Time course of appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy and implications for guideline-based driving restrictions

Michael H. Kim, Yan Zhang, Scott Sakaguchi, Jeffrey Goldberger

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background American Heart Association/Heart Rhythm Society recommendations restrict driving in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients for 6 months after implant for secondary prevention or primary prevention with an appropriate therapy (antitachycardia pacing or shock) for ventricular arrhythmias (VA). Objective The purpose of this study was to analyze implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy data to inform guideline recommendations on driving. Methods The OMNI Registry was queried for VA and assessed for the time course of appropriate therapies. A blind events committee adjudicated events. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate event rates. A 7-day blanking period was used for each event of interest. Results A total of 2262 patients (mean age 67 ± 12 years; mean left ventricular ejection fraction 28%) were enrolled; 1659 (73%) were men, and 1666 (74%) were implanted for primary prevention. Overall, 628 of 2255 patients (28%) received ≥1 appropriate therapy. The probability of receiving a subsequent appropriate therapy increased and occurred in a shorter time interval with each appropriate therapy. At 6 months, the likelihood of receiving a shock when the first VA was terminated by shock (30.0%) was 3 times the risk when the first VA was terminated by antitachycardia pacing (9.9%). Conclusion Each appropriate VA therapy is associated with an increased risk of a subsequent event that occurs, on average, in a time frame shorter than current guideline-based restrictions. A differential risk of shock is noted in those receiving antitachycardia pacing vs shock for the first appropriate VA. These findings may help to inform future clinical guideline and practice decisions related to driving.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1728-1736
Number of pages9
JournalHeart Rhythm
Volume12
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2015
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Implantable Defibrillators
Cardiac Arrhythmias
Guidelines
Shock
Primary Prevention
Therapeutics
Secondary Prevention
Practice Guidelines
Stroke Volume
Registries

Keywords

  • Antitachycardia pacing
  • Driving
  • Guidelines
  • ICD therapy
  • Shock
  • Ventricular arrhythmia

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Physiology (medical)

Cite this

Time course of appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy and implications for guideline-based driving restrictions. / Kim, Michael H.; Zhang, Yan; Sakaguchi, Scott; Goldberger, Jeffrey.

In: Heart Rhythm, Vol. 12, No. 8, 01.08.2015, p. 1728-1736.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{e70cfed415c642b185e6802639507639,
title = "Time course of appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy and implications for guideline-based driving restrictions",
abstract = "Background American Heart Association/Heart Rhythm Society recommendations restrict driving in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients for 6 months after implant for secondary prevention or primary prevention with an appropriate therapy (antitachycardia pacing or shock) for ventricular arrhythmias (VA). Objective The purpose of this study was to analyze implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy data to inform guideline recommendations on driving. Methods The OMNI Registry was queried for VA and assessed for the time course of appropriate therapies. A blind events committee adjudicated events. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate event rates. A 7-day blanking period was used for each event of interest. Results A total of 2262 patients (mean age 67 ± 12 years; mean left ventricular ejection fraction 28{\%}) were enrolled; 1659 (73{\%}) were men, and 1666 (74{\%}) were implanted for primary prevention. Overall, 628 of 2255 patients (28{\%}) received ≥1 appropriate therapy. The probability of receiving a subsequent appropriate therapy increased and occurred in a shorter time interval with each appropriate therapy. At 6 months, the likelihood of receiving a shock when the first VA was terminated by shock (30.0{\%}) was 3 times the risk when the first VA was terminated by antitachycardia pacing (9.9{\%}). Conclusion Each appropriate VA therapy is associated with an increased risk of a subsequent event that occurs, on average, in a time frame shorter than current guideline-based restrictions. A differential risk of shock is noted in those receiving antitachycardia pacing vs shock for the first appropriate VA. These findings may help to inform future clinical guideline and practice decisions related to driving.",
keywords = "Antitachycardia pacing, Driving, Guidelines, ICD therapy, Shock, Ventricular arrhythmia",
author = "Kim, {Michael H.} and Yan Zhang and Scott Sakaguchi and Jeffrey Goldberger",
year = "2015",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.hrthm.2015.04.037",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "12",
pages = "1728--1736",
journal = "Heart Rhythm",
issn = "1547-5271",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Time course of appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy and implications for guideline-based driving restrictions

AU - Kim, Michael H.

AU - Zhang, Yan

AU - Sakaguchi, Scott

AU - Goldberger, Jeffrey

PY - 2015/8/1

Y1 - 2015/8/1

N2 - Background American Heart Association/Heart Rhythm Society recommendations restrict driving in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients for 6 months after implant for secondary prevention or primary prevention with an appropriate therapy (antitachycardia pacing or shock) for ventricular arrhythmias (VA). Objective The purpose of this study was to analyze implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy data to inform guideline recommendations on driving. Methods The OMNI Registry was queried for VA and assessed for the time course of appropriate therapies. A blind events committee adjudicated events. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate event rates. A 7-day blanking period was used for each event of interest. Results A total of 2262 patients (mean age 67 ± 12 years; mean left ventricular ejection fraction 28%) were enrolled; 1659 (73%) were men, and 1666 (74%) were implanted for primary prevention. Overall, 628 of 2255 patients (28%) received ≥1 appropriate therapy. The probability of receiving a subsequent appropriate therapy increased and occurred in a shorter time interval with each appropriate therapy. At 6 months, the likelihood of receiving a shock when the first VA was terminated by shock (30.0%) was 3 times the risk when the first VA was terminated by antitachycardia pacing (9.9%). Conclusion Each appropriate VA therapy is associated with an increased risk of a subsequent event that occurs, on average, in a time frame shorter than current guideline-based restrictions. A differential risk of shock is noted in those receiving antitachycardia pacing vs shock for the first appropriate VA. These findings may help to inform future clinical guideline and practice decisions related to driving.

AB - Background American Heart Association/Heart Rhythm Society recommendations restrict driving in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients for 6 months after implant for secondary prevention or primary prevention with an appropriate therapy (antitachycardia pacing or shock) for ventricular arrhythmias (VA). Objective The purpose of this study was to analyze implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy data to inform guideline recommendations on driving. Methods The OMNI Registry was queried for VA and assessed for the time course of appropriate therapies. A blind events committee adjudicated events. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate event rates. A 7-day blanking period was used for each event of interest. Results A total of 2262 patients (mean age 67 ± 12 years; mean left ventricular ejection fraction 28%) were enrolled; 1659 (73%) were men, and 1666 (74%) were implanted for primary prevention. Overall, 628 of 2255 patients (28%) received ≥1 appropriate therapy. The probability of receiving a subsequent appropriate therapy increased and occurred in a shorter time interval with each appropriate therapy. At 6 months, the likelihood of receiving a shock when the first VA was terminated by shock (30.0%) was 3 times the risk when the first VA was terminated by antitachycardia pacing (9.9%). Conclusion Each appropriate VA therapy is associated with an increased risk of a subsequent event that occurs, on average, in a time frame shorter than current guideline-based restrictions. A differential risk of shock is noted in those receiving antitachycardia pacing vs shock for the first appropriate VA. These findings may help to inform future clinical guideline and practice decisions related to driving.

KW - Antitachycardia pacing

KW - Driving

KW - Guidelines

KW - ICD therapy

KW - Shock

KW - Ventricular arrhythmia

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84937522940&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84937522940&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.hrthm.2015.04.037

DO - 10.1016/j.hrthm.2015.04.037

M3 - Article

C2 - 25933503

AN - SCOPUS:84937522940

VL - 12

SP - 1728

EP - 1736

JO - Heart Rhythm

JF - Heart Rhythm

SN - 1547-5271

IS - 8

ER -