Schiedat Fabian, Meuterodt Benjamin, Winter Joachim, Prull Magnus, Aweimer Assem, Gotzmann Michael, O'Connor Stephen, Perings Christian, Lawo Thomas, El-Battrawy Ibrahim, Hanefeld Christoph, Korth Johannes, Mügge Andreas, Kloppe Axel
Department of Cardiology and Angiology, Marienhospital Gelsenkirchen, Academic Hospital of the Ruhr University Bochum, 45886 Gelsenkirchen, Germany.
Department of Cardiology and Angiology, University Hospital Bergmannsheil Bochum of the Ruhr-University Bochum, 44789 Bochum, Germany.
J Pers Med. 2024 Aug 17;14(8):870. doi: 10.3390/jpm14080870.
Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) prevent sudden cardiac death (SCD). Patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) requiring dialysis are at a very high risk of infection from cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation as well as mortality. In the present study, we compared the long-term complications and outcomes between subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) and transvenous ICD (TV-ICD) recipients.
In this retrospective analysis, we analyzed a total of 43 patients with ESRD requiring dialysis who received either a prophylactic S-ICD (26 patients) or a single right ventricular lead TV-ICD (17 patients) at seven experienced centers in Germany. Follow-up was performed bi-annually, at the end of which the data concerning comorbidities and, if applicable, reason for death were checked and confirmed with patients' general practitioner, nephrologist and cardiologist.
The median follow up duration was 95.6 months (range 42.8-126.3 months). Baseline characteristics were without noteworthy significant differences between groups. During follow-up (FU), there were significantly more device-associated infections (HR 8.72, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.18 to 12.85, < 0.05) and device-associated hospitalizations (HR 10.20, 95% CI 1.22 to 84.61, < 0.001), as well as a higher cardiovascular mortality (HR 9.17, 95% CI 1.12 to 8.33, < 0.05), in the TV-ICD group. The number of patients requiring hospitalization for any reason was significantly higher in the TV-ICD group (HR 2.59, 95% CI 1.12 to 6.41, < 0.05). There was no significant difference in overall mortality (HR 1.92, 95% CI 0.96 to 6.15, = 0.274).
Our data suggest that, in this extended follow-up in seriously compromised renal patients on dialysis, the S-ICD patients have statistically fewer device infections and hospitalizations as well as lower cardiac mortality compared with the TV-ICD cohort.
植入式心脏复律除颤器(ICD)可预防心源性猝死(SCD)。需要透析的终末期肾病(ESRD)患者因植入心脏植入式电子设备(CIED)而面临极高的感染风险以及死亡风险。在本研究中,我们比较了皮下ICD(S-ICD)和经静脉ICD(TV-ICD)接受者的长期并发症及预后情况。
在这项回顾性分析中,我们分析了德国七个经验丰富的中心共43例需要透析的ESRD患者,这些患者接受了预防性S-ICD(26例)或单右心室导线TV-ICD(17例)。每半年进行一次随访,随访结束时,与患者的全科医生、肾病科医生和心脏病专家核对并确认有关合并症以及(如适用)死亡原因的数据。
中位随访时间为95.6个月(范围42.8 - 126.3个月)。两组间基线特征无明显显著差异。在随访期间(FU),TV-ICD组的设备相关感染(风险比[HR] 8.72,95%置信区间[CI] 1.18至12.85,<0.05)、设备相关住院(HR 10.20,95% CI 1.22至84.61,<0.001)以及心血管死亡率更高(HR 9.17,95% CI 1.12至8.33,<0.05)。TV-ICD组因任何原因需要住院的患者数量显著更高(HR 2.59,95% CI 1.12至6.41,<0.05)。总死亡率无显著差异(HR 1.92,95% CI 0.96至6.15,P = 0.274)。
我们的数据表明,在对严重肾功能不全的透析患者进行的此次延长随访中,与TV-ICD队列相比,S-ICD患者在统计学上的设备感染和住院次数更少,心脏死亡率更低。