P1129Comparison of Ventricular Tachyarrhythmia Recurrence Between Ischemic Cardiomyopathy and Dilated Cardiomyopathy in Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Recipients for Secondary Prevention

Background Large‐scale studies describing modern populations using an implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator (ICD) are lacking. We aimed to analyze the incidence of arrhythmia, device interventions, and mortality in a broad spectrum of real‐world ICD patients with different heart disorders. Methods and Results The UMBRELLA study is a prospective, multicenter, nationwide study of contemporary patients using an ICD followed up by remote monitoring, with a blinded review of arrhythmic episodes. From November 2005 to November 2017, 4296 patients were followed up. After 46.6±27.3 months, 16 067 episodes of sustained ventricular arrhythmia occurred in 1344 patients (31.3%). Appropriate ICD therapy occurred in 27.3% of study population. Patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (hazard ratio [HR], 1.51; 95% CI, 1.29–1.78), dilated cardiomyopathy (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.07–1.53), and valvular heart disease (HR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.43–2.62) exhibited a higher risk of appropriate ICD therapies, whereas patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.54–0.96) and Brugada syndrome (HR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.14–0.45) showed a lower risk. All‐cause death was 13.4% at follow‐up. Ischemic cardiomyopathy (HR, 3.09; 95% CI, 2.58–5.90), dilated cardiomyopathy (HR, 3.33; 95% CI, 2.18–5.10), and valvular heart disease (HR, 3.97; 95% CI, 2.25–6.99) had the worst prognoses. Delayed high‐rate detection was enabled in 39.7% of patients, and single‐zone programming occurred in 52.6% of primary prevention patients. Both parameters correlated with lower risk of first appropriate ICD therapy, with no excess risk of mortality. The rate of inappropriate shocks at follow‐up was low (6%) and did not differ among type of ICD but was lower in SmartShock‐capable devices. Conclusions Irrespective of the cause, contemporary ICD patients with heart failure–related disorders had a similar risk of ICD life‐saving interventions and death. Current ICD programming recommendations still need to be implemented. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NTC01561144.

Download Full-text

Comparison of ventricular tachyarrhythmia recurrence between ischemic cardiomyopathy and dilated cardiomyopathy: a retrospective study

PeerJ ◽

10.7717/peerj.5312 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 6 ◽

pp. e5312 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Chih-Yuan Fang ◽

Huang-Chung Chen ◽

Yung-Lung Chen ◽

Tzu-Hsien Tsai ◽

Kuo-Li Pan ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Secondary Prevention ◽

Dilated Cardiomyopathy ◽

Cardiovascular Mortality ◽

Ischemic Cardiomyopathy ◽

Ventricular Tachyarrhythmia ◽

Left Ventricular ◽

Left Ventricular Ejection ◽

Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽

All Cause Mortality

BackgroundThe use of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) has been established as an effective secondary prevention strategy for ventricular tachycardia (VT)/ventricular fibrillation (VF). However, few reports discuss the difference in clinical predictors for recurrent VT/VF between patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) and patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM).MethodsFrom May 2004 to December 2015, 132 consecutive patients who had ICM (n= 94) or DCM (n= 38) and had received ICD implantation for secondary prevention were enrolled in this study. All anti-tachycardia events during follow-up were validated. The clinical characteristics and echocardiographic parameters were obtained for comparison. The incidence of recurrence of VT/VF, cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, the change of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and LV volume were analyzed.ResultsAt a mean follow-up of 3.62 ± 2.93 years, 34 patients (36.2%) in the ICM group and 22 patients (57.9%) in the DCM group had a recurrence of VT/VF episodes (p= 0.032). The DCM group had a lower LVEF (p= 0.019), a larger LV end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) (p= 0.001), a higher prevalence of LVEDV >158 mL (p= 0.010), and a larger LV end-systolic volume (p= 0.010) than the ICM group. LVEDV >158 mL and no use of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker were independent predictors of recurrences of VT/VF in ICM patients but not in DCM patients. There were no difference in cardiovascular mortality and all-cause mortality between the ICM and DCM patients.ConclusionThe DCM patients had a higher recurrence rate of VT/VF than did the ICM patients during long-term follow-up. An enlarged LV is an independent predictor of the recurrence of VT/VF in ICM patients receiving ICD for secondary prevention.

Download Full-text