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.

Preoperative Prediction of Shock Impedance for Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Using Chest Computed Tomography

Characterization of the Substernal Space with Computed Tomography Imaging in Patients with and Without Median Sternotomy: Assessing a Novel Implant Location for Extravascular Defibrillation Lead Placement.

Clinical Predictors Significance of Electrical Shock in Patients with Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators

Implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death: a single center experience

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

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

Decision-making regarding subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator as primary prevention in patients with low ejection fraction

Predictive utility of the impedance drop on AF recurrence using digital intraprocedural data linked to electronic health record data

Efficacy and safety of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in patients with and without obesity: A meta-analysis

Combining noninvasive risk stratification parameters improves the prediction of mortality and appropriate ICD shocks

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

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

Prognostic Value of Different Thresholds for Myocardial Scar Quantification on Cardiac MRI Late Gadolinium Enhancement Images in Patients Receiving Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators

How Overall Health Status and Insurance Influence Utilization of the Primary Prevention Implantable Defibrillator in the Current Era

Incidents and Predictors of Pre-Implantation QRS-T Morphology Screening in Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator

Retrospective Analysis of the Appropriate and Inappropriate Shock Characteristics in 134 Patients with Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator

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

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

Validation of the PRAETORIAN Score in a large S-ICD collective – usefulness in clinical routine

Prophylactic ICD Survival Benefit Prediction: Review and Comparison between Main Scores

Whether to implant a defibrillator or not? The Possibility of Using the MADIT-ICD Benefit Score Calculator in Real Practice