in patients with comorbidities similar to those typically observed in patients receiving TV‐ICD. The development of second and third generation devices has contributed to reduce inappropriate shocks and overcome previous limitations. The aim of this paper is to review the evidence in the literature over the past decade supporting S‐ICD as a valid alternative to TV‐ICD in terms of safety and efficacy, highlighting the improvements in technology, as well as outcomes.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
Infection in patients with subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: Results of the S-ICD Post Approval Study

Michael R Gold,Johan D Aasbo,Raul Weiss,Martin C Burke,Marye J Gleva,Bradley P Knight,Marc A Miller,Claudio D Schuger,Nathan Carter,Jill Leigh,Amy J Brisben,Mikhael F El-Chami

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2022.07.031

IF: 6.779

Heart Rhythm

Abstract:Background: Early subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) studies included atypical cohorts of patients who were younger with fewer comorbidities. Recent S-ICD studies included patient populations with more comorbidities. Objectives: The goals of this study were to determine the incidence and predictors of S-ICD-related infection over a 3-year follow-up period and to use these results to develop an infection risk score. Methods: The S-ICD Post Approval Study is a US prospective registry of 1637 patients. Baseline demographic characteristics and outcomes with 3-year postimplantation follow-up were compared between patients with and without device-related infection. A risk score was derived from multivariable proportional hazards analysis of 22 variables. Results: Infection was observed in 55 patients (3.3%), with 69% of infections occurring within 90 days and a vast majority (92.7%) within 1 year of implantation. Late infections more likely involved device erosion; no infections occurred after year 2. The annual mortality rate postinfection was 0.6%/y. No lead extraction complications or bacteremia related to infection were observed. An infection risk score was created with diabetes, age, prior transvenous ICD implant, and ejection fraction as predictors. Patients with a risk score of ≥3 had an 8.8 hazard ratio (95% confidence interval 2.8-16.3) of infection compared with a 0 risk score. Conclusion: Infection rates in the S-ICD Post Approval Study were similar to other S-ICD populations and not associated with systemic blood-borne infections. Late infection (>1 year) is uncommon and associated with system erosion. A high-risk infection cohort can be identified that may facilitate preventive measures.
Present criteria for prophylactic ICD implantation: Insights from the EU-CERT-ICD (Comparative Effectiveness Research to Assess the Use of Primary ProphylacTic Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators in EUrope) project

Markus Zabel,Simon Schlögl,Andrzej Lubinski,Jesper Hastrup Svendsen,Axel Bauer,Elena Arbelo,Sandro Brusich,David Conen,Iwona Cygankiewicz,Michael Dommasch,Panagiota Flevari,Jan Galuszka,Jim Hansen,Gerd Hasenfuß,Robert Hatala,Heikki V. Huikuri,Tuomas Kenttä,Tomasz Kucejko,Helge Haarmann,Markus Harden,Svetoslav Iovev,Stefan Kääb,Gabriela Kaliska,Andreas Katsimardos,Jaroslaw D. Kasprzak,Dariusz Qavoq,Lars Lüthje,Marek Malik,Tomáš Novotný,Nikola Pavlović,Peter Perge,Christian Röver,Georg Schmidt,Tchavdar Shalganov,Rajeeva Sritharan,Martin Svetlosak,Zoltan Sallo,Janko Szavits-Nossan,Vassil Traykov,Bert Vandenberk,Vasil Velchev,Marc A. Vos,Stefan N. Willich,Tim Friede,Rik Willems,Béla Merkely,Christian Sticherling,the EU-CERT-ICD Study Investigators

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2019.09.001

IF: 1.3

2019-11-01

Journal of Electrocardiology

Abstract:<h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Background</h3><p>The clinical effectiveness of primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy is under debate. It is urgently needed to better identify patients who benefit from prophylactic ICD therapy. The <u>EU</u>ropean <u>C</u>omparative <u>E</u>ffectiveness <u>R</u>esearch to Assess the Use of Primary Prophylac<u>T</u>ic Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators (EU-CERT-ICD) completed in 2019 will assess this issue.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Summary</h3><p>The EU-CERT-ICD is a prospective investigator-initiated non-randomized, controlled, multicenter observational cohort study done in 44 centers across 15 European countries. A total of 2327 patients with heart failure due to ischemic heart disease or dilated cardiomyopathy indicated for primary prophylactic ICD implantation were recruited between 2014 and 2018 (>1500 patients at first ICD implantation, >750 patients non-randomized non-ICD control group). The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality, and first appropriate shock was co-primary endpoint. At baseline, all patients underwent 12‑lead ECG and Holter-ECG analysis using multiple advanced methods for risk stratification as well as documentation of clinical characteristics and laboratory values. The EU-CERT-ICD data will provide much needed information on the survival benefit of preventive ICD therapy and expand on previous prospective risk stratification studies which showed very good applicability of clinical parameters and advanced risk stratifiers in order to define patient subgroups with above or below average ICD benefit.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Conclusion</h3><p>The EU-CERT-ICD study will provide new and current data about effectiveness of primary prophylactic ICD implantation. The study also aims for improved risk stratification and patient selection using clinical risk markers in general, and advanced ECG risk markers in particular.</p>

cardiac & cardiovascular systems

The cross-section of mutual fund fee dispersion

Inappropriate Therapy and Shock Rates Between the Subcutaneous and Transvenous Implantable Cardiac Defibrillator: A Secondary Analysis of the PRAETORIAN Trial

Lost bits: particle shedding with polyvinyl chloride intravenous administration sets

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

Granular computing: Common practices and mathematical models

Equal performance of the subcutaneous and transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator across all age groups in the PRAETORIAN trial

First-Line Catheter Ablation of Monomorphic Ventricular Tachycardia in Cardiomyopathy Concurrent With Defibrillator Implantation: The PAUSE-SCD Randomized Trial

The extravascular implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: The pivotal study plan

Pleuropericardial lesion in Q fever.

Performance of Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (S-ICD) in Chinese Population with Primary Prevention Indications: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study

The development of the extravascular defibrillator with substernal lead placement: A new Frontier for device-based treatment of sudden cardiac arrest

Subcutaneous and Transvenous Defibrillators in Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy

Transvenous versus subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillators in young cardiac arrest survivors

Personalized Screening Before Subcutaneous Cardioverter Defibrillator Implantation: Usefulness and Outcomes in Clinical Practice – The S-ICD Screening SIS Prospective Study

Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators for Sudden Cardiac Death Prevention in China: A Regional Analysis from the Improve SCA Clinical Trial

Diagnosis of allied functional bowel disorders using monoclonal antibodies and electronmicroscopy.

Subcutaneous versus transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator among drug-induced type-1 ECG pattern Brugada syndrome: a propensity score matching analysis from IBRYD study

Long-Term Performance of Subcutaneous Implantable Defibrillators in Athletes: A Multicenter, Real-World Analysis of Sport Activities from the iSUSI Registry

Ten years of subcutaneous defibrillator therapy: Consolidated clinical evidence and future perspectives

Infection in patients with subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: Results of the S-ICD Post Approval Study

Present criteria for prophylactic ICD implantation: Insights from the EU-CERT-ICD (Comparative Effectiveness Research to Assess the Use of Primary ProphylacTic Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators in EUrope) project