• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Mon, 15.07.24

Search results


April 2024
Dante Antonelli MD, Vladimir Poletaev MD, Vidal Essebag MD, Alexander Feldman MD

Inappropriate implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) shock due to electromagnetic interference (EMI) induced by electrocautery is a well-known theoretical association but is rarely reported [1]. We report a case of EMI induced by electrocautery causing inappropriate ICD shock, underlining that, with the use of monopolar cautery, not only the location of the surgery but also electrodispersive pad (EDP) placement may be important to avoid EMI.

June 2023
Dante Antonelli MD, Vladimir Poletaev MD, Alexander Feldman MD

Inappropriate shocks are a serious and still unresolved problem associated with implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) that have been associated with increased mortality and impairment of quality of life [1] despite advances in device safety. We report a case of electromagnetic interference (EMI) while showering that resulted in an inappropriate ICD discharge.

March 2023
Batya Wizman MD, Moti Haim MD, Ido Peles, Roi Westreich MD, Amjad Abu-Salman MD, Gal Tsaban MD MPH, Natalie Yasoor, Orit Barrett MD, Yuval Konstantino MD

Background: Existing cardiac disease contributes to poor outcome in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Little information exists regarding COVID-19 infection in patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED).

Objectives: To assess the association between CIEDs and severity of COVID-19 infection.

Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis including 13,000 patients > 18 years old with COVID-19 infection between January and December 2020. Patients with COVID-19 who had a permanent pacemaker or defibrillator were matched 1:4 based on age and sex followed by univariate and multivariate analyses. Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes were assessed.

Results: Forty patients with CIED and 160 patients without CIED were included in the current analysis. Mean age was 72.6 ± 13 years, and approximately 50% were females. Majority of the patients in the study arm had a pacemaker (63%), whereas only 15 patients (37%) had a defibrillator. Patients with COVID-19 and CIED presented more often with atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease, heart failure, hypertension, diabetes, and chronic kidney disease. They were more likely to be hospitalized in the intensive care unit (ICU) and required more ventilatory support (35% vs. 18.3%). Thirty-day mortality (22.5% vs. 13.8%) and 1-year mortality (25% vs. 15%) were higher among patients with COVID-19 and CIED.

Conclusions: Patients with COVID-19 and CIED had a significantly higher prevalence of co-morbidities that were associated with increased mortality. Although,CIED by itself was not found as an independent risk factor for morbidity and mortality, it may serve as a warning for severe illness with COVID-19.

January 2022
Gergana Marincheva MD, Tal Levi MD, Olga Perelshtein Brezinov MD, Andrei Valdman MD, Michael Rahkovich MD, Yonatan Kogan MD, and Avishag Laish-Farkash MD PhD

Background: Endocardial leads of permanent pacemakers (PPM) and implantable defibrillators (ICD) across the tricuspid valve (TV) can lead to tricuspid regurgitation (TR) or can worsen existing TR with subsequent severe morbidity and mortality.

Objectives: To evaluate prospectively the efficacy of intraprocedural 2-dimentional-transthoracic echocardiography (2DTTE) in reducing/preventing lead-associated TR.

Methods: We conducted a prospective randomized controlled study comparing echocardiographic results in patients undergoing de-novo PPM/ICD implantation with intraprocedural echo-guided right ventricular (RV) lead placement (Group 1, n=56) versus non-echo guided implantation (Group 2, n=55). Lead position was changed if TR grade was more than baseline in Group 1. Cohort patients underwent 2DTTE at baseline and 3 and/or 6 months after implantation. Excluded were patients with baseline TR > moderate or baseline ≥ moderate RV dysfunction.

Results: The study comprised 111 patients (74.14 ± 11 years of age, 58.6% male, 19% ICD, 42% active leads). In 98 patients there was at least one follow-up echo. Two patients from Group 1 (3.6%) needed intraprocedural RV electrode repositioning. Four patients (3.5%, 2 from each group, all dual chamber PPM, 3 atrial fibrillation, 2 RV pacing > 40%, none with intraprocedural reposition) had TR deterioration during 6 months follow-up. One patient from Group 2 with baseline mild-moderate aortic regurgitation (AR) had worsening TR and AR within 3 months and underwent aortic valve replacement and TV repair.

Conclusions: The rate of mechanically induced lead-associated TR is low; thus, a routine intraprocedural 2DTTE does not have a significant role in reducing/preventing it

June 2021
Dante Antonelli MD, Alexander Feldman MD, Nahum Adam Freedberg MD, and Yoav Turgeman MD
May 2018
Roman Nevzorov MD, Avital Porter MD, Shanie Mostov DVM, Shirit Kazum MD, Alon Eisen MD, Gustavo Goldenberg MD, Zaza Iakobishvili MD, Jairo Kusniec MD, Gregory Golovchiner MD, Boris Strasberg MD and Moti Haim MD

Background: Gender-related differences (GRD) exist in the outcome of patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).

Objectives: To assess GRD in patients who underwent CRT.

Methods: A retrospective cohort of 178 patients who were implanted with a CRT in a tertiary center 2005–2009 was analyzed. Primary outcome was 1 year mortality. Secondary endpoints were readmission and complication rates.

Results: No statistically significant difference was found in 1 year mortality rates (14.6% males vs. 11.8% females, P = 0.7) or in readmission rate (50.7% vs. 41.2%, P = 0.3). The complication rate was only numerically higher in women (14.7% vs. 5.6%, P = 0.09). Men more often had CRT-defibrillator (CRT-D) implants (63.2% vs. 35.3%, P = 0.003) and had a higher rate of ischemic cardiomyopathy (79.2% vs. 38.2%, P < 0.001). There was a trend to higher incidence of ventricular fibrillation/ventricular tachycardia in men before CRT implantation (29.9% vs. 14.7%, P = 0.07%). A higher proportion of men upgraded from implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) to CRT-D, 20.8% vs. 8.8%, P = 0.047. On multivariate model, chronic renal failure was an independent predictor of 1 year mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 3.6; 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 1.4–9.5), CRT-D had a protective effect compared to CRT-pacemaker (HR 0.3, 95%CI 0.12–0.81).

Conclusions: No GRD was found in 1 year mortality or readmission rates in patients treated with CRT. There was a trend toward a higher complication rate in females. Men were implanted more often with CRT-D and more frequently underwent upgrading of ICD to CRT-D.

 

August 2017
Liron Hofstetter MD, Sagit Ben Zekry MD, Naama Pelz-Sinvani MD, Michael Kogan MD, Vladislav Litachevsky MD, Avi Sabbag MD and Gad Segal MD
January 2017
Gustavo Goldenberg MD, Tamir Bental MD, Udi Kadmon MD, Ronit Zabarsky MD, Jairo Kusnick MD, Alon Barsheshet MD, Gregory Golovchiner MD and Boris Strasberg MD

Background: Syncope prognosis varies widely: 1 year mortality may range from 0% in the case of vasovagal events up to 30% in the presence of heart disease. 

Objectives: To assess the outcomes and prognosis of patients with implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) and indication of primary prevention and compare patients presenting with or without prior syncope.

Methods: We reviewed the charts of 75 patients who underwent ICD implantation with the indication of primary prevention and history of syncope and compared them to a control group of 80 patients without prior syncope. We assessed the number of ventricular tachycardia (VT), ventricular fibrillation (VF), shock, anti-tachycardia pacing (ATP), and death in each group during the follow-up.

Results: Mean follow-up was 893 days (810–976, 95% confidence interval) (no difference between groups). Patients with prior syncope had a higher ejection fraction (EF) (35.5 ± 12.6 vs. 31.4 ± 8.76, P = 0.02), more episodes of VT (21.3% vs. 3.8%, P = 0.001) and VF (8% vs. 0%, P = 0.01) and also received more electric shocks (18.7% vs. 3.8%, P = 0.004) and ATP (17.3% vs. 6.2%, P = 0.031). There were no differences in inappropriate shocks (6.7% vs. 5%, P = 0.74), in cardiovascular mortality (cumulative 5 year estimate 29.9% vs. 32.2% P = 0.97) and any death (cumulative 5 year estimate 38.1% vs. 48.9% P = 0.18) during the follow-up.

Conclusions: Syncopal patients before ICD implantation seem to have more episodes of VT/VF and shock or ATP. No mortality differences were observed

 

June 2016
Gustavo Goldenberg MD, Tamir Bental MD, Udi Kadmon MD, Ronit Zabarsky MD, Jairo Kusnick MD, Alon Barsheshet MD, Gregory Golovchiner MD and Boris Strasberg MD

Background: Syncope is a common clinical condition spanning from benign to life-threatening diseases. There is sparse information on the outcomes of syncopal patients who received an implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD). 

Objectives: To assess the outcomes and prognosis of patients who underwent implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) implantation for primary prevention of SCD and compare them to patients who presented with or without prior syncope.

Methods: We compared the medical records of 75 patients who underwent ICD implantation for primary prevention of SCD and history of syncope to those of a similar group of 80 patients without prior syncope. We assessed the episodes of ventricular tachycardia (VT), ventricular fibrillation (VF), shock, anti-tachycardia pacing (ATP) and mortality in each group during follow-up.

Results: Mean follow-up was 893 days (810–976, 95%CI) (no difference between groups). There was no significant difference in gender or age. Patients with prior syncope had a higher ejection fraction rate (35.5 ± 12.6 vs. 31.4 ± 8.76, P = 0.02), experienced more episodes of VT (21.3% vs. 3.8%, P = 0.001) and VF (8% vs. 0%, P = 0.01), and received more electric shocks (18.7% vs. 3.8%, P = 0.004) and ATP (17.3% vs. 6.2%, P = 0.031). There were no differences in inappropriate shocks (6.7% vs. 5%, P = 0.74), cardiovascular mortality (cumulative 5 year estimate 29.9% vs. 32.2%, P = 0.97) and any death (cumulative 5 year estimate 38.1% vs. 48.9%, P = 0.18).

Conclusions: Patients presenting with syncope before ICD implantation seemed to have more episodes of VT/VF and shock or ATP. No differences in mortality were observed

 

December 2015
Yuval Konstantino MD, Tali Shafat BSc, Victor Novack MD PhD, Lena Novack PhD and Guy Amit MD MPH
 

Background: Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) reduce mortality in patients implanted for primary and secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death. Data on the incidence of appropriate ICD therapies in primary vs. secondary prevention are limited. 


Objectives: To compare ICD therapies and mortality in primary vs. secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death. 


Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 581 consecutive patients receiving an ICD for primary (66%) or secondary (34%) prevention indications. 


Results: During long-term follow-up, 29% of patients implanted for secondary prevention received appropriate ICD therapy vs. 18% implanted for primary prevention. However, the overall 7 year mortality rate was not significantly different between the two groups (26.9%, P = 0.292). Multivariate analysis showed that patients implanted for primary prevention had a significantly lower risk of appropriate ICD therapy even after adjustment for age, left ventricular ejection fraction < 0.35 and chronic renal failure (HR 1.63, 95%CI 1.10–2.41, P = 0.015).


Conclusions: Patients implanted for secondary prevention were more likely to receive appropriate ICD therapy, with a significantly shorter time period from ICD implant to the first therapy. However, all-cause mortality was comparable between primary and secondary prevention groups. 


 

 
November 2014
Michael Arad MD Msc, Lorenzo Monserrat MD PhD, Shiraz Haron-Khun MSc, Jonathan G. Seidman PhD, Christine E. Seidman MD, Eloisa Arbustini MD PhD, Michael Glikson MD and Dov Freimark MD

Background: Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is a familial disease with autosomal dominant inheritance and age-dependent penetrance, caused primarily by mutations of sarcomere genes. Because the clinical variability of HCM is related to its genetic heterogeneity, genetic studies may improve the diagnosis and prognostic evaluation in HCM.

Objectives: To analyze the impact of genetic diagnosis on the clinical management of HCM.

Methods: Genetic studies were performed for either research or clinical reasons. Once the disease-causing mutation was identified, the management plan was reevaluated. Family members were invited to receive genetic counseling and encouraged to be tested for the mutation.

Results: Ten mutations in sarcomere protein genes were identified in 9 probands: 2 novel and 8 previously described. Advanced heart failure or sudden death in a young person prompted the genetic study in 8 of the 9 families. Of 98 relatives available for genotyping, only 53 (54%) agreed to be tested. The compliance was higher in families with sudden death and lower in what appeared to be sporadic HCM or elderly-onset disease. Among the healthy we identified 9 carriers and 19 non-carriers. In 6 individuals the test result resolved an uncertainty about "possible HCM." In several cases the genetic result was also used for family planning and played a role in decisions on cardioverter-defibrillator implantation.

Conclusions: Recurrence of a same mutation in different families created an opportunity to apply the information from the literature for risk stratification of individual patients. We suggest that the clinical context determine the indication for genetic testing and interpretation of the results.

August 2014
Legal Disclaimer: The information contained in this website is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal or medical advice on any matter.
The IMA is not responsible for and expressly disclaims liability for damages of any kind arising from the use of or reliance on information contained within the site.
© All rights to information on this site are reserved and are the property of the Israeli Medical Association. Privacy policy

2 Twin Towers, 35 Jabotinsky, POB 4292, Ramat Gan 5251108 Israel