English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Aims According to current guidelines, defibrillation testing (DT) for efficacy can be omitted in patients undergoing transvenous implantable cardioverter–defibrillator (T-ICD) implantation. DT is still recommended for patients at risk for a high defibrillation threshold (e.g. hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy, right-sided implantations) and for ICD generator changes. Moreover, a class I recommendation remains to perform DT during the implantation of subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD). The aim of the present survey was to analyze the current practice of DT during T-ICD and S-ICD implantations in Italy. Methods In March 2021, an ad hoc questionnaire on the current performance of DT and the standard practice adopted during testing was completed by 72 operators at Italian centers implanting S-ICD and T-ICD. Results 48 (67%) operators reported never performing DT during de-novo T-ICD implantations, while no operators perform it systematically. The remaining respondents perform it in specific cases: right sided implantations (54%), poor signal sensing (46%), secondary prevention patients (42%), arrhythmic syndromes (13%), hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (8%). DT is never performed at T-ICD generator change. At the time of de-novo S-ICD implantation, DT is never performed by 9 (13%) operators and performed systematically by 48 (66%). The remaining operators perform DT in cases of: secondary prevention patients (73%), sub-optimal S-ICD placement (33%), non-compromised ejection fraction (33%) or obese patients (7%). DT is not performed at S-ICD generator change by 92% of operators. DT is conducted by delivering a first shock energy of 65J by 60% of operators, while the remaining 40% test lower energy values. The most frequently reported conditions for revising the system at the end of de- novo implantation procedure is high shock impedance (54%) and sub-optimal S-ICD placement or high PRAETORIAN score (50%). With adequately low shock impedance and optimal system placement, 37% of operators would accept a defibrillation margin &amp;lt;15J. Conclusion In current clinical practice, the vast majority of operators omit DT at T-ICD implantation, even when still recommended in the guidelines. DT is also frequently omitted at S-ICD implantation. We also report a wide variability among operators in the procedures followed during DT and in the criteria applied for defining the procedural success. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.

Defibrillation testing of subcutaneous versus transvenous defibrillators in the clinical practice: a nationwide survey in Italy