Abstract:Background Current approaches fail to separate patients at high versus low risk for ventricular arrhythmias owing to overreliance on a snapshot left ventricular ejection fraction measure. We used statistical machine learning to identify important cardiac imaging and time‐varying risk predictors. Methods and Results Three hundred eighty‐two cardiomyopathy patients (left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35%) underwent cardiac magnetic resonance before primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillator insertion. The primary end point was appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator discharge or sudden death. Patient characteristics; serum biomarkers of inflammation, neurohormonal status, and injury; and cardiac magnetic resonance‐measured left ventricle and left atrial indices and myocardial scar burden were assessed at baseline. Time‐varying covariates comprised interval heart failure hospitalizations and left ventricular ejection fractions. A random forest statistical method for survival, longitudinal, and multivariable outcomes incorporating baseline and time‐varying variables was compared with (1) Seattle Heart Failure model scores and (2) random forest survival and Cox regression models incorporating baseline characteristics with and without imaging variables. Age averaged 57±13 years with 28% women, 66% white, 51% ischemic, and follow‐up time of 5.9±2.3 years. The primary end point (n=75) occurred at 3.3±2.4 years. Random forest statistical method for survival, longitudinal, and multivariable outcomes with baseline and time‐varying predictors had the highest area under the receiver operating curve, median 0.88 (95% CI, 0.75‐0.96). Top predictors comprised heart failure hospitalization, left ventricle scar, left ventricle and left atrial volumes, left atrial function, and interleukin‐6 level; heart failure accounted for 67% of the variation explained by the prediction, imaging 27%, and interleukin‐6 2%. Serial left ventricular ejection fraction was not a significant predictor. Conclusions Hospitalization for heart failure and baseline cardiac metrics substantially improve ventricular arrhythmic risk prediction. Nonstandard Abbreviations and Acronyms LGE late gadolinium enhancement RF‐SLAM random forest survival, longitudinal and multivariate outcomes SCD sudden cardiac death SI signal intensity Clinical Perspective What Is New? In primary prevention implanted cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) recipients, an interim hospitalization for heart failure identified a group at high risk for subsequent ventricular arrhythmia defined as an appropriate ICD shock. Among ICD recipients without heart failure hospitalizations, baseline cardiac magnetic resonance imaging metrics (specifically, left ventricle heterogeneous gray and total scar, left ventricle and left atrial volumes, and left atrial total emptying fraction) as well as serum interleukin‐6 levels were the strongest predictors of subsequent appropriate ICD shock; serial left ventricle ejection fraction did not provide additional prognostic value for the arrhythmic outcome. Machine learning statistical methods may improve risk score development by accounting for complex and dynamic interactions among risk variables and temporally varying risk. What Are the Clinical Implications? The combination of clinical heart failure course, baseline cardiac magnetic resonance imaging metrics, and levels of the inflammatory biomarker interleukin‐6 can most accurately stratify subsequent high versus low ventricular arrhythmic risk and may be useful for decision‐making as primary prevention ICD recipients approach elective generator change. Identifying patients most at risk for ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death (SCD) remains a clinical challenge. 1 Current guidelines directing the use of primary prevention implanted cardioverter defibrillator (ICDs) rely on a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), which has low predictive efficiency. 1 Estimated annualized rates of appropriat -Abstract Truncated-

The MADIT-ICD benefit risk score for Japanese patients -from Nippon Storm study-

Benefit of implantable cardioverter defibrillator use in Japanese patients based on modified MADIT‐ICD benefit score

Optimizing patient selection for cardiac resynchronization therapy in a multicenter study of Japanese patients: assessment of the MADIT-ICD benefit group

Risk stratification for a primary prevention ICD: Performance of the MADIT-ICD Benefit Score in contemporary real world patients

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

Risk stratification for ventricular tachyarrhythmia in patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy

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

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

Association between implanted cardioverter-defibrillators and mortality for patients with left ventricular ejection fraction between 30% and 35

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

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

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

Baseline and Dynamic Risk Predictors of Appropriate Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Therapy.

MRI Assessment of Myocardial Deformation for Risk Stratification of Major Arrhythmic Events in Patients With Non‐Ischemic Cardiomyopathy Eligible for Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators

Sudden cardiac death after myocardial infarction: individual participant data from pooled cohorts

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

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

Development and validation of a nomogram predicting all-cause mortality for patients with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator

Sudden Cardiac Death in Ischaemic Cardiomyopathy and the Primary Prevention ICD: Time for a More a Personalised Approach?

Effect of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Therapy on the Mortality of Patients with Ischemic Cardiomyopathy

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