Department of Electrophysiology, University Heart Center, Hamburg, Germany.
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2012 Oct;5(5):913-9. doi: 10.1161/CIRCEP.112.973339. Epub 2012 Aug 23.
Recently, subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) has become available. The aim of our study was to assess the efficacy of S-ICD in a clinical setting.
Between June 2010 and July 2011, 40 consecutive patients (42 ± 15 years; body mass index, 27 ± 6 kg/m(2); left ventricular ejection fraction, 47 ± 15%; 28 men) received an S-ICD for primary (n=17) or secondary prevention (n=23 [58%]) at 3 institutions in Germany. Intraoperative defibrillation efficacy testing failed in 1 patient with severely reduced left ventricular ejection fraction; testing was effective in all other patients. All episodes stored in the S-ICD were analyzed for appropriate and inappropriate detection, as well as effective shock delivery to convert ventricular tachyarrhythmia into sinus rhythm. During a median follow-up of 229 (interquartile range, 116-305) days, 4 patients experienced 21 episodes, with correct detection of ventricular tachyarrhythmia and subsequent shock therapy. A total of 28 shocks were delivered in these 4 patients. Mixed logistic regression modeling revealed a shock efficacy of 96.4% (95% CI, 12.8%-100%). The efficacy of first shocks, however, was only 57.9% (95% CI, 35.6%-77.4%). Four episodes were incorrectly classified as ventricular tachyarrhythmia, which led to inappropriate shock delivery in 2 patients.
Ineffective shock delivery may occur in patients with S-ICD, even after successful intraoperative testing. Multicenter trials are required with close monitoring of safety and efficacy end points to identify patients who may be at risk for shock failure.
最近,皮下植入式心律转复除颤器(S-ICD)已经问世。我们的研究旨在评估 S-ICD 在临床环境中的疗效。
2010 年 6 月至 2011 年 7 月,在德国的 3 家机构,40 例连续患者(42±15 岁;体重指数 27±6kg/m2;左室射血分数 47±15%;28 例男性)因原发性(n=17)或继发性预防(n=23 [58%])接受了 S-ICD。1 例左室射血分数严重降低的患者术中除颤效果测试失败;其余患者测试均有效。对所有在 S-ICD 中存储的事件进行了分析,以确定适当和不适当的检测,以及有效地将室性心动过速/心室颤动转换为窦性节律的电击治疗。在中位数为 229(四分位距,116-305)天的随访期间,4 例患者经历了 21 次发作,正确检测到室性心动过速/心室颤动并随后进行电击治疗。这 4 例患者共进行了 28 次电击治疗。混合逻辑回归模型显示电击治疗的有效性为 96.4%(95%可信区间,12.8%-100%)。然而,首次电击的疗效仅为 57.9%(95%可信区间,35.6%-77.4%)。4 个事件被错误地归类为室性心动过速/心室颤动,导致 2 例患者出现不适当的电击治疗。
即使在术中测试成功后,S-ICD 患者也可能出现电击无效。需要进行多中心试验,并密切监测安全性和疗效终点,以确定可能存在电击失败风险的患者。