The wearable cardioverter-defibrillator: experience in 153 patients and a long-term follow-up
Background: The wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) is available for patients at high risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD) when immediate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation is not possible or indicated. Patient selection remains challenging especially in primary preventio...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article (Journal) |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
24 March 2020
|
| In: |
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Year: 2020, Volume: 9, Issue: 3 |
| ISSN: | 2077-0383 |
| DOI: | 10.3390/jcm9030893 |
| Online Access: | Verlag, kostenfrei, Volltext: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9030893 Verlag, kostenfrei, Volltext: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/9/3/893 
|
| Author Notes: | Stephanie L. Rosenkaimer, Ibrahim El-Battrawy, Tobias C. Dreher, Stefan Gerhards, Susanne Röger, Jürgen Kuschyk, Martin Borggrefe and Ibrahim Akin |
| Summary: | Background: The wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) is available for patients at high risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD) when immediate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation is not possible or indicated. Patient selection remains challenging especially in primary prevention. Long-term data on these patients is still lacking. Methods: 153 patients were included in this study. They were prescribed the WCD between April 2012 and March 2019 at the University Medical Center, Mannheim, Germany. The mean follow-up period was 36.2 ± 15.6 months. Outcome data, including all-cause mortality, were analyzed by disease etiology and ICD implantation following WCD use. Results: We analyzed 56 patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy, 70 patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, 16 patients with prior need for ICD/CRT-D (device for cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator) explanation, 8 patients with acute myocarditis and 3 patients with congenital diseases. 58% of the patients did not need ICD/CRT-D implantation after WCD use. 4% of all patients suffered from appropriate WCD shocks. 2 of these patients (33%) experienced appropriate ICD shocks after implantation due to ventricular tachyarrhythmias. Long-term follow-up shows a good overall survival. All-cause mortality was 10%. There was no significant difference between patients with or without subsequent ICD implantation (p = 0.48). Patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy numerically showed a higher long-term mortality than patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (14% vs. 6%, p = 0.13) and received significantly more ICD shocks after implantation (10% of ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) patients versus 3% of non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) patients, p = 0.04). All patients with ventricular tachyarrhythmias during WCD use or after ICD implantation survived the follow-up period. Conclusion: Following WCD use, ICD implantation could be avoided in 58% of patients. Long-term follow-up shows good overall survival. The majority of all patients did not suffer from WCD shocks nor did receive ICD shocks after subsequent implantation. Patient selection regarding predictive conditions on long-term risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias needs further risk stratification. |
|---|---|
| Item Description: | Gesehen am 10.12.2020 |
| Physical Description: | Online Resource |
| ISSN: | 2077-0383 |
| DOI: | 10.3390/jcm9030893 |