The evolution of Extravascular Cardioverter Defibrillator implantation: feasibility in a purely electrophysiologic setting
Clicks: 2
ID: 325405
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
0.3
/100
2 views
1 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
EmergingRanked #25 of 79 articles by views in EP Europace
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
BACKGROUND: extravascular implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (EV-ICD) is a novel non-transvenous system delivering defibrillation shocks and anti-tachycardia pacing through a substernal lead. Despite proven efficacy, implantation has traditionally required general anesthesia and cardiothoracic surgical backup, limiting widespread adoption. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate feasibility, safety, and workflow efficiency of EV-ICD implantation under cardiologist-directed sedation without anesthesiology support. METHODS: Prospective observational study including 115 consecutive patients undergoing EV-ICD implantation across two European centers. Three procedural settings were explored sequentially: general anesthesia (GA, n=46), analgosedation without anesthesiology supervision (AS, n=28), and regional block with limited sedation (RBS, n=41). The primary endpoint was successful implantation without conversion to respiratory or circulatory support. Secondary endpoints included procedure duration, procedure-related complications, and device performance at follow-up. RESULTS: Overall implantation success was 97% (112/115) in a predominantly young population (50±17 years; 70% male). All procedures performed without anesthesiology supervision were completed without conversion to GA or emergency support, with comparable complication rates across groups. RBS was associated with a 27-minute reduction in procedural duration versus GA (p<0.001) and earlier mobilization (97% ambulating within 3 hours vs. 65% after 6 hours with GA; p<0.001). Over a median follow-up of 20 [10-30] months, appropriate ICD therapy was delivered in 13% of patients with 100% arrhythmia termination. Inappropriate therapy occurred in 8.9%, predominantly during the early learning phase. CONCLUSIONS: EV-ICD implantation can be safely and effectively performed under cardiologist-directed sedation without anesthesiology supervision, achieving a fully electrophysiology-driven workflow. Procedural simplification substantially reduces resource utilization and may facilitate broader adoption of this technology.
| Reference Key |
openalex_W7203738832
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Mauro Biffi, Hans Römers, A. Quaranta, Antonio Nicolò Izzo, Carmine Verde, Alberto Spadotto, Andrea Angeletti, Cristian Martignani, Igor Diemberger, Matteo Ziacchi, Lucas V.A. Boersma |
| Journal | EP Europace |
| Year | 2026 |
| DOI |
10.1093/europace/euag217
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.