open access

Vol 26, No 5 (2019)
Original articles — Clinical cardiology
Published online: 2018-04-25
Get Citation

The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: A tertiary center experience

Cesar Khazen, Peter Magnusson, Johannes Flandorfer, Christoph Schukro
DOI: 10.5603/CJ.a2018.0050
·
Pubmed: 29718532
·
Cardiol J 2019;26(5):543-549.

open access

Vol 26, No 5 (2019)
Original articles — Clinical cardiology
Published online: 2018-04-25

Abstract

Background: The aim of the study was to evaluate subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) patients with regard to underlying etiology, peri-procedural outcome, appropriate/inappropriate shocks, and complications during follow-up. Methods: All patients who underwent S-ICD implantation from February 2013 to March 2017 at an academic hospital in Vienna were included. Medical records were examined and follow-up interrogations of devices were conducted. Results: A total of 79 S-ICD patients (58.2% males) with a mean age of 44.5 ± 17.2 years were followed for a mean duration of 12.8 ± 13.7 months. A majority of patients (58.2%) had S-ICD for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death. The most common of the 16 underlying etiologies were ischemic cardiomyopathy, non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, and idiopathic ventricular fibrillation. The lead was implanted to the left sternal border in 96.2% of cases, between muscular layers in 72.2%. Mean implant time was 45 min, 3 patients were induced, and all patients except one were programmed to two zones. Six (7.6%) patients experienced at least one appropriate therapy for ventricular arrhythmias and the time to first event ranged from 1 to 52 months. Seven patients experienced inappropriate shocks due to T-wave oversensing, atrial tachycardia with rapid atrioventricular conduction, external electromagnetic interference, and/or baseline oversensing due to lead movement. Four patients underwent revision for lead repositioning (n = 1), loose device suture (n = 1), and infection (n = 2). Conclusions: While S-ICDs are a feasible and effective treatment, issues remain with inappropriate shock and infection.

Abstract

Background: The aim of the study was to evaluate subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) patients with regard to underlying etiology, peri-procedural outcome, appropriate/inappropriate shocks, and complications during follow-up. Methods: All patients who underwent S-ICD implantation from February 2013 to March 2017 at an academic hospital in Vienna were included. Medical records were examined and follow-up interrogations of devices were conducted. Results: A total of 79 S-ICD patients (58.2% males) with a mean age of 44.5 ± 17.2 years were followed for a mean duration of 12.8 ± 13.7 months. A majority of patients (58.2%) had S-ICD for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death. The most common of the 16 underlying etiologies were ischemic cardiomyopathy, non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, and idiopathic ventricular fibrillation. The lead was implanted to the left sternal border in 96.2% of cases, between muscular layers in 72.2%. Mean implant time was 45 min, 3 patients were induced, and all patients except one were programmed to two zones. Six (7.6%) patients experienced at least one appropriate therapy for ventricular arrhythmias and the time to first event ranged from 1 to 52 months. Seven patients experienced inappropriate shocks due to T-wave oversensing, atrial tachycardia with rapid atrioventricular conduction, external electromagnetic interference, and/or baseline oversensing due to lead movement. Four patients underwent revision for lead repositioning (n = 1), loose device suture (n = 1), and infection (n = 2). Conclusions: While S-ICDs are a feasible and effective treatment, issues remain with inappropriate shock and infection.

Get Citation

Keywords

arrhythmia; complication; subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator; sudden cardiac death

About this article
Title

The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: A tertiary center experience

Journal

Cardiology Journal

Issue

Vol 26, No 5 (2019)

Pages

543-549

Published online

2018-04-25

DOI

10.5603/CJ.a2018.0050

Pubmed

29718532

Bibliographic record

Cardiol J 2019;26(5):543-549.

Keywords

arrhythmia
complication
subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator
sudden cardiac death

Authors

Cesar Khazen
Peter Magnusson
Johannes Flandorfer
Christoph Schukro

References (20)
  1. McLeod CJ, Boersma L, Okamura H, et al. The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator: state-of-the-art review. Eur Heart J. 2017; 38(4): 247–257.
  2. Kleemann T, Becker T, Doenges K, et al. Annual rate of transvenous defibrillation lead defects in implantable cardioverter-defibrillators over a period of >10 years. Circulation. 2007; 115(19): 2474–2480.
  3. Burke MC, Gold MR, Knight BP, et al. Safety and Efficacy of the Totally Subcutaneous Implantable Defibrillator: 2-Year Results From a Pooled Analysis of the IDE Study and EFFORTLESS Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015; 65(16): 1605–1615.
  4. Bardy GH, Smith WM, Hood MA, et al. An entirely subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. N Engl J Med. 2010; 363(1): 36–44.
  5. Dabiri Abkenari L, Theuns DA, Valk SDA, et al. Clinical experience with a novel subcutaneous implantable defibrillator system in a single center. Clin Res Cardiol. 2011; 100(9): 737–744.
  6. Olde Nordkamp LRA, Dabiri Abkenari L, Boersma LVA, et al. The entirely subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: initial clinical experience in a large Dutch cohort. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012; 60(19): 1933–1939.
  7. Aydin A, Hartel F, Schlüter M, et al. Shock efficacy of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator for prevention of sudden cardiac death: initial multicenter experience. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2012; 5(5): 913–919.
  8. Jarman JWE, Todd DM. United Kingdom national experience of entirely subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator technology: important lessons to learn. Europace. 2013; 15(8): 1158–1165.
  9. Köbe J, Reinke F, Meyer C, et al. Implantation and follow-up of totally subcutaneous versus conventional implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: a multicenter case-control study. Heart Rhythm. 2013; 10(1): 29–36.
  10. Frommeyer G, Dechering DG, Zumhagen S, et al. Long-term follow-up of subcutaneous ICD systems in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a single-center experience. Clin Res Cardiol. 2016; 105(1): 89–93.
  11. Brouwer TF, Yilmaz D, Lindeboom R, et al. Long-Term clinical outcomes of subcutaneous versus transvenous implantable defibrillator therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016; 68(19): 2047–2055.
  12. Honarbakhsh S, Providencia R, Srinivasan N, et al. A propensity matched case-control study comparing efficacy, safety and costs of the subcutaneous vs. transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator. Int J Cardiol. 2017; 228: 280–285.
  13. Mesquita J, Cavaco D, Ferreira A, et al. Effectiveness of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators and determinants of inappropriate shock delivery. Int J Cardiol. 2017; 232: 176–180.
  14. Mithani AA, Kath H, Hunter K, et al. Characteristics and early clinical outcomes of patients undergoing totally subcutaneous vs. transvenous single chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillator placement. Europace. 2018; 20(2): 308–314.
  15. Moss AJ, Schuger C, Beck CA, et al. MADIT-RIT Trial Investigators. Reduction in inappropriate therapy and mortality through ICD programming. N Engl J Med. 2012; 367(24): 2275–2283.
  16. Olde Nordkamp LRA, Warnaars JLF, Kooiman KM, et al. Which patients are not suitable for a subcutaneous ICD: incidence and predictors of failed QRS-T-wave morphology screening. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2014; 25(5): 494–499.
  17. Weinstock J, Bader YH, Maron MS, et al. Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: an initial experience. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016; 5(2).
  18. Brisben AJ, Burke MC, Knight BP, et al. A new algorithm to reduce inappropriate therapy in the S-ICD system. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2015; 26(4): 417–423.
  19. Friedman DJ, Parzynski CS, Varosy PD, et al. Trends and in-hospital outcomes associated with adoption of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator in the united states. JAMA Cardiol. 2016; 1(8): 900–911.
  20. Winter J, Siekiera M, Shin DI, et al. Intermuscular technique for implantation of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator: long-term performance and complications. Europace. 2017; 19(12): 2036–2041.

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

By "Via Medica sp. z o.o." sp.k., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk, Poland
tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, fax:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail: viamedica@viamedica.pl