scholarly journals P125The value of cardiac iodine-123-metaiodobenzylguanidine scintigraphy in postinfarction heart failure patients qualified for implantable cardioverter defibrillator in follow up of 2-5 years

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (Supplement_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
A Teresinska ◽  
O Wozniak ◽  
A Maciag ◽  
J Wnuk ◽  
A Fronczak ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 121
Author(s):  
Marco Canepa ◽  
Pietro Palmisano ◽  
Gabriele Dell’Era ◽  
Matteo Ziacchi ◽  
Ernesto Ammendola ◽  
...  

The role of prognostic risk scores in predicting the competing risk of non-sudden death in heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) receiving an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is unclear. To this goal, we evaluated the accuracy and usefulness of the Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure (MAGGIC) score. The present analysis included 1089 HFrEF ICD recipients enrolled in the OBSERVO-ICD registry (NCT02735811). During a median follow-up of 36 months (1st–3rd IQR 25–48 months), 193 patients (17.7%) experienced at least one appropriate ICD therapy, and 133 patients died (12.2%) without experiencing any ICD therapy. The frequency of patients receiving ICD therapies was stable around 17–19% across increasing tertiles of 3-year MAGGIC probability of death, whereas non-sudden mortality increased (6.4% to 9.8% to 20.8%, p < 0.0001). Accuracy of MAGGIC score was 0.60 (95% CI, 0.56–0.64) for the overall outcome, 0.53 (95% CI, 0.49–0.57) for ICD therapies and 0.65 (95% CI, 0.60–0.70) for non-sudden death. In patients with higher 3-year MAGGIC probability of death, the increase in the competing risk of non-sudden death during follow-up was greater than that of receiving an appropriate ICD therapy. Results were unaffected when analysis was limited to ICD shocks only. The MAGGIC risk score proved accurate and useful in predicting the competing risk of non-sudden death in HFrEF ICD recipients. Estimation of mortality risk should be taken into greater consideration at the time of ICD implantation.


EP Europace ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (9) ◽  
pp. 1360-1368 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henneke Versteeg ◽  
Ivy Timmermans ◽  
Jos Widdershoven ◽  
Geert-Jan Kimman ◽  
Sébastien Prevot ◽  
...  

AbstractAimsThe European REMOTE-CIED study is the first randomized trial primarily designed to evaluate the effect of remote patient monitoring (RPM) on patient-reported outcomes in the first 2 years after implantation of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD).Methods and resultsThe sample consisted of 595 European heart failure patients implanted with an ICD compatible with the Boston Scientific LATITUDE® RPM system. Patients were randomized to RPM plus a yearly in-clinic ICD check-up vs. 3–6-month in-clinic check-ups alone. At five points during the 2-year follow-up, patients completed questionnaires including the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire and Florida Patient Acceptance Survey (FPAS) to assess their heart failure-specific health status and ICD acceptance, respectively. Information on clinical status was obtained from patients’ medical records. Linear regression models were used to compare scores between groups over time. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses showed no significant group differences in patients’ health status and ICD acceptance (subscale) scores (all Ps > 0.05). Exploratory subgroup analyses indicated a temporary improvement in device acceptance (FPAS total score) at 6-month follow-up for secondary prophylactic in-clinic patients only (P < 0.001). No other significant subgroup differences were observed.ConclusionLarge clinical trials have indicated that RPM can safely and effectively replace most in-clinic check-ups of ICD patients. The REMOTE-CIED trial results show that patient-reported health status and ICD acceptance do not differ between patients on RPM and patients receiving in-clinic check-ups alone in the first 2 years after ICD implantation.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01691586.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document