Dataset Information

RR interval variability in the evaluation of ventricular tachycardia and effects of implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy.

ABSTRACT:

Background

An implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is the most reliable therapeutic device for preventing sudden cardiac death in patients with sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT). Regarding its effectiveness, targeted VT is defined based on the tachyarrhythmia cycle length. However, variations in RR interval variability of VTs may occur. Few studies have reported on VT characteristics and effects of ICD therapy according to the RR interval variability. We aimed to identify the clinical characteristics of VTs and ICD therapy effects according to the RR interval variability.

Methods

We analyzed 821 VT episodes in 69 patients with ICDs or cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators. VTs were classified as irregular when the difference between two successive beats was >20 ms in at least one of 10 RR intervals; otherwise, they were classified as regular. We evaluated successful termination using anti-tachycardia pacing (ATP)/shock therapy, spontaneous termination, and acceleration between regular and irregular VTs. The RR interval variability reproducibility rates were evaluated.

Results

Regular VT was significantly more successfully terminated than irregular VT by ATP. No significant difference was found in shock therapy or VT acceleration between the regular and irregular VTs. Spontaneous termination occurred significantly more often in irregular than in regular VT cases. The reproducibility rates of RR interval variability in each episode and in all episodes were 89% and 73%, respectively.

Conclusions

ATP therapy showed greater effectiveness for regular than for irregular VT. Spontaneous termination was more common in irregular than in regular VT. RR interval variability of VTs seems to be reproducible.

SUBMITTER: Tsukahara K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8339111 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background One third of primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients receive appropriate therapy, but all remain at risk of defibrillator complications. Information on these complications in contemporary cohorts is limited. This study assessed complications and their risk factors after defibrillator implantation in a Dutch nationwide prospective registry cohort and forecasts the potential reduction in complications under distinct scenarios of updated indication criteria. Methods and Results Complications in a prospective multicenter registry cohort of 1442 primary implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implant patients were classified as major or minor. The potential for reducing complications was derived from a newly developed prediction model of appropriate therapy to identify patients with a low probability of benefitting from the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. During a follow-up of 2.2 years (interquartile range, 2.0-2.6 years), 228 complications occurred in 195 patients (13.6%), with 113 patients (7.8%) experiencing at least one major complication. Most common ones were lead related (n=93) and infection (n=18). Minor complications occurred in 6.8% of patients, with lead-related (n=47) and pocket-related (n=40) complications as the most prevailing ones. A surgical reintervention or additional hospitalization was required in 53% or 61% of complications, respectively. Complications were strongly associated with device type. Application of stricter implant indication results in a comparable proportional reduction of (major) complications. Conclusions One in 13 patients experiences at least one major implantable cardioverter-defibrillator-related complication, and many patients undergo a surgical reintervention. Complications are related to defibrillator implantations, and these should be discussed with the patient. Stricter implant indication criteria and careful selection of device type implanted may have significant clinical and financial benefits.

Project description:Arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy is characterized by ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death. Once the diagnosis is established, risk stratification to determine whether implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) placement is warranted is critical. The cohort included 312 patients (163 men, age at presentation 33.6±13.9 years) with definite arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy who received an ICD. Over 8.8±7.33 years, 186 participants (60%) had appropriate ICD therapy and 58 (19%) had an intervention for ventricular fibrillation/flutter. Ventricular tachycardia at presentation (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.38-2.49; P<0.001), inducibility on electrophysiology study (HR: 3.14; 95% CI, 1.95-5.05; P<0.001), male sex (HR: 1.62; 95% CI, 1.20-2.19; P=0.001), inverted T waves in ≥3 precordial leads (HR: 1.66; 95% CI, 1.09-2.52; P=0.018), and premature ventricular contraction count ≥1000/24 hours (HR: 2.30; 95% CI, 1.32-4.00; P=0.003) were predictors of any appropriate ICD therapy. Inducibility at electrophysiology study (HR: 2.28; 95% CI, 1.10-4.70; P=0.025) remained as the only predictor after multivariable analysis. The predictors for ventricular fibrillation/flutter were premature ventricular contraction ≥1000/24 hours (HR: 4.39; 95% CI, 1.32-14.61; P=0.016), syncope (HR: 1.85; 95% CI, 1.10-3.11; P=0.021), aged ≤30 years at presentation (HR: 1.76; 95% CI, 1.04-3.00; P<0.036), and male sex (HR: 1.73; 95% CI, 1.01-2.97; P=0.046). Younger age at presentation (HR: 3.14; 95% CI, 1.32-7.48; P=0.010) and high premature ventricular contraction burden (HR: 4.43; 95% CI, 1.35-14.57; P<0.014) remained as independent predictors of ventricular fibrillation/flutter. Complications occurred in 66 participants (21%), and 64 (21%) had inappropriate ICD interventions. Overall mortality was low at 2%, and 4% underwent heart transplantation. These findings represent an important step in identifying predictors of ICD therapy for potentially fatal ventricular fibrillation/flutter and should be considered when developing a risk stratification model for arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy.

Project description:ImportanceCardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduces the risk for mortality and heart failure-related events in select patients. Little is known about the use of CRT in combination with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) in patients who are eligible for this therapy in clinical practice.ObjectiveTo (1) identify patient, clinician, and hospital characteristics associated with CRT defibrillator (CRT-D) use and (2) determine the extent of hospital-level variation in the use of CRT-D among guideline-eligible patients undergoing ICD placement.Design, setting, and participantsMulticenter retrospective cohort from 1428 hospitals participating in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry between April 1, 2010, and June 30, 2014. Adult patients meeting class I or IIa guideline recommendations for CRT at the time of device implantation were included in this study.Main outcomes and measuresImplantation of an ICD with or without CRT.ResultsA total of 63 506 eligible patients (88.6%) received CRT-D at the time of device implantation. The mean (SD) ages of those in the ICD and CRT-D groups were 67.9 (12.2) years and 68.4 (11.5) years, respectively. In hierarchical multivariable models, black race was independently associated with lower use of CRT-D (odds ratio [OR], 0.77; 95% CI, 0.71-0.83) as was nonprivate insurance (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.85-0.95 for Medicare and OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.65-0.82 for Medicaid). Clinician factors associated with greater CRT-D use included clinician implantation volume (OR, 1.01 per 10 additional devices implanted; 95% CI, 1.01-1.01) and electrophysiology training (OR, 3.13 as compared with surgery-boarded clinicians; 95% CI, 2.50-3.85). At the hospital level, the overall median risk-standardized rate of CRT-D use was 79.9% (range, 26.7%-100%; median OR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.99-2.18).Conclusions and relevanceIn a national cohort of patients eligible for CRT-D at the time of device implantation, nearly 90% received a CRT-D device. However, use of CRT-D differed by race and implanting operator characteristics. After accounting for these factors, the use of CRT-D continued to vary widely by hospital. Addressing disparities and variation in CRT-D use among guideline-eligible patients may improve patient outcomes.

Project description: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.