Frequency of and outcomes associated with nonadherence to guideline-based recommendations for an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in patients with congenital long QT syndrome
Raquel Neves MD , Lia Crotti MD, PhD , Sahej Bains BS , J. Martijn Bos MD, PhD , Federica Dagradi MD , Giulia Musu MD , Ramin Garmany BS , Fulvio L.F. Giovenzana MD , Paolo Cerea MD , John R. Giudicessi MD, PhD , Peter J. Schwartz MD, FHRS , Michael J. Ackerman MD, PhD
{"title":"Frequency of and outcomes associated with nonadherence to guideline-based recommendations for an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in patients with congenital long QT syndrome","authors":"Raquel Neves MD , Lia Crotti MD, PhD , Sahej Bains BS , J. Martijn Bos MD, PhD , Federica Dagradi MD , Giulia Musu MD , Ramin Garmany BS , Fulvio L.F. Giovenzana MD , Paolo Cerea MD , John R. Giudicessi MD, PhD , Peter J. Schwartz MD, FHRS , Michael J. Ackerman MD, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.hrthm.2024.09.063","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Guideline-directed device therapy for long QT syndrome (LQTS) has evolved during the years, and indications for an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) vary between professional cardiac societies.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>We aimed to identify the subset of patients with LQTS who satisfied a class I or class II 2022 European Society of Cardiology guideline-based recommendation for an ICD and to determine the outcomes of those patients who received an ICD compared with those treated without an ICD.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Retrospective analysis was conducted of 2861 patients with LQT1, LQT2, or LQT3 to identify patients meeting contemporary recommendations for guideline-directed device therapy. Basic demographics, clinical characteristics, and frequency/type of breakthrough cardiac events (BCEs) were extracted, and outcomes/complications were compared between patients treated with an ICD and those treated without one.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of the 290 patients (approximately 10%) who met a guideline-based recommendation, 53 (18%) satisfied a class I/level B indication for an ICD; 56 (19%), a class I/level C indication; 19 (7%), a class IIa/level C indication; and 162 (56%), a class IIb/level B indication. However, most patients (156/290 [54%]) did not receive an ICD. Of those who received an ICD, 55 of 134 (41%) experienced ≥1 appropriate ventricular fibrillation–terminating ICD therapy, whereas ICD-related complications occurred in 13 patients (10%). Of those who were treated without an ICD, only 6 of 156 patients (4%) had nonlethal BCEs, which was significantly lower compared with the ICD group (<em>P</em> < .001).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>With >1200 years of combined follow-up, the experience and evidence from our 2 LQTS specialty centers suggest that many patients who satisfy a recommendation for an ICD based on the latest 2022 European Society of Cardiology guidelines may not need one. This is particularly true when the indication stemmed from a BCE while receiving beta blocker therapy or in asymptomatic patients with an increased 1-2-3-LQTS-Risk score.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12886,"journal":{"name":"Heart rhythm","volume":"22 8","pages":"Pages 2073-2081"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heart rhythm","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1547527124033940","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Guideline-directed device therapy for long QT syndrome (LQTS) has evolved during the years, and indications for an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) vary between professional cardiac societies.
Objective
We aimed to identify the subset of patients with LQTS who satisfied a class I or class II 2022 European Society of Cardiology guideline-based recommendation for an ICD and to determine the outcomes of those patients who received an ICD compared with those treated without an ICD.
Methods
Retrospective analysis was conducted of 2861 patients with LQT1, LQT2, or LQT3 to identify patients meeting contemporary recommendations for guideline-directed device therapy. Basic demographics, clinical characteristics, and frequency/type of breakthrough cardiac events (BCEs) were extracted, and outcomes/complications were compared between patients treated with an ICD and those treated without one.
Results
Of the 290 patients (approximately 10%) who met a guideline-based recommendation, 53 (18%) satisfied a class I/level B indication for an ICD; 56 (19%), a class I/level C indication; 19 (7%), a class IIa/level C indication; and 162 (56%), a class IIb/level B indication. However, most patients (156/290 [54%]) did not receive an ICD. Of those who received an ICD, 55 of 134 (41%) experienced ≥1 appropriate ventricular fibrillation–terminating ICD therapy, whereas ICD-related complications occurred in 13 patients (10%). Of those who were treated without an ICD, only 6 of 156 patients (4%) had nonlethal BCEs, which was significantly lower compared with the ICD group (P < .001).
Conclusion
With >1200 years of combined follow-up, the experience and evidence from our 2 LQTS specialty centers suggest that many patients who satisfy a recommendation for an ICD based on the latest 2022 European Society of Cardiology guidelines may not need one. This is particularly true when the indication stemmed from a BCE while receiving beta blocker therapy or in asymptomatic patients with an increased 1-2-3-LQTS-Risk score.
期刊介绍:
HeartRhythm, the official Journal of the Heart Rhythm Society and the Cardiac Electrophysiology Society, is a unique journal for fundamental discovery and clinical applicability.
HeartRhythm integrates the entire cardiac electrophysiology (EP) community from basic and clinical academic researchers, private practitioners, engineers, allied professionals, industry, and trainees, all of whom are vital and interdependent members of our EP community.
The Heart Rhythm Society is the international leader in science, education, and advocacy for cardiac arrhythmia professionals and patients, and the primary information resource on heart rhythm disorders. Its mission is to improve the care of patients by promoting research, education, and optimal health care policies and standards.