Competing risks of monomorphic vs. non-monomorphic ventricular arrhythmias in primary prevention implantable cardioverter–defibrillator recipients: Global Electrical Heterogeneity and Clinical Outcomes (GEHCO) study

Ablation of monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (MMVT) has been shown to reduce shock frequency and improve survival. We aimed to compare cause-specific risk factors for MMVT and polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (PVT)/ventricular fibrillation (VF) and to develop predictive models.

The multicentre retrospective cohort study included 2668 patients (age 63.1 ± 13.0 years; 23% female; 78% white; 43% non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy; left ventricular ejection fraction 28.2 ± 11.1%). Cox models were adjusted for demographic characteristics, heart failure severity and treatment, device programming, and electrocardiogram metrics. Global electrical heterogeneity was measured by spatial QRS-T angle (QRSTa), spatial ventricular gradient elevation (SVGel), azimuth, magnitude (SVGmag), and sum absolute QRST integral (SAIQRST). We compared the out-of-sample performance of the lasso and elastic net for Cox proportional hazards and the Fine–Gray competing risk model. During a median follow-up of 4 years, 359 patients experienced their first sustained MMVT with appropriate implantable cardioverter–defibrillator (ICD) therapy, and 129 patients had their first PVT/VF with appropriate ICD shock. The risk of MMVT was associated with wider QRSTa [hazard ratio (HR) 1.16; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01–1.34], larger SVGel (HR 1.17; 95% CI 1.05–1.30), and smaller SVGmag (HR 0.74; 95% CI 0.63–0.86) and SAIQRST (HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.71–0.99). The best-performing 3-year competing risk Fine–Gray model for MMVT [time-dependent area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC(t)AUC) 0.728; 95% CI 0.668–0.788] identified high-risk (> 50%) patients with 75% sensitivity and 65% specificity, and PVT/VF prediction model had ROC(t)AUC 0.915 (95% CI 0.868–0.962), both satisfactory calibration.

We developed and validated models to predict the competing risks of MMVT or PVT/VF that could inform procedural planning and future randomized controlled trials of prophylactic ventricular tachycardia ablation.

URL:www.clinicaltrials.gov Unique identifier:NCT03210883.