Abstract:Background Few data are available about patients implanted with an implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) after an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). In particular, it is unclear if these patients have a higher risk of appropriate device therapy than patients implanted for primary and other secondary prevention. Purpose To assess if appropriate device interventions (ATP/shocks) are higher in patients implanted after OHCA compared to patients implanted for primary and secondary prevention other than OHCA. To verify also if mortality, implantation-related complications (pneumothorax, hemothorax, hematoma, cardiac tamponade), device-related complications (lead displacement and fracture, infections) and inappropriate shocks/ATP are higher in OHCA patients compared to other patients. Methods This is a retrospective multicenter international study. All the patients implanted with an ICD between January 2015 and December 2016 in the participating centers were included. Follow-up was considered concluded in case of death or at the last follow-up available until December 2023. Patients were divided according to ICD implantation indication (secondary prevention after OHCA, other secondary prevention, primary prevention). Results 1386 patients (79% males; median age 67, IQR 59-74) from 15 centers were included with a median follow-up of 83 months: 111 patients in OHCA group, 134 in other secondary prevention group and 1141 in primary prevention group. Considering the first appropriate intervention, a significant difference among the three groups was observed (Fig.1A) and, at post-hoc comparison, the OHCA group was at higher risk than primary prevention (HR 1.51, 95%CI 1.06-2.17, p=0.02), but was at similar risk than other secondary prevention (HR 0.79, 95%CI 0.51-1.23, p=0.3). This was confirmed also after correction for age, gender, history of atrial fibrillation, aetiology and multi-comorbidity (Fig.2A). However, considering the number of appropriate interventions during follow-up, the risk of OHCA group was lower than other secondary prevention (IRR 0.28, 95%CI 0.11-0.68, p<0.01) and similar to primary prevention (IRR 0.97, 95%CI 0.47-1.96, p=0.93), also after correction for the other predictors (Fig.2B). The three groups showed no differences in survival (Fig.1B), implantation-related complication, device-related complications (Fig.1C) and inappropriate shocks/ATP. Conclusion Patients implanted with an ICD after an OHCA have a risk similar to those implanted for other secondary prevention, when considering the first appropriate intervention, but a risk similar to those implanted for primary prevention when considering the number of appropriate interventions during follow-up. Our study confirms that OHCA patients represents a peculiar population with the same chance of survival and rate of complications compared to primary and other secondary prevention patients suggesting the need of more studies to improve their long-term treatment.Figure 1 (Panel A, B and C)Figure 2 (Panel A and B)

Implantable cardioverter defibrillator use in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy in North America and Europe

Transatlantic differences in the use of implantable cardioverter defibrillators in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy

Outcomes of Catheter Ablation in Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy Without Background Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Therapy: A Multicenter International Ventricular Tachycardia Registry.

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

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

A new prediction model for ventricular arrhythmias in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy

Long-Term Arrhythmic Follow-Up and Risk Stratification of Patients With Desmoplakin-Associated Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy

Subcutaneous and Transvenous Defibrillators in Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy

A Territory-Wide Study of Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy Patients from Hong Kong

Clinical Features, Genetic Findings, and Risk Stratification in Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy: Data From a Brazilian Cohort

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

A new score for life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death in adults with transposition of the great arteries and a systemic right ventricle

Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy/dysplasia (ARVC/D) in clinical practice

Abstract 12506: Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators for Primary Prevention in Patients With Ischemic and Non Ischemic Cardiomyopathy: A Meta-Analysis of 15 Randomized Controlled Trial

Subcutaneous ICD Implantation and Catheter Ablation: A Step-Planned Approach for Ventricular Tachycardia Management in ARVC

Risk for appropriate ICD intervention and complications in patients implanted after an out-hospital cardiac arrest compared to patients implanted for primary and other secondary prevention indication

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

Comparison of the Benefit of Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Therapy in Ischemic Versus Nonischemic Dilated Cardiomyopathy

Abstract 13047: Clinical Risk Stratification for Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators (Icds)

Risk stratification for ventricular tachyarrhythmia in patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy