Abstract
Background: To date, only a few comparisons between subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) patients undergoing and those not undergoing defibrillation testing (DT) at implantation (DT+ vs DT–) have been reported. Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare long-term clinical outcomes of 2 propensity-matched cohorts of DT+ and DT– patients. Methods: Among consecutive S-ICD patients implanted across 17 centers from January 2015 to October 2020, DT– patients were 1:1 propensity-matched for baseline characteristics with DT+ patients. The primary outcome was a composite of ineffective shocks and cardiovascular mortality. Appropriate and inappropriate shock rates were deemed secondary outcomes. Results: Among 1290 patients, a total of 566 propensity-matched patients (283 DT+; 283 DT–) served as study population. Over median follow-up of 25.3 months, no significant differences in primary outcome event rates were found (10 DT+ vs 14 DT–; P =.404) as well as for ineffective shocks (5 DT– vs 3 DT+; P =.725). At multivariable Cox regression analysis, DT performance was associated with a reduction of neither the primary combined outcome nor ineffective shocks at follow-up. A high PRAETORIAN score was positively associated with both the primary outcome (hazard ratio 3.976; confidence interval 1.339–11.802; P =.013) and ineffective shocks alone at follow-up (hazard ratio 19.030; confidence interval 4.752–76.203; P =.003). Conclusion: In 2 cohorts of strictly propensity-matched patients, DT performance was not associated with significant differences in cardiovascular mortality and ineffective shocks. The PRAETORIAN score is capable of correctly identifying a large percentage of patients at risk for ineffective shock conversion in both cohorts.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | Heart Rhythm |
| Volume | 18 |
| Issue number | 12 |
| Pages (from-to) | 2072-2079 |
| Number of pages | 8 |
| ISSN | 1547-5271 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 12.2021 |
Funding
Funding sources: The authors have no funding sources to disclose. Disclosures: Dr Santini is a consultant/speaker for Boston Scientific. Dr Tondo is a member of the Boston Scientific Advisory Board. Dr Steffel has received consultant and/or speaker fees Boston Scientific; and has received grant support through his institution from Boston Scientific. Dr Luigi Di Biase is a consultant for Boston Scientific. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.
Research Areas and Centers
- Centers: Cardiological Center Luebeck (UHZL)
DFG Research Classification Scheme
- 2.22-12 Cardiology, Angiology