Reassessing the role of antitachycardia pacing in fast ventricular arrhythmias in primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients: Results from MADIT-RIT

BACKGROUND In Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial - Reduce Inappropriate Therapy (MADIT-RIT), high-rate cutoff (arm B) and delayed therapy (arm C) reduced the risk of inappropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) interventions when compared with conventional programming (arm A); however, appropriate but unnecessary therapies were not evaluated.OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to assess the value of antitachycardia pacing (ATP) for fast ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) >= 200 beats/min in patients with primary prevention ICD.METHODS We compared ATP only, ATP and shock, and shock only rates in patients in MADIT-RIT treated for VAs >= 200 beats/min. The only difference between these randomized groups was the time delay between ventricular tachycardia detection and therapy (3.4 seconds vs 4.9 seconds vs 14.4 seconds).RESULTS In arm A, 11.5% patients had events, the initial therapy was ATP in 10.5% and shock in 1 %, and the final therapy was ATP in 8% and shock in 3.5 %. In arm B, 6.6% had events, 4.2% were initially treated with ATP and 2.4% with shock, and the final therapy was ATP in 2.8% and shock in 3.8%. In arm C, 4.7% had events, 2.5% were initially treated with ATP and 2.3% with shock, and the final therapy was ATP in 1.4% and shock in 3.3%. The final shock rate was similar in arm A vs arm B (3.5% vs 3.8%; P = .800) and in arm A vs arm C (3.5% vs 3.3%; P = .855) despite the marked discrepancy in initial ATP therapy utilization.CONCLUSION In MADIT-RIT, there was a significant reduction in ATP interventions with therapy delays due to spontaneous termination, with no difference in shock therapies, suggesting that earlier interventions for VAs >= 200 beats/min are likely unnecessary, leading to an overestimation of the value of ATP in primary prevention ICD recipients.