Reinoud E Knops, Michael S Lloyd, Paul R Roberts, David J Wright, Lucas V A Boersma, Rahul Doshi, Paul A Friedman, Petr Neuzil, Carina Blomström-Lundqvist, Maria Grazia Bongiorni, Martin C Burke, Daniel Gras, Steven P Kutalek, Anish K Amin, Eugene Y Fu, Laurence M Epstein, Jose Maria Tolosana, Thomas D Callahan, Johan D Aasbo, Ralph Augostini, Harish Manyam, Devi G Nair, Blandine Mondésert, Wilber W Su, Chris Pepper, Marc A Miller, Jon Grammes, Karim Saleh, Christelle Marquie, Faisal M Merchant, Yong-Mei Cha, Colin Cunnington, David S Frankel, Julie West, Elizabeth Matznick, Bryan Swackhamer, Amy J Brisben, Jonathan Weinstock, Kenneth M Stein, Vivek Y Reddy, Lluis Mont
BACKGROUND: The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is associated with fewer lead-related complications than a transvenous ICD; however, the subcutaneous ICD cannot provide bradycardia and antitachycardia pacing. Whether a modular pacing-defibrillator system comprising a leadless pacemaker in wireless communication with a subcutaneous ICD to provide antitachycardia and bradycardia pacing is safe remains unknown. METHODS: We conducted a multinational, single-group study that enrolled patients at risk for sudden death from ventricular arrhythmias and followed them for 6 months after implantation of a modular pacemaker-defibrillator system...
May 18, 2024: New England Journal of Medicine