Clinical experience with wearable cardioverter defibrillators at a tertiary electrophysiology program

Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2018 Nov;41(11):1491-1494. doi: 10.1111/pace.13491. Epub 2018 Sep 29.

Abstract

Background: A wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) is an alternative for patients who are not immediate candidates for an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD).

Methods: Retrospective analysis of 242 patients prescribed a WCD from January 2014 through March 2015 with 1-year follow-up.

Results: A WCD was prescribed to 242 patients during the 15-month period. Forty-one patients were excluded due to lack of complete follow-up. The remaining 201 patients received a WCD for primary or secondary prevention of SCD. Seventy-nine percent of WCDs were prescribed by nonelectrophysiologists. Underlying etiologies for the WCD prescription included: 38% nonischemic cardiomyopathy, 25% recent myocardial infarction, 16% newly diagnosed ischemic cardiomyopathy, 12% documented ventricular arrhythmia, 6% ICD lead extraction, and 3% had high risk conditions for sudden cardiac death. During 1-year follow-up, 96 patients (48%) received an ICD and five patients (2.5%) received appropriate shocks and one patient (0.5 %) received an inappropriate shock. Other 105 (52%) patients subsequently did not require an ICD due to either improvement in ejection fraction, refusal of ICD therapy, or death.

Conclusions: About half of patients prescribed a WCD subsequently receive an ICD and the rate of appropriate shock therapy from the WCD is 2.5%.

Keywords: cardiomyopathy; sudden cardiac arrest; wearable cardioverter defibrillator.

MeSH terms

  • Death, Sudden, Cardiac / prevention & control*
  • Defibrillators*
  • Electric Countershock / instrumentation*
  • Equipment Design
  • Female
  • Follow-Up Studies
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Primary Prevention
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Risk Factors
  • Secondary Prevention
  • Treatment Outcome