Arrhythmic episodes in patients implanted with a cardioverter-defibrillator – results from the Prospective Study on Predictive Quality with Preferencing PainFree ATP therapies (4P)

Table 1 Baseline characteristics in the 4P-study

	SC-ICD (N = 48)	DC-ICD (N = 50)	CRT-D (N = 98)	All patients (N = 196)	p value
Patient demographics and clinical presentation
Male (%)	81	88	84	84	0.645
Age (years ± SD)	59 ± 13	63 ± 14	68 ± 11	64 ± 13	0.001²
LVEF (% ± SD)	44 ± 14	42 ± 14	31 ± 10	36 ± 13	< 0.001^1,2
QRS (ms ± SD)	107 ± 26	112 ± 30	143 ± 35	126 ± 36	< 0.001^1,2
Secondary prevention (%)	58	48	17	35	< 0.001^1,2
Device replacement or upgrade (%)	63	41	61	56	0.039
NYHA functional class (%)
I	17	18	10	14	< 0.001^1,2
II	19	24	50	34
III	6	8	39	21
IV	2	0	1	1
Underlying cardiac disease (%)
Ischemic heart disease, leading diagnosis	60	66	58	61	0.652
CABG	21	18	30	25	0.239
PCI	27	44	37	36	0.217
Cardiomyopathy, other	25	26	27	26	0.668
Arrhythmia and conduction defects (%)
Non permanent atrial fibrillation	15	24	31	25	0.108
Atrial tachycardia	4	14	10	10	0.251
Ventricular fibrillation	27	12	13	16	0.066
Ventricular tachycardia (sustained)	25	34	8	19	0.003^1,2
Ventricular tachycardia (non-sustained)	21	26	16	20	0.372
AV-block	10	10	28	19	0.008²
Medication (%)
Beta-blocker	91	85	90	89	0.333
Calcium channel blocker	18	11	6	10	0.129
Digoxin	0	2	13	7	0.004²
Anti-arrhythmics	25	34	29	29	0.599
of which amiodarone	14	28	25	23	0.187
Implantation type (%)
New	38	59	39	44	< 0.001^1,2
Replacement	62	37	33	41
Upgrade	0	4	28	15

Significant post-hoc comparisons are indicated as: ¹ SC-ICD vs CRT-D; ² DC-ICD vs CRT-D

ISSN: 1471-2261