Comparative Efficacy, Safety, and Complications of Subcutaneous Versus Transvenous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators: Insights from the PRAETORIAN and ATLAS Trials and Meta-Analyses
Highlights
- Subcutaneous ICDs (S-ICDs) significantly reduce lead-related complications compared with transvenous ICDs (TV-ICDs), especially over long-term follow-up.
- Inappropriate shocks occur more frequently with S-ICDs primarily due to cardiac oversensing and electromagnetic interference, whereas TV-ICDs have higher inappropriate shocks related to atrial arrhythmias.
- Appropriate shock efficacy of S-ICDs is comparable to TV-ICDs, despite the lack of antitachycardia pacing in S-ICDs, although S-ICD recipients may receive more shocks.
- Device selection should be individualized, considering pacing needs, risk of lead-related complications, and the causes of inappropriate shocks.
Background
MedXY registered readers
Sign in free to continue reading
Create or use your MedXY account to unlock the complete article.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.