OBJECTIVE: There is limited evidence regarding the use of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (S-ICD) in pediatric patients. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of complications in these patients at our center, according to the type of ICD and patient size.
METHODS: We included all patients aged<18 years who received an S-ICD since 2016 at our center. As a control group, we also included contemporary patients (since 2014) who received a transvenous ICD (TV-ICD). The primary endpoint was a composite of complications and inappropriate shocks.
RESULTS: A total of 26 patients received an S-ICD (median age, 14 [5-17] years; body mass index [BMI], 20.2 kg/m2). Implantation was intermuscular in 23 patients (88%) and subserratus in the remainder. Two incisions were used in 24 patients (92%). In all patients, 2 zones were programmed: a conditional zone set at 230 (220-230) bpm, and a shock zone set at 250 bpm. Nineteen patients received a TV-ICD (median age, 11 [range, 5-16] years; BMI, 19.2 kg/m2, 79% single-chamber). Survival free from the primary endpoint at 5 years was 80% in the S-ICD group and 63% in the TV-ICD group (P=.54). Survival free from inappropriate shocks was similar (85% vs 89%, P=.86), while survival free from complications was higher in the S-ICD group (96% vs 57%, cloglog P=.016). There were no therapy failures in the S-ICD group, and no increased complication rates were observed in patients with BMI ≤20 kg/m2.
CONCLUSIONS: With contemporary implantation techniques and programming, S-ICD is a safe and effective therapy in pediatric patients. The number of inappropriate shocks is similar to TV-ICD, with fewer short- and mid-term complications.

Subcutaneous-implantable cardiac defibrillators (S-ICDs) are used increasingly to prevent sudden cardiac death in young patients. This study was set up to gain insight in the indications for S-ICD, possible complications, and their predictors and follow-up results.
A multicentre, observational, retrospective, non-randomized, standard-of-care registry on S-ICD outcome in young patients with congenital heart diseases (CHDs), inherited arrhythmias (IAs), idiopathic ventricular fibrillation (IVF), and cardiomyopathies (CMPs). Anthropometry was registered as well as implantation technique, mid-term device-related complications, and incidence of appropriate/inappropriate shocks (IASs). Data are reported as median (interquartile range) or mean ± standard deviation. Eighty-one patients (47% CMPs, 20% CHD, 21% IVF, and 12% IA), aged 15 (14-17) years, with body mass index (BMI) 21.8 ± 3.8 kg/m2, underwent S-ICD implantation (primary prevention in 59%). This was performed with two-incision technique in 81% and with a subcutaneous pocket in 59%. Shock and conditional zones were programmed at 250 (200-250) and 210 (180-240) b.p.m., respectively. No intraoperative complications occurred. Follow up was 19 (6-35) months: no defibrillation failure occurred, 17% of patients received appropriate shocks, 13% of patients received IAS (supraventricular tachycardias 40%, T-wave oversensing 40%, and non-cardiac oversensing 20%). Reprogramming, proper drug therapy, and surgical revision avoided further IAS. Complications requiring surgical revision occurred in 9% of patients, with higher risks in patients with three-incision procedures [hazard ratio (HR) 4.3, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.5-34, P = 0.038] and BMI < 20 (HR 5.1, 95% CI 1-24, P = 0.031).
This multicentre European paediatric registry showed good S-ICD efficacy and safety in young patients. Newer implantation techniques and BMI > 20 showed better outcome.

Defibrillator technology for sudden cardiac death (SCD) prevention now includes the transvenous implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD), subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) and wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD). ICD use improves survival in patients who survived previous sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) due to ventricular tachycardia (VT)/ventricular fibrillation (VF), as well as in patients who experienced haemodynamically significant VT. It is also currently indicated for primary prevention in ischaemic/non-ischaemic cardiomyopathies, certain congenital heart disease conditions and inherited channelopathies. In this review article, we hope to present an updated review on ICD use for SCD prevention, with a focus on contemporary issues affecting ICD selection. These include: the role of primary prevention ICD in patients with non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) in light of the 2016 DANISH (Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of ICDs in Patients with Non-Ischemic Systolic Heart Failure on Mortality) trial; the role of defibrillator component (CRT-D) in patients receiving cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT-P); and the emerging role of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (cMRI) in particular, the presence of late gadolinium enhancement (LGE), as an important SCD risk predictor. The current use of S-ICD and WCD, including clinical indications, evidence for efficacy and limitations, will also be discussed.

BACKGROUND: The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) is used in patients at risk of sudden death. Our aim was to assess clinical predictors of electrocardiographic ineligibility for S-ICD, and the impact of exercise on S-ICD eligibility in an unselected series of patients requiring ICD therapy.
METHODS: 102 patients at risk of sudden death were evaluated at rest and during exercise. Electrocardiograph screening using limb lead electrodes (to simulate the S-ICD sensing vectors) was performed at rest and during bicycle ergometer exercise.
RESULTS: R wave amplitude in lead D3 during exercise >16mV, baseline QTc and the sum of amplitudes of the R waves at supine >30mV were predictors of ineligibility for S-ICD. Eligibility increased from 90% to 100% of patients when evaluated with an \"any of the three leads\" criterion compared to current recommendations. A more restrictive criterion based on two of three ECG leads caused an eligibility drop at 66%, that further decreased to 56% during exercise; these figures improved to 79% and 81%, respectively, when an \"any 2 of 3 leads\" criterion was used.
CONCLUSIONS: Huge ECG amplitude and QTc duration are associated with ineligibility in the current S-ICD release. By performing exercise testing, lead suitability changes in one patient out of 14 (7% of tested patients) and eligibility is decreased by use of a more stringent criterion for eligibility (ECG criteria satisfied in two of three leads). A dynamic selection of sensing vectors aiming at situation-specific suitability (any of three leads) would increase S-ICD eligibility to 100% of patients.