Development and external validation of prediction models to predict implantable cardioverter-defibrillator efficacy in primary prevention of sudden cardiac death

Tom E Verstraelen*, Marit van Barreveld, Pascal H F M van Dessel, Lucas V A Boersma, Peter-Paul P H M Delnoy, Anton E Tuinenburg, Dominic A M J Theuns, Pepijn H van der Voort, Gerardus P Kimman, Erik Buskens, Michiel Hulleman, Cornelis P Allaart, Sipke Strikwerda, Marcoen F Scholten, Mathias Meine, René Abels, Alexander H Maass, Mehran Firouzi, Jos W M G Widdershoven, Jan EldersMarco W F van Gent, Muchtiar Khan, Kevin Vernooy, Robert W Grauss, Raymond Tukkie, Lieselot van Erven, Han A M Spierenburg, Marc A Brouwer, Gerard L Bartels, Nick R Bijsterveld, Alida E Borger van der Burg, Mattheus W Vet, Richard Derksen, Reinoud E Knops, Frank A L E Bracke, Markus Harden, Christian Sticherling, Rik Willems, Tim Friede, Markus Zabel, Marcel G W Dijkgraaf, Aeilko H Zwinderman, Arthur A M Wilde

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

9 Citations (Scopus)
18 Downloads (Pure)


AIMS: This study was performed to develop and externally validate prediction models for appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shock and mortality to identify subgroups with insufficient benefit from ICD implantation.

METHODS AND RESULTS: We recruited patients scheduled for primary prevention ICD implantation and reduced left ventricular function. Bootstrapping-based Cox proportional hazards and Fine and Gray competing risk models with likely candidate predictors were developed for all-cause mortality and appropriate ICD shock, respectively. Between 2014 and 2018, we included 1441 consecutive patients in the development and 1450 patients in the validation cohort. During a median follow-up of 2.4 (IQR 2.1-2.8) years, 109 (7.6%) patients received appropriate ICD shock and 193 (13.4%) died in the development cohort. During a median follow-up of 2.7 (IQR 2.0-3.4) years, 105 (7.2%) received appropriate ICD shock and 223 (15.4%) died in the validation cohort. Selected predictors of appropriate ICD shock were gender, NSVT, ACE/ARB use, atrial fibrillation history, Aldosterone-antagonist use, Digoxin use, eGFR, (N)OAC use, and peripheral vascular disease. Selected predictors of all-cause mortality were age, diuretic use, sodium, NT-pro-BNP, and ACE/ARB use. C-statistic was 0.61 and 0.60 at respectively internal and external validation for appropriate ICD shock and 0.74 at both internal and external validation for mortality.

CONCLUSION: Although this cohort study was specifically designed to develop prediction models, risk stratification still remains challenging and no large group with insufficient benefit of ICD implantation was found. However, the prediction models have some clinical utility as we present several scenarios where ICD implantation might be postponed.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbereuab012
Pages (from-to)887-897
Number of pages11
Issue number6
Early online date14-Feb-2021
Publication statusPublished - Jun-2021

Cite this