scholarly journals Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Explantation -- A Single Tertiary Center Experience

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naga Venkata Pothineni ◽  
Tharian Cherian ◽  
Neel Patel ◽  
Jeffrey Smietana ◽  
David Frankel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Tertiary Referral ◽  
Icd Implantation ◽  
Tertiary Referral Center ◽  
Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Device Implantation ◽  
Tertiary Center ◽  
Qrs Duration ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Selection For

Background: The subcutaneous implantable-cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) is an appealing alternative to transvenous ICD systems. However, data on indications for S-ICD explantations are sparse. Objectives: To assess incidence and indications for S-ICD explantation at a large tertiary referral center. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of all S-ICD explantations performed from 2014 to 2020. Data on demographics, comorbidities, implantation characteristics, and indications for explantation, were collected. Results: A total of 64 patients underwent S-ICD explantation during the study period. During that time, there were 410 S-ICD implantations at our institution of which 53 (12.9%) were explanted with a mean duration from implant to explant of 19.7±20.1 months. The mean age of the patients at explantation was 44.8±15.3 years, and 42% (n=27) were female. The indication for S-ICD implantation was primary prevention in 58% and secondary prevention in 42% of the patients. The most common reason for explantation was infection (32.8%) followed by abnormal sensing (25%) and need for pacing (18.8%). Those who underwent S-ICD explantation for pacing indications were significantly older (55.7±13.6 vs 42.3± 14.6 years, p = 0.005) with a wider QRS duration (111±19 ms vs 98±19 ms, p = 0.03) at device implantation compared to patients who underwent explantation for other indications. Conclusion: Incidence of S-ICD explantation in a large tertiary practice was 12.9%. While infection was the indication for a third of the explantations, a significant number were due to sensing abnormalities and need for pacing. These data may have implications for patient selection for S-ICD implantation.

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in children

2021 ◽  
pp. 021849232110412
Author(s):  
Shuiyun Wang ◽  
Changsheng Zhu
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Treatment ◽  
Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy ◽  
Cardiac Death ◽  
Treatment Results ◽  
Tertiary Referral ◽  
Good Discrimination ◽  
Icd Implantation ◽  
Tertiary Referral Center ◽  
Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Septal Hypertrophy

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) characterized by asymmetric ventricular septal hypertrophy, is the commonest cause of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in the young. The underlying etiology of HCM in the childhood and adolescent patients is diverse. Moreover, the prognosis of pediatric HCM depends on the age of presentation and etiology. Despite the complexity of children with obstructive HCM, surgical treatment results in a favorable outcome for carefully selected patients in experienced tertiary referral center in contemporary era. Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) remains the most effective and reliable treatment to prevent SCD. New pediatric SCD risk prediction model, which has good discrimination and calibration and can distinguish patients who are most benefit from an ICD implantation, is expected to be further refined in the future.

scholarly journals Circulating Soluble ST2 Predicts All-Cause Mortality in Severe Heart Failure Patients with an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Zhi-wei Hou ◽  
Hai-bo Yu ◽  
Yan-chun Liang ◽  
Yang Gao ◽  
Guo-qing Xu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Severe Heart Failure ◽  
Icd Implantation ◽  
Soluble St2 ◽  
Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Device Implantation ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Background. Heart failure (HF) is the terminal stage of all cardiovascular events. Although implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapies have reduced mortality among the high-risk HF population, it is necessary to determine whether certain factors can predict mortality even after cardiac device implantation. Growth stimulation expressed gene 2 (ST2) is an emerging biomarker for HF patient stratification in different clinical settings. Aims. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between baseline soluble ST2 (sST2) levels in serum and the clinical outcomes of high-risk HF patients with device implantation. Methods. Between January 2017 and August 2018, we prospectively recruited consecutive patients implanted with an ICD for heart failure, with LVEF ≤35% as recommended, and analyzed the basic characteristics, baseline serum sST2, and NT-proBNP levels, with at least 1-year follow-up. All-cause mortality was the primary endpoint. Results. During a 643-day follow-up, all-cause mortality occurred in 16 of 150 patients (10.67%). Incidence of all-cause mortality increased significantly in patients with sST2 levels above 34.98846 ng/ml (16.00% vs. 5.33%, P = 0.034 ). After adjusting the model (age, gender, device implantation, prevention of sudden death, LVEDD, LVEF, WBC and CLBBB, hsTNT, etiology, and eGFR) and the model combined with NT-proBNP, the risk of all-cause death was increased by 2.5% and 1.9%, respectively, per ng/ml of sST2. The best sST2 cutoff for predicting all-cause death was 43.42671 ng/ml (area under the curve: 0.72, sensitive: 0.69, and specificity: 0.69). Compared to patients with sST2 levels below 43.42671 ng/ml, the risk of all-cause mortality was higher in those with values above the threshold (5.1% vs. 21.2%, P = 0.002 ). ST2 level ≥43.42671 ng/ml was an independent predictor of all-cause mortality (HR: 3.30 [95% CI 1.02–10.67]). Age (HR: 1.06 [95% CI: 1.01–1.12]) and increased NT-proBNP per 100 (HR: 1.02 [95% CI: 1.01–1.03]) were also associated with all-cause mortality in ICD patients. Conclusions. sST2 level was associated with risk of all-cause mortality, and a threshold of 43.43 ng/ml showed good distinguishing performance to predict all-cause mortality in patients with severe heart failure, recommended for ICD implantation. Patients with sST2 levels more than 43.42671 ng/ml even after ICD implantation should therefore be monitored carefully.

scholarly journals Remote heart failure management using a multiparameter implantable cardioverter-defibrillator alert: the multicentric RE-HEART registry

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
J De Juan Baguda ◽  
J.J Gavira Gomez ◽  
M Pachon Iglesias ◽  
L Pena Conde ◽  
J.M Rubin Lopez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Median Duration ◽  
Office Visit ◽  
Active Phase ◽  
Cardiac Resynchronization ◽  
Office Visits ◽  
Icd Implantation ◽  
Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Clinical Events

Abstract Background The HeartLogic algorithm combines multiple implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD)-based sensors into an index for prediction of impending heart failure (HF) decompensation. In patients with ICD and cardiac resynchronization therapy ICD remotely monitored at 13 Spanish centers, we analyzed the association between clinical events and HeartLogic alerts and we described the use of the algorithm for the remote management of HF. Methods The association between clinical events and HeartLogic alerts was studied in the blinded phase (from ICD implantation to alert activation – no clinical actions taken in response to alerts) and in the following active phase (after alert activation – clinicians automatically notified in case of alert). Results We enrolled a total of 215 patients (67±13 years old, 77% male, 53% with ischemic cardiomyopathy) with ICD (19%) or CRT-D (81%). The median duration of the blinded phase was 8 [3–12] months. In this phase, the HeartLogic index crossed the threshold value (set by default to 16) 34 times in 20 patients. HeartLogic alerts were associated with 6 HF hospitalizations and 5 unplanned in-office visits for HF. Five additional HeartLogic threshold crossings were not associated with overt HF events, but occurred at the time of changes in drug therapy or of other clinical events. The rate of unexplained alerts was 0.25 alert-patient/year. The median time spent in alert was longer in the case of HF hospitalizations than of in-office visits (75 [min-max: 30–155] days versus 39 [min-max: 5–105] days). The maximum HeartLogic index value was 38±15 in the case of hospitalizations and 24±7 in that of minor HF events. The median duration of the following active phase was 5 [2–10] months. After HeartLogic activation, 40 alerts were reported in 26 patients. Twenty-seven (68%) alerts were associated with multiple HF- or non-HF related conditions or changes in prescribed HF therapy. Multiple actions were triggered by these alerts: HF hospitalization (4), unscheduled in-office visits (8), diuretics increase (8), change in other cardiovascular drugs (5), device reprogramming (2), atrial fibrillation ablation (1), patient education on therapy adherence (2). The rate of unexplained alerts not followed by any clinical action was 0.13 alert-patient/year. These alerts were managed remotely (device data review and phone contact), except for one alert that generated an unscheduled in-office visit. Conclusions HeartLogic index was frequently associated with HF-related clinical events. The activation of the associated alert allowed to remotely detect relevant clinical conditions and to implement clinical actions. The rate of unexplained alerts was low, and the work required in order to exclude any impending decompensation did not constitute a significant burden for the centers. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

scholarly journals Sacubitril/valsartan reduces atrial fibrillation and supraventricular arrhythmias in patients with HFrEF and remote monitoring: preliminary data from the SAVE THE RHYTHM

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
F Guerra ◽  
L Pimpini ◽  
M Flori ◽  
D Contadini ◽  
G Stronati ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Remote Monitoring ◽  
Preliminary Data ◽  
Premature Ventricular Contractions ◽  
Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Neprilysin Inhibitor ◽  
History Of ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
The Mean

Abstract Background Sacubitril/valsartan, the first combined angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, has demonstrated a significant benefit compared to angiotensin inhibitor in decreasing ventricular arrhythmias and appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) shocks in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). At present, there is no study which evaluates the effect of sacubitril/valsartan on the supraventricular arrhythmic burden in HFrEF patients with an ICD or cardiac resynchronisation therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D) and remote monitoring. Purpose To evaluate the effect of sacubitril/valsartan on the supraventricular arrhythmic burden in HFrEF patients with an ICD or CRTD and remote monitoring. Methods The SAVETHERHYTHM ((SAacubitril Valsartan rEal-world registry evaluating THE arRHYTHMia burden in HFrEF patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillator) is a multicentre, observational, prospective registry enrolling all patients with HFrEF, ICD or CRT-D actively followed through remote monitoring and starting treatment with sacubitril/valsartan. All patients are followed-up for at least one year after sacubitril/valsartan start. The primary endpoint is the mean number of sustained atrial tachycardia or atrial fibrillation (AT/AF) episodes per month. Secondary endpoints include the total burden of AT/AF (defined as the percentage of time in AT/AF per day), the mean number of premature ventricular contractions (PVC) per hour and the percentage of biventricular pacing per day (in patients with CRT-D). All primary and secondary endpoints are collected through remote monitoring. Results At the time of the first ad interim analysis, 60 patients (85.2% male, age 69±10 years) were consecutively enrolled. After treatment with sacubitril/valsartan, patients with at least one episode of AT/AF per month decreased from 32.8% to 21.3% (p=0.015). A significant decrease in number of AT/AF episodes (from 4.3 to 1.2 per year), in AT/AF burden (from 12% to 9%) and in number of PVC (from 83 to 74 per hour) were seen in patients with a previous diagnosis of paroxysmal or persistent AF (n=15; all p<0.05). Patients with permanent AF (n=7) experienced no benefits from sacubitril/valsartan therapy in terms of arrhythmic burden reduction. Patients with no previous history of AF (n=38) showed a decrease in number of AT/AF episodes (from 2.0 to 0.8 per year) and in number of PVC (from 77 to 49 per hour, all p<0.05). No new diagnosis of clinical AF was made after starting treatment with sacubitrl/valsartan, and patients with subclinical AT/AF episodes decreased from 8% to 3%. Conclusions Preliminary data suggest that therapy with sacubitril/valsartan could decrease arrhythmic burden in patients with non-permanent AF and reduce subclinical AT/AF episodes in patients with no history of AF. No positive effect has been noted in patients with permanent AF. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

Worldwide differences in primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillator utilization and outcomes in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victor Nauffal ◽  
Peter Marstrand ◽  
Larry Han ◽  
Victoria N Parikh ◽  
Adam S Helms ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy ◽  
Primary Prevention ◽  
Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards ◽  
Icd Implantation ◽  
Icd Therapy ◽  
Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Implantation Rates ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Aims  Risk stratification algorithms for sudden cardiac death (SCD) in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) and regional differences in clinical practice have evolved over time. We sought to compare primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation rates and associated clinical outcomes in US vs. non-US tertiary HCM centres within the international Sarcomeric Human Cardiomyopathy Registry. Methods and results We included patients with HCM enrolled from eight US sites (n = 2650) and five non-US (n = 2660) sites and used multivariable Cox-proportional hazards models to compare outcomes between sites. Primary prevention ICD implantation rates in US sites were two-fold higher than non-US sites (hazard ratio (HR) 2.27 [1.89–2.74]), including in individuals deemed at high 5-year SCD risk (≥6%) based on the HCM risk-SCD score (HR 3.27 [1.76–6.05]). US ICD recipients also had fewer traditional SCD risk factors. Among ICD recipients, rates of appropriate ICD therapy were significantly lower in US vs. non-US sites (HR 0.52 [0.28–0.97]). No significant difference was identified in the incidence of SCD/resuscitated cardiac arrest among non-recipients of ICDs in US vs. non-US sites (HR 1.21 [0.74–1.97]). Conclusion  Primary prevention ICDs are implanted more frequently in patients with HCM in US vs. non-US sites across the spectrum of SCD risk. There was a lower rate of appropriate ICD therapy in US sites, consistent with a lower-risk population, and no significant difference in SCD in US vs. non-US patients who did not receive an ICD. Further studies are needed to understand what drives malignant arrhythmias, optimize ICD allocation, and examine the impact of different ICD utilization strategies on long-term outcomes in HCM.

Abstract 5700: Worsening Renal Function and Arrhythmic Event in Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Patients with Nonischemic Heart Failure

Circulation ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 118 (suppl_18) ◽  
Author(s):  
Atsushi Takahashi ◽  
Tsuyoshi Shiga ◽  
Daigo Yagishita ◽  
Keisuke Futagawa ◽  
Naoki Serizawa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Renal Function ◽  
Renal Dysfunction ◽  
Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Shock Therapy ◽  
Electrical Storm ◽  
Icd Implantation ◽  
Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Arrhythmic Event ◽  
Icd Shock

Purpose: Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD) prevents sudden cardiac death in high risk patients with heart failure (HF). Worsening renal function (WRF) is associated with mortality in patients with myocardial infarction or HF, but its effect on lethal arrhythmia is unknown. We evaluated the influence of WRF on the occurrence of arrhythmic events in patients with nonischemic HF and ICD. Methods: A total of 286 nonischemic HF patients who underwent ICD implantation between 1990 and 2007 were studied. Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) was calculated using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease. Renal dysfunction was defined as eGFR <60mL/min/1.73m 2 and WRF was defined as 15mL/min/1.73m 2 per year. Differences in arrhythmia recurrences according to the eGFR and WRF were compared by Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Results: During a mean follow-up time of 2.2+/−1.0 years, 94 (33%) of 286 patients (mean age; 57+/−15 years, 72% male) experienced appropriate ICD shock therapy. There was a significantly higher cumulative rate of appropriate ICD shock therapy (p<0.05) and electrical storm (p<0.05) in patients with renal dysfunction than others. The patients with renal dysfunction at baseline experience WRF more frequently than other patients (53% vs. 23%, respectively, p<0.01). After correcting for age, sex, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), indication for ICD implantation, and use of beta-blockers in a Cox regression model, WRF was still an independent predictor of the time to first appropriate shock (HR 2.21, 95% CI 1.32–3.69, p<0.05) and electrical storm (HR 2.22, 95% CI 1.19 – 4.13, p<0.05). The result of subgroup analysis of 147 patients with low LVEF (LVEF<35%) indicated that the patients with WRF experienced electrical storms more frequently (p<0.05). Conclusion: WRF is associated with increased rate of arrhythmic event in nonischemic HF patients. Especially, those patients with low LVEF and WRF experience more frequent ICD shocks.

scholarly journals Defibrillation success after subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator generator replacement is not affected by impedance increase

EP Europace ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
W Van Der Stuijt ◽  
S Pepplinkhuizen ◽  
ABE Quast ◽  
L Smeding ◽  
LRA Olde Nordkamp ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ventricular Arrhythmia ◽  
Success Rate ◽  
Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Retrospective Analysis ◽  
Analysis Data ◽  
Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Replacement Procedure ◽  
Shock Impedance ◽  
Tertiary Center ◽  
Generator Replacement

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background Routine defibrillation testing during implant and replacement of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) is recommended per current guidelines. Recently, concerns have been raised about an increase in shock impedance and consequent shock failure during defibrillation testing in S-ICD patients undergoing a generator replacement. Purpose We aim to describe the defibrillation success rate in relation to the shock impedance in patients undergoing S-ICD generator replacement in our large tertiary center. Methods In this retrospective analysis, data from replacement procedures were collected from all patients who underwent an S-ICD generator replacement in our center from June 2014 to December 2020. Defibrillation testing was performed with at least one shock of ≤65J, and a successful shock was defined as terminating the ventricular arrhythmia within 5 seconds after the shock. Results A total of 133 patients underwent an S-ICD generator replacement, 5.8 ± 0.9 years after initial implant. Reasons for replacement were: reaching of elective replacement indicator (n = 119), early battery depletion (n = 9), complaints of generator pocket (n = 3) and device malfunction (n = 2). Defibrillation testing was performed in 111 patients (86.5%) undergoing a replacement procedure. Shock impedance data from both the implant and replacement procedure were available in 101 patients. The median shock impedance of these patients during their replacement procedure was significantly higher than during their implant, 79Ω (IQR 66-94) and 66Ω (IQR 57.5-81) respectively (Z = -5.552, p &lt; 0.001). Despite the higher shock impedance, first shock during defibrillation testing was successful in 105/111 patients (94.6%), with a success rate of 97.3% after two attempts. In the remaining three patients, the ventricular arrhythmia could only be terminated with a 80J shock. This was the case during both their initial implant and their replacement procedure. Shock impedance increase between implant and replacement was not significantly higher in patients with a successful first shock compared to patients with an unsuccessful first shock (Δ+11.1 ± 20.0Ω versus Δ+12.7 ± 27.6Ω, p = 0.86). Conclusion In this large retrospective analysis, we have shown a first shock success rate during S-ICD generator replacement of 94.6%, which is similar to the success rate of defibrillation testing after initial implant. After multiple attempts, defibrillation testing success rate was 100%. Even though the median shock impedance during replacement was significantly higher than during the initial implant, there was no difference in impedance increase in patients with a successful shock compared to patients with an unsuccessful shock. Abstract Figure. Defibrillation success

scholarly journals LEFT VENTRICULAR LEAD IMPLANTATION FOR DETECTION OF VENTRICULAR ARRHYTHMIAS IN PATIENT WITH IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER DEFIBRILLATOR AND LOW R WAVE IN RIGHT VENTRICLE

2021 ◽  
pp. 17
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Sudden Cardiac Death ◽  
Right Ventricle ◽  
Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Cardiac Death ◽  
Ventricular Arrhythmias ◽  
Systolic Function ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Icd Implantation ◽  
Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Ventricular Lead

Dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) is a disease characterised as left ventricular (LV) or biventricular dilatation with impaired systolic function. Regardless of underlying cause patients with DCM have a propensity to ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death. Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD) implantation for these patients results in significant reduction of sudden cardiac death [1-3]. ICD devices may be limited by right ventricle (RV) sensing dysfunction with low RV sensing amplitude. We present a clinical case of patient with DCM, implanted ICD and low R wave sensing on RV lead.

5968Adherence to driving restrictions among patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator: insights from a nationwide register-linked survey study

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
J Bjerre ◽  
S M Rosenkranz ◽  
M Schou ◽  
C Jons ◽  
B T Philbert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Primary Prevention ◽  
Secondary Prevention ◽  
Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Icd Implantation ◽  
Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Driving Restrictions ◽  
Driver's License ◽  
Icd Shock

Abstract Background Patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) are restricted from driving following initial implantation or ICD shock. It is unclear how many patients are aware of, and adhere to, these restrictions. Purpose To investigate knowledge of, and adherence to, private and professional driving restrictions in a nationwide cohort of ICD patients. Methods A questionnaire was distributed to all living Danish residents ≥18 years who received a first-time ICD between 2013 and 2016 (n=3,913). During this period, Danish guidelines recommended 1 week driving restriction following ICD implantation for primary prevention, and 3 months following either ICD implantation for secondary prevention or appropriate ICD shock, and permanent restriction of professional driving and driving of large vehicles (>3.5 metric tons). Questionnaires were linked with relevant nationwide registries. Logistic regression was applied to identify factors associated with non-adherence. Results Of 2,741 questionnaire respondents, 92% (n=2,513) held a valid private driver's license at time of ICD implantation (85% male; 46% primary prevention indication; median age: 67 years (IQR: 59–73)). Of these, 7% (n=175) were actively using a professional driver's license for truck driving (n=73), bus driving (n=45), taxi driving (n=22), large vehicle driving for private use (n=54), or other purposes (n=32) (multiple purposes allowed). Only 42% of primary prevention patients, 63% of secondary prevention patients, and 72% of patients who experienced an appropriate ICD shock, recalled being informed of any driving restrictions. Only 45% of professional drivers recalled being informed about specific professional driving restrictions (Figure). Most patients (93%, n=2,344) resumed private driving after ICD implantation, more than 30% during the driving restriction period: 34% of primary prevention patients resumed driving within 1 week, 43% of secondary prevention patients resumed driving within 3 months, and 30% of patients who experienced an appropriate ICD shock resumed driving within 3 months. Professional driving was resumed by 35%. Patients who resumed driving within the restricted periods were less likely to report having received information about driving restrictions (all p<0.001) (Figure). In a multiple logistic regression model, non-adherence was predicted by reporting non-receipt of information about driving restrictions (OR: 3.34, CI: 2.27–4.03), as well as male sex (OR: 1.53, CI: 1.17–2.01), age ≥60 years (OR: 1.20, CI: 1.02–1.64), receipt of a secondary prevention ICD (OR: 2.2, CI: 1.80–2.62), and being the only driver in the household (OR: 1.29, CI: 1.05–1.57). Conclusion In this nationwide survey study, many ICD patients were unaware of the driving restrictions, and many ICD patients, including professional drivers, resumed driving within the restricted periods. More focus on communicating driving restrictions might improve adherence. Acknowledgement/Funding Danish Heart Foundation, Arvid Nilsson Foundation, Fraenkels Mindefond

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document