The need for a subsequent transvenous system in patients implanted with subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator

Alessio Gasperetti*, Marco Schiavone, Julia Vogler, Mikael Laredo, Fabian Fastenrath, Pietro Palmisano, Matteo Ziacchi, Andrea Angeletti, Gianfranco Mitacchione, Lukas Kaiser, Paolo Compagnucci, Alexander Breitenstein, Roberto Arosio, Francesco Vitali, Silvana De Bonis, Francesco Picarelli, Michela Casella, Luca Santini, Carlo Pignalberi, Carlo LavalleEnnio Pisanò, Danilo Ricciardi, Leonardo Calò, Antonio Curnis, Matteo Bertini, Simone Gulletta, Antonio Dello Russo, Nicolas Badenco, Claudio Tondo, Jürgen Kuschyk, Roland Tilz, Giovanni B. Forleo, Mauro Biffi

*Corresponding author for this work
7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: The absence of pacing capabilities may reduce the appeal of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) devices for patients at risk for conduction disorders or with antitachycardia pacing (ATP)/cardiac resynchronization (CRT) requirements. Reports of rates of S-ICD to transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (TV-ICD) system switch in real-world scenarios are limited. Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the need for a subsequent transvenous (TV) device in patients implanted with an S-ICD and its predictors. Methods: All patients implanted with an S-ICD were enrolled from the multicenter, real-world iSUSI (International SUbcutaneouS Implantable cardioverter defibrillator) Registry. The need for a TV device and its clinical reason, and appropriate and inappropriate device therapies were assessed. Logistic regression with Firth penalization was used to assess the association between baseline and procedural characteristics and the overall need for a subsequent TV device. Results: A total of 1509 patients were enrolled (age 50.8 ± 15.8 years; 76.9% male; 32.0% ischemic; left ventricular ejection fraction 38% [30%–60%]). Over 26.5 [13.4–42.9] months, 155 (10.3%) and 144 (9.3%) patients experienced appropriate and inappropriate device therapies, respectively. Forty-one patients (2.7%) required a TV device (13 bradycardia; 10 need for CRT; 10 inappropriate shocks). Body mass index (BMI) >30 kg/m2 and chronic kidney disease (CKD) were associated with need for a TV device (odds ratio [OR] 2.57 [1.37–4.81], P = .003; and OR 2.67 [1.29–5.54], P = .008, respectively). Conclusion: A low rate (2.7%) of conversion from S-ICD to a TV device was observed at follow-up, with need for antibradycardia pacing, ATP, or CRT being the main reasons. BMI >30 kg/m2 and CKD predicted all-cause need for a TV device.

Original languageEnglish
JournalHeart Rhythm
Volume19
Issue number12
Pages (from-to)1958-1964
Number of pages7
ISSN1547-5271
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 12.2022

Research Areas and Centers

  • Centers: Cardiological Center Luebeck (UHZL)

DFG Research Classification Scheme

  • 205-12 Cardiology, Angiology

Cite this