Deutsches Herzzentrum München, Klinik für Herz- und Kreislauferkrankungen, Faculty of Medicine, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Sacre-Coeur Hospital, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
JACC Heart Fail. 2014 Dec;2(6):611-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jchf.2014.05.015. Epub 2014 Oct 1.
The OPTION (Optimal Anti-Tachycardia Therapy in Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Patients Without Pacing Indications) trial sought to compare long-term rates of inappropriate shocks, mortality, and morbidity between dual-chamber and single-chamber settings in implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) patients.
The use of dual-chamber ICDs potentially allows better discrimination of supraventricular arrhythmias and thereby reduces inappropriate shocks. However, it may lead to detrimental ventricular pacing.
This prospective multicenter, single-blinded trial enrolled 462 patients with de novo primary or secondary prevention indications for ICD placement and with left ventricular ejection fractions ≤40% despite optimal tolerated pharmacotherapy. All patients received atrial leads and dual-chamber defibrillators that were randomized to be programmed either with dual-chamber or single-chamber settings. In the dual-chamber setting arm, the PARAD+ algorithm, which differentiates supraventricular from ventricular arrhythmias, and SafeR mode, to minimize ventricular pacing, were activated. In the single-chamber setting arm, the acceleration, stability, and long cycle search discrimination criteria were activated, and pacing was set to VVI 40 beats/min. Ventricular tachycardia detection was required at rates between 170 and 200 beats/min, and ventricular fibrillation detection was activated above 200 beats/min.
During a follow-up period of 27 months, the time to the first inappropriate shock was significantly longer in the dual-chamber setting arm (p = 0.012, log-rank test), and 4.3% of patients in the dual-chamber setting group compared with 10.3% in the single-chamber setting group experienced inappropriate shocks (p = 0.015). Rates of all-cause death or cardiovascular hospitalization were 20% for the dual-chamber setting group and 22.4% for the single-chamber setting group and satisfied the pre-defined margin for equivalence (p < 0.001).
Therapy with dual-chamber settings for ICD discrimination combined with algorithms for minimizing ventricular pacing was associated with reduced risk for inappropriate shock compared with single-chamber settings, without increases in mortality and morbidity. (Optimal Anti-Tachycardia Therapy in Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator [ICD] Patients Without Pacing Indications [OPTION]; NCT00729703).
OPTION(无起搏指征的植入式心脏复律除颤器患者的最佳抗心动过速治疗)试验旨在比较双腔和单腔设置在植入式心脏复律除颤器(ICD)患者中的长期不适当电击率、死亡率和发病率。
双腔 ICD 的使用可能有助于更好地区分室上性心律失常,从而减少不适当的电击。 然而,它可能导致有害的心室起搏。
这项前瞻性多中心、单盲试验纳入了 462 名患有新发原发性或继发性 ICD 放置适应证的患者,左心室射血分数≤40%,尽管接受了最佳耐受的药物治疗。 所有患者均接受了心房导联和双腔除颤器,随机编程为双腔或单腔设置。 在双腔设置臂中,激活了 PARAD+算法,该算法可区分室上性和室性心律失常,以及 SafeR 模式,以尽量减少心室起搏。 在单腔设置臂中,激活了加速、稳定和长周期搜索鉴别标准,起搏设置为 VVI 40 次/分。 室性心动过速检测需要在 170-200 次/分之间,室颤检测在 200 次/分以上激活。
在 27 个月的随访期间,双腔设置臂的首次不适当电击时间明显延长(p = 0.012,对数秩检验),双腔设置组有 4.3%的患者发生不适当电击,而单腔设置组有 10.3%(p = 0.015)。 双腔设置组的全因死亡或心血管住院率为 20%,单腔设置组为 22.4%,满足等效性的预设界限(p < 0.001)。
与单腔设置相比,将 ICD 鉴别用双腔设置与最小化心室起搏的算法相结合进行治疗,与不适当电击风险降低相关,而死亡率和发病率没有增加。 (植入式心脏复律除颤器[ICD]患者无起搏指征的最佳抗心动过速治疗[OPTION];NCT00729703)。