Utility of electrophysiological studies to predict arrhythmic events

Hilfiker, Gabriela; Schoenenberger, Andreas; Erne, Paul; Kobza, Richard (2015). Utility of electrophysiological studies to predict arrhythmic events. World journal of cardiology, 7(6), pp. 344-350. Baishideng Publishing Group 10.4330/wjc.v7.i6.344

Preview

Text WJC-7-344.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution-Noncommercial (CC-BY-NC). This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. Download (815kB) | Preview

AIM

To evaluate the prognostic value of electrophysiological stimulation (EPS) in the risk stratification for tachyarrhythmic events and sudden cardiac death (SCD).

METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study and analyzed the long-term follow-up of 265 consecutive patients who underwent programmed ventricular stimulation at the Luzerner Kantonsspital (Lucerne, Switzerland) between October 2003 and April 2012. Patients underwent EPS for SCD risk evaluation because of structural or functional heart disease and/or electrical conduction abnormality and/or after syncope/cardiac arrest. EPS was considered abnormal, if a sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) was inducible. The primary endpoint of the study was SCD or, in implanted patients, adequate ICD-activation.

RESULTS

During EPS, sustained VT was induced in 125 patients (47.2%) and non-sustained VT in 60 patients (22.6%); in 80 patients (30.2%) no arrhythmia could be induced. In our cohort, 153 patients (57.7%) underwent ICD implantation after the EPS. During follow-up (mean duration 4.8 ± 2.3 years), a primary endpoint event occurred in 49 patients (18.5%). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was 0.593 (95%CI: 0.515-0.670) for a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 35% and 0.636 (95%CI: 0.563-0.709) for inducible sustained VT during EPS. The AUROC of EPS was higher in the subgroup of patients with LVEF ≥ 35% (0.681, 95%CI: 0.578-0.785). Cox regression analysis showed that both, sustained VT during EPS (HR: 2.26, 95%CI: 1.22-4.19, P = 0.009) and LVEF < 35% (HR: 2.00, 95%CI: 1.13-3.54, P = 0.018) were independent predictors of primary endpoint events.

CONCLUSION

EPS provides a benefit in risk stratification for future tachyarrhythmic events and SCD and should especially be considered in patients with LVEF ≥ 35%.

Interest & Impact

Downloads

291 since deposited on 30 Mar 2016
25 in the past 12 months

Citations

5 Citations in Web of Science ®
6 Citations in Scopus

Search

in Google Scholar™

Services

Actions (login required)

Edit item

Actions (login required)

Edit item