Assessment of Antitachycardia Pacing in Primary Prevention Patients: The APPRAISE ATP Randomized Clinical Trial.

IF 63.1 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Claudio Schuger, Boyoung Joung, Kenji Ando, Lluís Mont, Pier D Lambiase, Gilles E O'Hara, John M Jennings, Derek Yung, Giuseppe Boriani, Jonathan P Piccini, Nicholas Wold, Kenneth M Stein, James P Daubert
{"title":"Assessment of Antitachycardia Pacing in Primary Prevention Patients: The APPRAISE ATP Randomized Clinical Trial.","authors":"Claudio Schuger, Boyoung Joung, Kenji Ando, Lluís Mont, Pier D Lambiase, Gilles E O'Hara, John M Jennings, Derek Yung, Giuseppe Boriani, Jonathan P Piccini, Nicholas Wold, Kenneth M Stein, James P Daubert","doi":"10.1001/jama.2024.16531","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>The emergence of novel programming guidelines that reduce premature and inappropriate therapies along with the availability of new implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) technologies lacking traditional endocardial antitachycardia pacing (ATP) capabilities requires the reevaluation of ATP as a first strategy in terminating fast ventricular tachycardias (VTs) in primary prevention ICD recipients.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the role of ATP in terminating fast VTs in primary prevention ICD recipients with contemporary programming.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>This global, prospective, double-blind, randomized clinical trial had an equivalence design with a relative margin of 35%. Superiority tests were performed at interim analyses and the final analysis if equivalence was not proven. Patients were enrolled between September 2016 and April 2021 at 134 sites in 8 countries, with the last date of follow-up on July 6, 2023. Patients were required to have an indication for a primary prevention ICD, including left ventricular ejection fraction less than or equal to 35%.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive ATP plus shock vs shock only.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>The primary end point was time to first all-cause shock. Secondary end points included time to first appropriate shock, time to first inappropriate shock, all-cause mortality, and the composite of time to first all-cause shock plus all-cause mortality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 2595 patients were randomized (mean age, 63.9 years; 22.4% were females). At a mean follow-up of 38 months, first all-cause shock occurred in 129 participants in the ATP plus shock group and 178 participants in the shock only group. The hazard ratio (HR) for the primary end point was 0.72 (95.9% CI, 0.57-0.92), with P = .005 for superiority of the ATP plus shock group over the shock only group. During follow-up in an intention-to-treat analysis, the total shock burden per 100 patient-years was not statistically different, at 12.3 and 14.9, respectively (P = .70).</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>The use of a single burst of ATP prior to shock in primary prevention ICD recipients with modern ICD detection programming prolonged the time to first all-cause ICD shock.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02923726.</p>","PeriodicalId":54909,"journal":{"name":"Jama-Journal of the American Medical Association","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":63.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jama-Journal of the American Medical Association","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.16531","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: The emergence of novel programming guidelines that reduce premature and inappropriate therapies along with the availability of new implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) technologies lacking traditional endocardial antitachycardia pacing (ATP) capabilities requires the reevaluation of ATP as a first strategy in terminating fast ventricular tachycardias (VTs) in primary prevention ICD recipients.

Objective: To assess the role of ATP in terminating fast VTs in primary prevention ICD recipients with contemporary programming.

Design, setting, and participants: This global, prospective, double-blind, randomized clinical trial had an equivalence design with a relative margin of 35%. Superiority tests were performed at interim analyses and the final analysis if equivalence was not proven. Patients were enrolled between September 2016 and April 2021 at 134 sites in 8 countries, with the last date of follow-up on July 6, 2023. Patients were required to have an indication for a primary prevention ICD, including left ventricular ejection fraction less than or equal to 35%.

Interventions: Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive ATP plus shock vs shock only.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary end point was time to first all-cause shock. Secondary end points included time to first appropriate shock, time to first inappropriate shock, all-cause mortality, and the composite of time to first all-cause shock plus all-cause mortality.

Results: A total of 2595 patients were randomized (mean age, 63.9 years; 22.4% were females). At a mean follow-up of 38 months, first all-cause shock occurred in 129 participants in the ATP plus shock group and 178 participants in the shock only group. The hazard ratio (HR) for the primary end point was 0.72 (95.9% CI, 0.57-0.92), with P = .005 for superiority of the ATP plus shock group over the shock only group. During follow-up in an intention-to-treat analysis, the total shock burden per 100 patient-years was not statistically different, at 12.3 and 14.9, respectively (P = .70).

Conclusions and relevance: The use of a single burst of ATP prior to shock in primary prevention ICD recipients with modern ICD detection programming prolonged the time to first all-cause ICD shock.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02923726.

评估一级预防患者的抗心动过速起搏:APPRAISE ATP 随机临床试验。
重要性:新编程指南的出现减少了过早和不适当的治疗,同时新的植入式心律转复除颤器(ICD)技术缺乏传统的心内膜抗心动过速起搏(ATP)功能,因此需要重新评估 ATP,将其作为终止一级预防 ICD 患者快速室性心动过速(VTs)的首要策略:目的:评估 ATP 在使用现代程序终止 ICD 初级预防受术者快速室速中的作用:这项全球性、前瞻性、双盲、随机临床试验采用等效设计,相对差值为 35%。如果等效性未得到证实,则在中期分析和最终分析中进行优效性测试。患者于2016年9月至2021年4月期间在8个国家的134个研究机构入组,最后随访日期为2023年7月6日。患者必须具备一级预防 ICD 的适应症,包括左心室射血分数小于或等于 35%:患者按1:1的比例随机接受ATP加电击与仅电击治疗:主要终点是首次全因休克的时间。次要终点包括首次适当休克时间、首次不适当休克时间、全因死亡率以及首次全因休克时间和全因死亡率的复合值:共有 2595 名患者接受了随机治疗(平均年龄 63.9 岁;22.4% 为女性)。在平均 38 个月的随访中,ATP 加休克组有 129 人首次出现全因休克,仅休克组有 178 人首次出现全因休克。主要终点的危险比(HR)为 0.72(95.9% CI,0.57-0.92),ATP 加电击组优于单纯电击组,P = .005。在意向治疗分析的随访期间,每100患者年的总休克负荷没有统计学差异,分别为12.3和14.9(P = .70):结论和相关性:对于使用现代 ICD 检测程序的一级预防 ICD 患者,在休克前使用单次 ATP 可延长首次全因 ICD 休克的时间:试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:NCT02923726。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
48.20
自引率
0.90%
发文量
1569
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) is an international peer-reviewed general medical journal. It has been published continuously since 1883. JAMA is a member of the JAMA Network, which is a consortium of peer-reviewed general medical and specialty publications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信