LaPage, Martin J

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy in children and congenital heart disease (CHD) patients is hampered by poor long-term lead survival. Lead extraction is technically difficult and carries substantial morbidity. Manufacturers developed distinct strategies for this issue: thinner lead bodies or a Gore ePTFE coil coating. Both design changes were thought to improve ease of lead removal, but have not been directly compared in children or adults. The purpose of this study was to assess thin and ePTFE-coated ICD lead survival in pediatric and CHD pts. Methods: The Pediatric Lead Extractability and Survival Evaluation (PLEASE) Study began as a Phase IV multicenter open-label prospective study [ NCT00335036 ], facilitated by the Pediatric & Congenital EP Society. Initially designed as a randomized study, it changed to a parallel assignment registry when 1 lead had an advisory due to high incidence of failure, prompting concern about continued clinical equipoise. Pediatric and CHD pts who underwent ICD lead implant from 2005-2010 were eligible. The end date was NCDR ICD Registry v2.0 release (includes pediatric & lead data). 23 centers participated; each site obtained IRB approval. De-identified data was sent to the PI center for verification and statistical analyses. Results: A total of 982 ICD pts (357 VVI, 558 DDD, 67 CRT-D) entered the PLEASE study, incl. 423 pts (43%) with CHD. Mean age at implant = 18.3 ± 9.9 yrs. Thin (< 7Fr) ICD leads accounted for 51%, 23% were ePTFE-coated, 26% neither thin nor coated. There were 113 ICD lead failures (11.5%) at a mean lead-age of 2.2 ± 1.7 yrs, causing shocks in 55 pts. Failure occurred in 21% of thin leads vs 3.5% of ePTFE leads (p<0.01). Extraction was performed on 142 (14.5%) leads overall; 21% of thin leads (incl. extraction of 29 functioning leads due to recall) vs. 4.4% of ePTFE leads (p<0.01). There were 7 major extraction complications (4.9%), but no procedural mortality. Among thin leads, 90/270 (33.3%) of recalled leads failed vs 15/229 (6.6%) non-recalled thin leads. Conclusions: This Phase IV study demonstrates that ICD leads in children and CHD pts have suboptimal performance overall. Thinner leads were much more likely to fail and/or be extracted compared with ePTFE leads, chiefly driven by one lead type.

BACKGROUND: In severely affected patients with catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia, beta-blockers are often insufficiently protective. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether flecainide is associated with a lower incidence of arrhythmic events (AEs) when added to beta-blockers in a large cohort of patients with catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia. METHODS: From 2 international registries, this multicenter case cross-over study included patients with a clinical or genetic diagnosis of catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia in whom flecainide was added to beta-blocker therapy. The study period was defined as the period in which background therapy (ie, beta-blocker type [beta1-selective or nonselective]), left cardiac sympathetic denervation, and implantable cardioverter defibrillator treatment status, remained unchanged within individual patients and was divided into pre-flecainide and on-flecainide periods. The primary end point was AEs, defined as sudden cardiac death, sudden cardiac arrest, appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator shock, and arrhythmic syncope. The association of flecainide with AE rates was assessed using a generalized linear mixed model assuming negative binomial distribution and random effects for patients. RESULTS: A total of 247 patients (123 [50%] females; median age at start of flecainide, 18 years [interquartile range, 14–29]; median flecainide dose, 2.2 mg/kg per day [interquartile range, 1.7–3.1]) were included. At baseline, all patients used a beta-blocker, 70 (28%) had an implantable cardioverter defibrillator, and 21 (9%) had a left cardiac sympathetic denervation. During a median pre-flecainide follow-up of 2.1 years (interquartile range, 0.4–7.2), 41 patients (17%) experienced 58 AEs (annual event rate, 5.6%). During a median on-flecainide follow-up of 2.9 years (interquartile range, 1.0–6.0), 23 patients (9%) experienced 38 AEs (annual event rate, 4.0%). There were significantly fewer AEs after initiation of flecainide (incidence rate ratio, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.38–0.83]; P =0.007). Among patients who were symptomatic before diagnosis or during the pre-flecainide period (n=167), flecainide was associated with significantly fewer AEs (incidence rate ratio, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.31–0.77]; P =0.002). Among patients with ≥1 AE on beta-blocker therapy (n=41), adding flecainide was also associated with significantly fewer AEs (incidence rate ratio, 0.25 [95% CI, 0.14–0.45]; P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia, adding flecainide to beta-blocker therapy was associated with a lower incidence of AEs in the overall cohort, in symptomatic patients, and particularly in patients with breakthrough AEs while on beta-blocker therapy.

Background: Symptomatic children with catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (CPVT) are at risk for recurrent arrhythmic events. β-Blockers decrease this risk, but studies comparing individual β-blockers in sizeable cohorts are lacking. We aimed to assess the association between risk for arrhythmic events and type of β-blocker in a large cohort of symptomatic children with CPVT. Methods: From 2 international registries of patients with CPVT, RYR2 variant–carrying symptomatic children (defined as syncope or sudden cardiac arrest before β-blocker initiation and age at start of β-blocker therapy <18 years), treated with a β-blocker were included. Cox regression analyses with time-dependent covariates for β-blockers and potential confounders were used to assess the hazard ratio (HR). The primary outcome was the first occurrence of sudden cardiac death, sudden cardiac arrest, appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shock, or syncope. The secondary outcome was the first occurrence of any of the primary outcomes except syncope. Results: We included 329 patients (median age at diagnosis, 12 [interquartile range, 7–15] years, 35% females). Ninety-nine (30.1%) patients experienced the primary outcome and 74 (22.5%) experienced the secondary outcome during a median follow-up of 6.7 (interquartile range, 2.8–12.5) years. Two-hundred sixteen patients (66.0%) used a nonselective β-blocker (predominantly nadolol [n=140] or propranolol [n=70]) and 111 (33.7%) used a β1-selective β-blocker (predominantly atenolol [n=51], metoprolol [n=33], or bisoprolol [n=19]) as initial β-blocker. Baseline characteristics did not differ. The HRs for both the primary and secondary outcomes were higher for β1-selective compared with nonselective β-blockers (HR, 2.04 [95% CI, 1.31–3.17]; and HR, 1.99 [95% CI, 1.20–3.30], respectively). When assessed separately, the HR for the primary outcome was higher for atenolol (HR, 2.68 [95% CI, 1.44–4.99]), bisoprolol (HR, 3.24 [95% CI, 1.47–7.18]), and metoprolol (HR, 2.18 [95% CI, 1.08–4.40]) compared with nadolol, but did not differ from propranolol. The HR of the secondary outcome was only higher in atenolol compared with nadolol (HR, 2.68 [95% CI, 1.30–5.55]). Conclusions: β1-selective β-blockers were associated with a significantly higher risk for arrhythmic events in symptomatic children with CPVT compared with nonselective β-blockers, specifically nadolol. Nadolol, or propranolol if nadolol is unavailable, should be the preferred β-blocker for treating symptomatic children with CPVT.

AbstractBackgroundAxillary implant location is an alternative implant location in patients for cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) for the purposes of improved cosmetic outcome. The impact from the patient's perspective is unknown. The purpose of this study was to compare scar perception scores and quality of life (QOL) in pediatric patients with axillary CIED implant location versus the standard infraclavicular approach.MethodsThis is a multicenter prospective study conducted at eight pediatric centers and it includes patients aged from 8 to 18 years with a CIED. Patients with prior sternotomy were excluded. Scar perception and QOL outcomes were compared between the infraclavicular and axillary implant locations.ResultsA total of 141 patients (83 implantable cardioverter defibrillator [ICD]/58 pacemakers) were included, 55 with an axillary device and 86 with an infraclavicular device. Patients with an ICD in the axillary position had better perception of scar appearance and consciousness. Patients in the axillary group reported, on average, a total Pediatric QOL Inventory score that was 6 (1, 11) units higher than the infraclavicular group, after adjusting for sex and race (P = 0.02).ConclusionsQOL is significantly improved in axillary in comparison to the infraclavicular CIED position, regardless of device type. Scar perception is improved in patients with ICD in the axillary position.

Background— Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy in children and congenital heart disease patients is hampered by poor long-term lead survival. Lead extraction is technically difficult and carries substantial morbidity. We sought to determine the outcomes of ICD leads in pediatric and congenital heart disease patients. Methods and Results— The Pediatric Lead Extractability and Survival Evaluation (PLEASE) is a 24-center international registry. Pediatric and congenital heart disease patients with ICD lead implantations from 2005 to 2010 were eligible. Study subjects comprised 878 ICD patients (44% congenital heart disease). Mean±SD age at implantation was 18.6±9.8 years. Of the 965 total leads, 54% were thin (≤7F), of which 57% were Fidelis, and 23% were coated with expanded polytetrafluoroethylene. There were 139 ICD lead failures (14%) in 132 patients (15%) at a mean lead age of 2.0±1.4 years, causing shocks in 53 patients (40%). Independent predictors of lead failure included younger implantation age and Fidelis leads. Actuarial analysis showed an incremental risk of lead failure with younger age at implantation: <8 years compared with >18 years ( P =0.015). The actuarial yearly failure rate was 2.3% for non-Fidelis and 9.1% for Fidelis leads. Extraction was performed on 143 leads (80% thin, 7% expanded polytetrafluoroethylene coated), with lead age as the only independent predictor for advanced extraction techniques. There were 6 major extraction complications (4%) but no procedural mortality. Conclusions— This study demonstrates that ICD leads in children and congenital heart disease patients have an age-related suboptimal performance, further compounded by a high failure rate of Fidelis leads. Advanced extraction techniques were common and correlated with older lead age. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00335036.