In order to bring you the best possible user experience, this site uses Javascript. If you are seeing this message, it is likely that the Javascript option in your browser is disabled. For optimal viewing of this site, please ensure that Javascript is enabled for your browser.

This content is currently on FREE ACCESS, enjoy another 18 days of free consultation

In these unprecedented times, the ESC is doing everything it can to support its community: FREE access to all ESC 365 content until 31 July: explore more than 125,000 educational resources.

From 1 August onwards, support our mission by becoming a member.

Risk assessment for primary prophylactic ICD implantation in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy using the risk calculator: discrepancy between theory and clinical practice?

Session Clinical Case Corner 1

Speaker Thomas Kleemann

Event : EHRA 2018

  • Topic : arrhythmias and device therapy
  • Sub-topic : Ventricular Arrhythmias and SCD - Clinical
  • Session type : Poster Session

Authors : T Kleemann (Ludwigshafen,DE), M Strauss (Ludwigshafen,DE), K Kouraki (Ludwigshafen,DE), N Werner (Ludwigshafen,DE), R Zahn (Ludwigshafen,DE)

T Kleemann1 , M Strauss1 , K Kouraki1 , N Werner1 , R Zahn1 , 1Medizinische Klinik B, Klinikum Ludwigshafen - Ludwigshafen - Germany ,

European Heart Journal Supplements ( 2018 ) 20 ( Supplement 1 ), i92

Background: In hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) ESC guidelines recommend the use of a risk calculator to assess the risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD). Aim of the study was to compare the calculated risk of SCD at baseline in HCM patients with the incidence of malignant ventricular arrhythmias during follow-up. Methods and results: A total of 27 of 2017 (1.3%) patients of the prospective single-centre ICD-registry Ludwigshafen had a HCM and underwent primary prophylactic ICD implantation. Patients were stratified according to the risk score into a low, intermediate and high risk group (Table 1). During the median follow-up time of 4.5 years 8 patients had ICD shocks triggered by ventricular arrhythmias (VT/VF).

Kaplan-Meier curves showed no difference of event-free survival between the low, intermediate and high risk groups.

Conclusions: In patients with HCM stratified according to the HCM risk score the incidence of VA was not different between the different risk groups. Even in the low risk group where ICD is not generally recommended almost half of the patients had a VT/VF shock during the 5-year follow-up.

Low risk

(n = 13)

Intermediate risk (n = 9)

High risk

(n = 5)

Age (years)

66 (47; 71)

57 (49; 63)

43 (29; 64)





Risk score




Maximum LV wall thickness (mm)

17 (14; 18)

20 (18; 23)

16 (13; 24)

Left atrial diameter

45 (44; 50)

50 (43; 52)

44 (38; 50)

LVOT gradient (mmHg)

9 ±19

33 ± 30

66 ± 109





Non-sustained VT




Appropriate ICD shock during FU




All-cause mortality




Baseline characteristics and outcome of ICD patients stratified according to the calculated risk score.

Based on your interests

Members get more

Join now
  • 1ESC Professional Members – access all resources from general ESC events 
  • 2ESC Association Members (Ivory, Silver, Gold) – access your Association’s resources
  • 3Under 40 or in training - with a Combined Membership, access all resources
Join now

Our sponsors

ESC 365 is supported by Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim and Lilly Alliance, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer Alliance, Novartis Pharma AG and Vifor Pharma in the form of educational grants. The sponsors were not involved in the development of this platform and had no influence on its content.

logo esc

Our mission: To reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease

Who we are