BACKGROUND Despite the high rate of sudden death after myocardial infarction among patients with a low ejection fraction, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators are contraindi-cated until 40 to 90 days after myocardial infarction. Whether a wearable cardio- verter-defibrillator would reduce the incidence of sudden death during this high-risk period is unclear. METHODS We randomly assigned (in a 2:1 ratio) patients with acute myocardial infarction and an ejection fraction of 35% or less to receive a wearable cardioverter-defibrillator plus guideline-directed therapy (the device group) or to receive only guideline-directed therapy (the control group). The primary outcome was the composite of sudden death or death from ventricular tachyarrhythmia at 90 days (arrhythmic death). Secondary outcomes included death from any cause and nonarrhythmic death. RESULTS Of 2302 participants, 1524 were randomly assigned to the device group and 778 to the control group. Participants in the device group wore the device for a median of 18.0 hours per day (interquartile range, 3.8 to 22.7). Arrhythmic death occurred in 1.6% of the participants in the device group and in 2.4% of those in the control group (relative risk, 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37 to 1.21; P=0.18). Death from any cause occurred in 3.1% of the participants in the device group and in 4.9% of those in the control group (relative risk, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.98; uncorrected P=0.04), and nonarrhythmic death in 1.4% and 2.2%, respectively (relative risk, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.33 to 1.19; uncorrected P=0.15). Of the 48 participants in the device group who died, 12 were wearing the device at the time of death. A total of 20 participants in the device group (1.3%) received an appropriate shock, and 9 (0.6%) received an inappropriate shock. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with a recent myocardial infarction and an ejection fraction of 35% or less, the wearable cardioverter-defibrillator did not lead to a significantly lower rate of the primary outcome of arrhythmic death than control. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and Zoll Medical; VEST ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01446965.)

Background: The Subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) is safe and effective for sudden cardiac death prevention. However, patients in previous S-ICD studies had fewer comorbidities, less left ventricular dysfunction and received more inappropriate shocks (IAS) than in typical transvenous (TV)-ICD trials. The UNTOUCHED trial was designed to evaluate the IAS rate in a more typical, contemporary ICD patient population implanted with the S-ICD using standardized programming and enhanced discrimination algorithms. Methods: Primary prevention patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 35% and no pacing indications were included. Generation 2 or 3 S-ICD devices were implanted and programmed with rate-based therapy delivery for rates ≥ 250 beats per minute (bpm) and morphology discrimination for rates ≥200 and < 250 bpm. Patients were followed for 18 months. The primary endpoint was the IAS free rate compared to a 91.6% performance goal, derived from the results for the ICD-only patients in the MADIT-RIT study. Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed to evaluate event-free rates for IAS, all cause shock, and complications. Multivariable proportional hazard analysis was performed to determine predictors of endpoints. Results: S-ICD implant was attempted in 1116 patients and 1111 patients were included in post-implant follow-up analysis. The cohort had a mean age of 55.8±12.4 years, 25.6% women, 23.4% black race, 53.5% with ischemic heart disease, 87.7% with symptomatic heart failure and a mean LVEF of 26.4±5.8%. Eighteen-month freedom from IAS was 95.9% (Lower confidence limit LCL 94.8%). Predictors of reduced incidence of IAS were implanting the most recent generation of device, using the three-incision technique, no history of atrial fibrillation, and ischemic etiology. The 18-month all cause shock free rate was 90.6% (LCL 89.0%), meeting the prespecified performance goal of 85.8%. Conversion success rate for appropriate, discrete episodes was 98.4%. Complication free rate at 18 months was 92.7%. Conclusions: This study demonstrates high efficacy and safety with contemporary S-ICD devices and programming despite the relatively high incidence of co-morbidities in comparison to earlier S-ICD trials. The inappropriate shock rate (3.1% at one year) is the lowest reported for the S-ICD and lower than many TV ICD studies using contemporary programming to reduce IAS. Clinical Trial Registration: URL https://clinicaltrials.gov Unique Identifier NCT02433379

This categorization for our consensus document should not be considered as being directly similar to that used for official society guideline recommendations which apply a classification (I-III) and level of evidence (A, B, and C) to recommendations.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia worldwide, and it has a significant effect on morbidity and mortality. It is a significant risk factor for stroke and peripheral embolization, and it has an effect on cardiac function. Despite widespread interest and extensive research on this topic, our understanding of the etiology and pathogenesis of this disease process is still incomplete. As a result, there are no set primary preventive strategies in place apart from general cardiology risk factor prevention goals. It seems intuitive that a better understanding of the risk factors for AF would better prepare medical professionals to initially prevent or subsequently treat these patients. In this article, we discuss widely established risk factors for AF and explore newer risk factors currently being investigated that may have implications in the primary prevention of AF. For this review, we conducted a search of PubMed and used the following search terms (or a combination of terms): atrial fibrillation, metabolic syndrome, obesity, dyslipidemia, hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus, omega-3 fatty acids, vitamin D, exercise toxicity, alcohol abuse, and treatment. We also used additional articles that were identified from the bibliographies of the retrieved articles to examine the published evidence for the risk factors of AF.

As the most common sustained arrhythmia in adults, atrial fibrillation (AF) is an established and growing epidemic. To provide optimal patient care, it is important for clinicians to be aware of AF's epidemiological trends, methods of risk reduction, and the various available treatment modalities. Our understanding of AF's pathophysiology has advanced, and with this new understanding has come advancements in prevention strategies as well as pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatment options. Following PubMed and MEDLINE searches for AF risk factors, epidemiology, and therapies, we reviewed relevant articles (and bibliographies of those articles) published from 2000 to 2016. This "state-of-the-art" review provides a comprehensive update on the understanding of AF in the world today, contemporary therapeutic options, and directions of ongoing and future study.

Background: Vest Prevention of Early Sudden Death Trial did not demonstrate a significant reduction in arrhythmic death with the wearable cardioverterdefibrillator (WCD), but compliance with the device may have substantially affected the results. ThePletcher influence of WCD compliance on outcomes has not yet been fully evaluated.Methods: Using linear and pooled logistic models, we performed as-treated analyses omitting person-time in the hospital and adjusted for correlates of WCD compliance.To assess the impact of early stopping of WCD, we performed a per-protocol Kaplan-Meier analysis, censoring after the last day the WCD was worn. Interactions of potential effect modifiers with treatment assignment and WCD compliance on outcomes were investigated. Finally, we used linear models to identify predictors of WCD compliance.Results: A per-protocol analysis demonstrated a significant reduction in total (P < .001) and arrhythmic (P = .001) mortality. Better WCD compliance was independently predicted by cardiac arrest during index myocardial infarction (MI), higher Cr, diabetes, prior heart failure, EF ≤ 25%, Polish enrolling center and number of WCD alarms, while worse compliance was predicted by being divorced, Asian Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; CABG, coronary artery bypass grafting; EF, ejection fraction; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; MI, myocardial infarction; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; VEST, Vest Prevention of Early Sudden Death Trial; WCD, wearable cardioverter-defibrillator. race, higher body mass index, prior percutaneous coronary intervention, or any WCD shock. Neither excluding time in hospital from the as-treated analysis nor adjustment for factors affecting WCD compliance materially changed the results. No variable demonstrated a significant interaction in either the intention-to-treat or as-treated analysis.Conclusion: Robust sensitivity analyses of as-treated and per-protocol analyses suggest that the WCD is protective in compliant patients with ejection fraction less than or equal to 35% during the first 3 months post-MI. K E Y W O R D S defibrillator, heart failure, myocardial infarction, sudden death, ventricular tachycardia, wearable cardioverter-defibrillator

Abstract

In patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and an implanted ICD, Tpe(c) independently predicts both ventricular tachyarrhythmia and overall mortality.