CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

急性冠脉综合征

Abstract

Recommended Article

Implications of Alternative Definitions of Peri-Procedural Myocardial Infarction After Coronary Revascularization Advances in Clinical Cardiology 2020: A Summary of Key Clinical Trials High-Sensitivity Troponin I Levels and Coronary Artery Disease Severity, Progression, and Long-Term Outcomes Incidence and Outcomes of Acute Coronary Syndrome After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Timing of Oral P2Y12 Inhibitor Administration in Patients With Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome Mild Hypothermia in Cardiogenic Shock Complicating Myocardial Infarction - The Randomized SHOCK-COOL Trial Impact of tissue protrusion after coronary stenting in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction Prevalence of anginal symptoms and myocardial ischemia and their effect on clinical outcomes in outpatients with stable coronary artery disease: data from the International Observational CLARIFY Registry

Original Research14 September 2021

JOURNAL:Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. Article Link

Significantly less inappropriate shocks in ischemic patients compared to non-ischemic patients: The S-ICD experience of a high volume single-center

E Oosterwerff, A Adiyaman, A Elvan et al. Keywords: S-ICD; ischemic cardiomyopathy; non-ischemic cardiomyopathy; inappropriate shocks

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND - The subcutaneous cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) continues to be preferentially used in relatively young patients, with less advanced heart disease.

 

OBJECTIVE - We, therefore, studied the short and long-term efficacy and safety of the S-ICD in subgroups of patients, which are underreported at present.

 

METHODS - A total of 218 patients between November 2010 and February 2019 undergoing S-ICD with a follow up of at least 6 months implantation were included in a prospective registry. Mean follow up was 38 months.

 

RESULTS - The most common indication for S-ICD implantation was ischemic cardiomyopathy (n = 106, 49%). Complication rate needing invasive intervention was 9% (n = 21). Appropriate shock rate in patients with an S-ICD was 3.5%/year. A total of 30 inappropriate shocks (IAS) occurred in 19 patients (8.7%; 2.7%/year). The proportion of appropriate and inappropriate shock rates in patients with different cardiomyopathies shows remarkable variances. There were significant more IAS (3.6%/year vs. 1.7%/year,p = .048) in patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy versus patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. Multivariate analysis identified, besides type of cardiomyopathy, atrial fibrillation (AF) as predictor for IAS.

 

CONCLUSION - In this real-world prospective registry we analyzed S-ICD performance in the more traditional ICD patient. Patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy had significantly less inappropriate therapy compared to patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy and appear to be appropriate patients for this type of device.