Arrhythmias & electrophysiology
Exploiting SMART pass filter deactivation detection to minimize inappropriate subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapies: a real-world single-centre experience and management guide
Main finding · ITResult — go to the resultHazard ratio 5.36 95% CI 2.37–12.13Study context
- Population
- Patients with Emblem subcutaneous internal cardiac defibrillator (S-ICD) devices implanted 2016 to 2020; 73% primary prevention
- Participants
- 348 patients
- Exposure
- SMART Pass (SP) deactivation vs no SP deactivation
- SP deactivationn = 32
- Outcome
- Inappropriate therapy (IT)
- Follow-up
- 27 ± 16.6 months
Methodological detailssingle-centre, audit of health records and remote monitoring data
- Single-centre
- Audit of health records and remote monitoring data
Main finding
IT
Hazard ratio
5.36
95% CI 2.37–12.13
SP deactivationvs No SP deactivation
HR 5.36 (95% CI 2.37–12.13)
As reported in the abstract
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
Shocks and inappropriate therapy (IT), whole cohort
- Patients receiving shocks (83 shocks)
- 38 (11.8%)
- Patients receiving IT (44 IT)
- 27 (7.8%)
- IT due to oversensing
- 98%
- IT due to aberrantly conducted AF
- 2%
SP deactivation
- SP deactivation incidence (32 of 348)
- 9%
- Due to low amplitude R waves
- 94%
- Associated with higher defibrillation threshold at implant and arrhythmogenic RV cardiomyopathy
IT after corrective interventions · 16 ± 15.5 months
- Changing sensing vector successful
- 59%
- No further IT
Original publication
Exploiting SMART pass filter deactivation detection to minimize inappropriate subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapies: a real-world single-centre experience and management guide. Europace. Published 1 April 2023. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →