Copyright
©The Author(s) 2017.
World J Cardiol. Feb 26, 2017; 9(2): 167-173
Published online Feb 26, 2017. doi: 10.4330/wjc.v9.i2.167
Published online Feb 26, 2017. doi: 10.4330/wjc.v9.i2.167
All | Effective SMT | Ineffective SMT | P-value | |
Number, n (%) | 618 | 596 (96.3) | 22 (3.7) | |
Sex | ||||
Male, n | 470 | 452 | 18 | |
Female, n | 148 | 144 | 4 | |
Age (years) | ||||
Mean (± SD) | 66.4 (± 11) | 66.7 (± 10.6) | 54.6 (± 16.5) | P = 0.0003 |
Median (IQR) | 69 (60-74) | 69 (62-74) | 54 (41-69) | |
LVEF (%) | ||||
Mean (± SD) | 31 (± 12.4) | 31 (± 12.5) | 26.9 (± 9.0) | P = n.s. |
Median (IQR) | 30 (22-35) | 30 (23-35) | 30 (20-35) | |
LVEF > 30%, n (%) | 248 (40.1) | 240 (36.9) | 8 (3.2) | |
LVEF < 30%, n (%) | 370 (59.9) | 356 (56.1) | 14 (3.8) | P = n.s. (> 30% vs < 30%) |
LVEF > 20%, n (%) | 334 (54.0) | 320 (49.8) | 14 (4.2) | |
LVEF < 20%, n (%) | 284 (46) | 276 (43.2) | 8 (2.8) | P = n.s. (> 20% vs < 20%) |
BMI (kg/m2) | ||||
Mean (± SD) | 28.4 (± 4.7) | 28 (± 4.7) | 29 (± 4.0) | P = n.s. |
Median (IQR) | 28 (17-28) | 28 (25-31) | 29 (25.5-33) | |
Indikation | ||||
Primary prevention, n (%) | 468 (76) | 452 (72.6) | 16 (3.4) | |
Secundary prevention, n (%) | 150 (24) | 144 (20) | 6 (4.0) | P = n.s. (pp vs sp) |
Type of arrhythmia for secondary prevention, n (%) | ||||
Sustained VT | 108 (72) | 106 (70.1) | 2 (1.9) | |
VF | 42 (28) | 38 (18.1) | 4 (9.5) | P = 0.05 (VT vs VF) |
SMT-Energy (J) | ||||
Mean (± SD) | 21 (± 2.3) | 20.8 (± 2.3) | 30.9 (± 2.0) | |
Median (IQR) | 20 (20-22) | 20 (20-20) | 30 (30-30) | |
Diagnosis | ||||
Non CAD, n (%) | 270 | 254 (94.1) | 16 (5.9) | |
DCM (myocarditis), n (%) | 232 (85) | 218 (79) | 14 (6.0) | |
Other CM (non myocarditis), n (%) | 38 (15) | 36 (9.8) | 2 (5.2) | |
CAD, n (%) | 348 | 342 (98.3) | 6 (1.7) | P = 0.007 (nonCAD vs CAD) |
Complete revascularized, n (%) | 196 (56) | 192 (54) | 4 (2.0) | |
Not complete revascularized, n (%) | 152 (44) | 150 (42.7) | 2 (1.3) | P = n.s. (complete vs in-complete revascularized) |
One vessel disease | 124 (81.6) | 122 (80.0) | 2 (1.6) | |
> One vessel disease | 28 (18.4) | 28 (18.4) | 0 (0) | P = n.s. (one vesel vs > one) |
Stenosed | 100 (65.8) | 100 (65.8) | 0 (0) | |
Occluded | 52 (34.2) | 50 (30.4) | 2 (3.8) | P = n.s. (stenosed vs occluded) |
Medication | ||||
Amiodaron medication, n (%) | 124 (20) | 118 (15.2) | 6 (4.8) | |
No amiodaron, n (%) | 494 (80) | 478 (76.8) | 16 (3.2) | P = n.s. (amio vs no amio) |
n | Age at time of implantation (years) | Sex (m/f) | Indication for ICD implantation | LVEF (%) | Primary vs secondary ICD indication | Further management after failed initial SMT |
1 | 46 | m | LAD stenosed | 30 | pp | Subcutaneous array |
2 | 45 | w | oCM | 15 | pp | PDT OK |
3 | 74 | w | oCM | 36 | pp | Subcutaneous array |
4 | 41 | m | cmpl revasc | 39 | pp | Subcutaneous array |
5 | 54 | w | DCM | 10 | pp | Subcutaneous array |
6 | 25 | m | oCM | 20 | sp | Subcutaneous array |
7 | 68 | m | DCM | 35 | sp | Subcutaneous array |
8 | 69 | m | RCA occluded | 31 | sp | PDT OK |
9 | 73 | m | oCM | 30 | pp | PDT OK |
10 | 37 | m | TGV surgery | 30 | pp | Subcutaneous array |
11 | 69 | m | DCM | 20 | pp | none |
12 | 46 | m | LAD stenosed | 30 | pp | Subcutaneous array |
13 | 45 | w | DCM | 15 | pp | PDT OK |
14 | 74 | w | DCM | 36 | pp | Subcutaneous array |
15 | 41 | m | cmpl revasc | 39 | pp | Subcutaneous array |
16 | 54 | w | DCM | 10 | pp | Subcutaneous array |
17 | 25 | m | DCM | 20 | sp | Subcutaneous array |
18 | 68 | m | DCM | 35 | sp | Subcutaneous array |
19 | 69 | m | RCA occluded | 31 | sp | PDT OK |
20 | 73 | m | DCM | 30 | pp | PDT OK |
21 | 37 | m | vs D surgery | 30 | pp | Subcutaneous array |
22 | 69 | m | DCM | 20 | pp | None |
All | Effective SMT | Ineffective SMT | P-value | ||
FU, n (%) | 552 (89.3) | 530 (96) | 22 (100) | ||
FU duration (mo) | Mean (± SD) | 21.1 (± 21) | 21.5 (± 21) | 15.8 (± 21) | P = n.s. |
Antiarrhythmica, n (%) | |||||
Amiodarone | 122 (23.0) | 6 (27) | P = n.s. | ||
Sotalex | 2 (0.4) | 0 (0) | P = n.s. | ||
β-blocker | 485 (91.5) | 20 (91) | P = n.s. | ||
Events during FU, n (%) | 124 (23.4) | 2 (9.1) | P = 0.02 | ||
Inadequate therapy | 4 (0.8) | 2 (9.1) | P = n.s. | ||
ATP | 58 (10.9) | 0 (0) | |||
Shock delivery | 36 (6.8) | 0 (0) | |||
ATP and shock delivery | 20 (3.8) | 0 (0) | |||
VT ablation | 6 (1.1) | 0 (0) |
- Citation: Roos M, Geller JC, Ohlow MA. Critical analysis of ineffective post implantation implantable cardioverter-defibrillator-testing. World J Cardiol 2017; 9(2): 167-173
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1949-8462/full/v9/i2/167.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4330/wjc.v9.i2.167