Skip to main content

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Cardiovasc. Med.
Sec. Cardiac Rhythmology
Volume 12 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2025.1539125
This article is part of the Research Topic New Challenges in Arrhythmology View all 9 articles

Clinical performance of subcutaneous versus transvenous implantable defibrillator in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy: data from Monaldi Rhythm Registry

Provisionally accepted
Vincenzo Russo Vincenzo Russo 1*Alfredo Caturano Alfredo Caturano 1Valter Bianchi Valter Bianchi 2Anna Rago Anna Rago 2Ernesto Ammendola Ernesto Ammendola 2Andrea Antonio Papa Andrea Antonio Papa 2Nadia Della Cioppa Nadia Della Cioppa 2Annamaria Guarino Annamaria Guarino 2Alessandro Masi Alessandro Masi 1Paolo Golino Paolo Golino 1Antonio D'Onofrio Antonio D'Onofrio 2Emilio Di Lorenzo Emilio Di Lorenzo 2Gerardo Nigro Gerardo Nigro 1
  • 1 University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, Caserta, Italy
  • 2 Monaldi Hospital, Naples, Campania, Italy

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) is an alternative to a transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (TV-ICD) system in selected patients not in need of pacing or resynchronization. Currently, little is known about the effectiveness and safety of S-ICD in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM).The aim of our study was to describe the clinical features and the drivers of S-ICD implantation among patients with ICM, as well as the clinical performance of S-ICD vs. TV-ICD among this subset of patients during a long-term follow-up.All ICM patients with both S-ICD and TV-ICD implanted and followed at Monaldi Hospital from January 1, 2015, to January 1, 2024, were evaluated; among them, only ICD recipients with no pacing indication were included. We collected clinical and anamnestic characteristics, as well as ICD inappropriate therapies, ICD-related complications and infections.A total of 243 ICM patients (mean age 63.0±11.0, male 86.0%) implanted with TV-ICD (n: 129, 53.1%) and S-ICD (n: 114, 46.9%) followed at our center for a median follow-up of 66.9 [39.4-96.4] months were included in the study. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed no significant difference in the risk of inappropriate ICD therapies (log-rank p=0.137) or ICD-related complications (log-rank p=0.055) between S-ICD and TV-ICD groups. TV-ICD patients showed a significantly higher risk of ICD-related infections compared to those in the S-ICD group (log-rank p=0.048). At multivariate logistic regression analysis, the only independent predictors of S-ICD implantation were female sex [OR: 52.62; p<0.001] and primary prevention [OR: 17.60; p<0.001].Among patients with ICM not in need of pacing or resynchronization (CRT), the decision to implant an S-ICD was primarily influenced by female gender and primary prevention indications. No significant differences in inappropriate ICD therapies and complications were found; in contrast, the S-ICD group showed a numerically reduced risk of ICD-related infections.

    Keywords: Subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD), transvenous ICD, complications, Infections, inappropriate shock therapy, ischemic cardiomyopathy

    Received: 10 Dec 2024; Accepted: 05 Feb 2025.

    Copyright: © 2025 Russo, Caturano, Bianchi, Rago, Ammendola, Papa, Della Cioppa, Guarino, Masi, Golino, D'Onofrio, Di Lorenzo and Nigro. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence: Vincenzo Russo, University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, Caserta, Italy

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.