This consensus statement has been compiled on behalf of the International Society for Holter and Noninvasive Electrophysiology. It reviews the topic of heart rate turbulence (HRT) and concentrates on technologies for measurement, physiologic background and interpretation, and clinical use of HRT. It also lists suggestions for future research. The phenomenon of HRT refers to sinus rhythm cycle-length perturbations after isolated premature ventricular complexes. The physiologic pattern of HRT consists of brief heart rate acceleration (quantified by the so-called turbulence onset) followed by more gradual heart rate deceleration (quantified by the so-called turbulence slope) before the rate returns to a pre-ectopic level. Available physiologic investigations confirm that the initial heart rate acceleration is triggered by transient vagal inhibition in response to the missed baroreflex afferent input caused by hemodynamically inefficient ventricular contraction. A sympathetically mediated overshoot of arterial pressure is responsible for the subsequent heart rate deceleration through vagal recruitment. Hence, the HRT pattern is blunted in patients with reduced baroreflex. The HRT pattern is influenced by a number of factors, provocations, treatments, and pathologies reviewed in this consensus. As HRT measurement provides an indirect assessment of baroreflex, it is useful in those clinical situations that benefit from baroreflex evaluation. The HRT evaluation has thus been found appropriate in risk stratification after acute myocardial infarction, risk prediction, and monitoring of disease progression in heart failure, as well as in several other pathologies.
BACKGROUNDThe subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) was designed to avoid complications related to the transvenous ICD lead by using an entirely extrathoracic placement. Evidence comparing these systems has been based primarily on observational studies. METHODSWe conducted a noninferiority trial in which patients with an indication for an ICD but no indication for pacing were assigned to receive a subcutaneous ICD or transvenous ICD. The primary end point was the composite of device-related complications and inappropriate shocks; the noninferiority margin for the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval for the hazard ratio (subcutaneous ICD vs. transvenous ICD) was 1.45. A superiority analysis was prespecified if noninferiority was established. Secondary end points included death and appropriate shocks. RESULTSA total of 849 patients (426 in the subcutaneous ICD group and 423 in the transvenous ICD group) were included in the analyses. At a median follow-up of 49.1 months, a primary end-point event occurred in 68 patients in the subcutaneous ICD group and in 68 patients in the transvenous ICD group (48-month Kaplan-Meier estimated cumulative incidence, 15.1% and 15.7%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 1.39; P = 0.01 for noninferiority; P = 0.95 for superiority). Device-related complications occurred in 31 patients in the subcutaneous ICD group and in 44 in the transvenous ICD group (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.44 to 1.09); inappropriate shocks occurred in 41 and 29 patients, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.43; 95% CI, 0.89 to 2.30). Death occurred in 83 patients in the subcutaneous ICD group and in 68 in the transvenous ICD group (hazard ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.70); appropriate shocks occurred in 83 and 57 patients, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.08 to 2.12). CONCLUSIONSIn patients with an indication for an ICD but no indication for pacing, the subcutaneous ICD was noninferior to the transvenous ICD with respect to devicerelated complications and inappropriate shocks. (Funded by Boston Scientific; PRAETORIAN ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01296022.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.