Search

Key Points: Question: Is antitachycardia pacing followed by shock clinically equivalent to a shock-only strategy in primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients when programmed with long detection to therapy delays? Findings: In this randomized clinical trial that included 2626 patients and was designed as an equivalence trial with sequential superiority analysis of each group, anti-tachycardia pacing prior to shock reduced the relative risk of time to first all-cause shock by 28%, a significant difference. Meaning: Antitachycardia pacing is effective as a first-line therapy in prolonging time to first all-cause shock, although the shock burden was not significantly different between the groups during follow-up. Importance: The emergence of novel programming guidelines that reduce premature and inappropriate therapies along with the availability of new implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) technologies lacking traditional endocardial antitachycardia pacing (ATP) capabilities requires the reevaluation of ATP as a first strategy in terminating fast ventricular tachycardias (VTs) in primary prevention ICD recipients. Objective: To assess the role of ATP in terminating fast VTs in primary prevention ICD recipients with contemporary programming. Design, Setting, and Participants: This global, prospective, double-blind, randomized clinical trial had an equivalence design with a relative margin of 35%. Superiority tests were performed at interim analyses and the final analysis if equivalence was not proven. Patients were enrolled between September 2016 and April 2021 at 134 sites in 8 countries, with the last date of follow-up on July 6, 2023. Patients were required to have an indication for a primary prevention ICD, including left ventricular ejection fraction less than or equal to 35%. Interventions: Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive ATP plus shock vs shock only. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was time to first all-cause shock. Secondary end points included time to first appropriate shock, time to first inappropriate shock, all-cause mortality, and the composite of time to first all-cause shock plus all-cause mortality. Results: A total of 2595 patients were randomized (mean age, 63.9 years; 22.4% were females). At a mean follow-up of 38 months, first all-cause shock occurred in 129 participants in the ATP plus shock group and 178 participants in the shock only group. The hazard ratio (HR) for the primary end point was 0.72 (95.9% CI, 0.57-0.92), with P =.005 for superiority of the ATP plus shock group over the shock only group. During follow-up in an intention-to-treat analysis, the total shock burden per 100 patient-years was not statistically different, at 12.3 and 14.9, respectively (P =.70). Conclusions and Relevance: The use of a single burst of ATP prior to shock in primary prevention ICD recipients with modern ICD detection programming prolonged the time to first all-cause ICD shock. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02923726 This randomized clinical trial assesses the role of antitachycardia pacing in terminating fast ventricular tachycardia in primary prevention patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators with contemporary programming. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims Heart rate score (HRSc), the per cent of atrial paced and sensed event in the largest 10 b.p.m. rate histogram bin of a pacemaker, predicts survival in patients with cardiac devices. No correlation between HRSc and development of atrial fibrillation (AF) has been reported. In this study, we evaluated the relationship between pacemaker post-implantation HRSc and the incidence of newly developed atrial tachyarrhythmias (ATAs). Methods and results Patients with dual-chamber pacemakers, implanted 2013–17, with the LATITUDE remote monitoring data with ≥600 000 beats of histogram data collected at baseline were included (N = 34 543). Heart rate score was determined from the initial 3-month post-implantation histogram data. Patients were excluded if they had ATAs, defined as atrial high-rate episodes >5 min or >1% of right atrial beats >170 b.p.m. during the initial 3 months post-implantation. New ATAs, after the baseline period, were defined by each of the following: >1, >10, or >25% of atrial beats >170 b.p.m. or atrial tachycardia response (ATR) events >24 h. Patients were followed a median of 2.8 (1.0–4.0) years. The incidence of ATAs increased in proportion to HRSc (log-rank P -value <0.001), and the initial HRSc ≥70% was associated with increased ATAs by all definitions. Patients with initial HRSc ≥70% were older, had a higher percentage of right atrium pacing (%RA pacing), had a lower percentage of right ventricular pacing (%RV pacing), and were more likely programmed with rate-response vs. subjects with HRSc <70%. Initial HRSc (hazard ratio: 1.07, 95% confidence interval: 1.05–1.09; P < 0.0001) independently predicted ATAs after adjusting for age, gender, %RV pacing, and rate-response programming. The %RA pacing and initial HRSc were correlated. Conclusion Heart rate score independently predicts any subsequent duration of ATAs in pacemaker patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Patients have increasing comorbidities and competing causes of death with advancing age, raising questions about the effectiveness of the implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) in older age. We therefore investigated the effect of patients' age at initial device implantation on all-cause mortality and on the risk of ICD shocks in single-chamber (V-ICD), dual-chamber (D-ICD), and cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator (CRT-D) recipients.Methods and Results: We reviewed de-identified records of 67 128 ICD recipients enrolled in the Boston Scientific ALTITUDE database of remote monitored patients [V-ICD (n = 11 422), D-ICD (n = 23 974), and CRT-D (n = 31 732)]. Over a mean follow-up of 2.3 ± 1.4 years, patients in all ICD groups had increased all-cause mortality but decreased risk of defibrillator shocks and/or anti-tachycardia pacing per 10 year increase in age. Compared with the youngest age group (<50 years), patients in the oldest age group (≥80 years) had a 6.8-fold, 5.9-fold, and 3.4-fold increase in all-cause mortality (P < 0.001 for all comparisons) and a 31, 45, and 53% decrease in the risk of ICD shock (P ≤ 0.002 for all comparisons) for the V-ICD, D-ICD, and CRT-D groups, respectively.Conclusion: Older recipients of standard and CRT defibrillators have higher mortality but fewer ICD shocks and/or therapies compared with younger patients. These data highly suggest less benefit of ICD therapy with increasing age, presumably because of competing risks of non-arrhythmic mortality. The role of defibrillator therapy in older patients may need to be evaluated with randomized controlled trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]