13 research outputs found
Efficacy and Safety of Appropriate Shocks and Antitachycardia Pacing in Transvenous and Subcutaneous Implantable Defibrillators: Analysis of All Appropriate Therapy in the PRAETORIAN Trial.
BACKGROUND: The PRAETORIAN trial (A Prospective, Randomized Comparison of Subcutaneous and Transvenous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Therapy) showed noninferiority of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) compared with transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (TV-ICD) with regard to inappropriate shocks and complications. In contrast to TV-ICD, S-ICD cannot provide antitachycardia pacing for monomorphic ventricular tachycardia. This prespecified secondary analysis evaluates appropriate therapy and whether antitachycardia pacing reduces the number of appropriate shocks. METHODS: The PRAETORIAN trial was an international, investigator-initiated randomized trial that included patients with an indication for implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy. Patients with previous ventricular tachycardia <170 bpm or refractory recurrent monomorphic ventricular tachycardia were excluded. In 39 centers, 849 patients were randomized to receive an S-ICD (n=426) or TV-ICD (n=423) and were followed for a median of 49.1 months. ICD programming was mandated by protocol. Appropriate ICD therapy was defined as therapy for ventricular arrhythmias. Arrhythmias were classified as discrete episodes and storm episodes (≥3 episodes within 24 hours). Analyses were performed in the modified intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: In the S-ICD group, 86 of 426 patients received appropriate therapy, versus 78 of 423 patients in the TV-ICD group, during a median follow-up of 52 months (48-month Kaplan-Meier estimates 19.4% and 17.5%; P=0.45). In the S-ICD group, 83 patients received at least 1 shock, versus 57 patients in the TV-ICD group (48-month Kaplan-Meier estimates 19.2% and 11.5%; P=0.02). Patients in the S-ICD group had a total of 254 shocks, compared with 228 shocks in the TV-ICD group (P=0.68). First shock efficacy was 93.8% in the S-ICD group and 91.6% in the TV-ICD group (P=0.40). The first antitachycardia pacing attempt successfully terminated 46% of all monomorphic ventricular tachycardias, but accelerated the arrhythmia in 9.4%. Ten patients with S-ICD experienced 13 electrical storms, versus 18 patients with TV-ICD with 19 electrical storms. Patients with appropriate therapy had an almost 2-fold increased relative risk of electrical storms in the TV-ICD group compared with the S-ICD group (P=0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, no difference was observed in shock efficacy of S-ICD compared with TV-ICD. Although patients in the S-ICD group were more likely to receive an ICD shock, the total number of appropriate shocks was not different between the 2 groups. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01296022
Orthostatic hypotension: clinical review and case study
Transient loss of consciousness (TLOC) accounts for 3% of all attendance in emergency departments within the UK. More than 90% of TLOC presentations are due to epileptic seizures, psychogenic seizures or syncope. However, in England and Wales in 2002, it was estimated that 92000 patients were incorrectly diagnosed with epilepsy, at an additional annual cost to the NHS of up to £189 million. This article will reflect on the case study of a 54-year-old female patient who presented with a possible TLOC, and had a background of long-term depression. Differential diagnoses will be discussed, but the article will focus on orthostatic hypotension. Being diagnosed with this condition is
independently associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality. Causes of orthostatic hypotension and the pathophysiology behind the condition will be discussed, highlighting the importance of obtaining an accurate clinical history. This is extremely pertinent if a patient collapses in an NHS setting and this is witnessed by nurses because they can contribute to the history of the type of collapse, to aid diagnosis and correct treatment. In addition, nurses have a valuable role to play in highlighting polypharmacy to doctors, and non-medical
prescribers, as a contributing factor to orthostatic hypotension is polypharmacy. It is therefore important to accurately distinguish TLOC aetiology, not only to provide appropriate management, but to also identify patients at risk of morbidity/mortality related to underlying disease.N/
Device-related complications in the subcutaneous and transvenous ICD: a secondary analysis of the PRAETORIAN trial.
BACKGROUND: The subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) is developed to overcome lead-related complications and systemic infections, inherent to transvenous ICD (TV-ICD) therapy. The PRAETORIAN trial demonstrated that the S-ICD is non-inferior to the TV-ICD with regard to the combined primary endpoint of inappropriate shocks and complications. This prespecified secondary analysis evaluates all complications in the PRAETORIAN trial. METHODS: The PRAETORIAN trial is an international, multicenter, randomised trial in which 849 patients with an indication for ICD therapy were randomised to receive an SICD (N = 426) or TV-ICD (N = 423) and followed for a median of 49 months. Endpoints were device-related complications, lead-related complications, systemic infections and the need for invasive interventions. RESULTS: Thirty-six device-related complications occurred in 31 patients in the S-ICD group of which bleedings were the most frequent. In the TV-ICD group 49 complications occurred in 44 patients of which lead-dysfunction was most frequent (HR 0.69; P =0.11). In both groups half of all complications were within 30 days after implantation. Lead-related complications and systemic infections occurred significantly less in the S-ICD group compared to the TV-ICD group (P <0.001, P =0.03 respectively). Significantly more complications required invasive interventions in the TV-ICD group compared to the S-ICD group (8.3% vs. 4.3%, HR 0.59; P =0.047). CONCLUSIONS: This secondary analysis shows that, lead-related complications and systemic infections are more prevalent in the TV-ICD group compared to the S-ICD group. In addition, complications in the TV-ICD group were more severe as they required significantly more invasive interventions. This data contributes to shared decision making in clinical practice
Update on hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and a guide to the guidelines
Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is the most common inherited cardiovascular disorder, affecting 1 in 500 individuals worldwide. Existing epidemiological studies might have underestimated the prevalence of HCM, however, owing to limited inclusion of individuals with early, incomplete phenotypic expression. Clinical manifestations of HCM include diastolic dysfunction, left ventricular outflow tract obstruction, ischaemia, atrial fibrillation, abnormal vascular responses and, in 5% of patients, progression to a 'burnt-out' phase characterized by systolic impairment. Disease-related mortality is most often attributable to sudden cardiac death, heart failure, and embolic stroke. The majority of individuals with HCM, however, have normal or near-normal life expectancy, owing in part to contemporary management strategies including family screening, risk stratification, thromboembolic prophylaxis, and implantation of cardioverter-defibrillators. The clinical guidelines for HCM issued by the ACC Foundation/AHA and the ESC facilitate evaluation and management of the disease. In this Review, we aim to assist clinicians in navigating the guidelines by highlighting important updates, current gaps in knowledge, differences in the recommendations, and challenges in implementing them, including aids and pitfalls in clinical and pathological evaluation. We also discuss the advances in genetics, imaging, and molecular research that will underpin future developments in diagnosis and therapy for HCM