Questions under study: In patients with an implantable defibrillator (ICD), inappropriate ICD interventions alter the quality of life, may cause hospitalisations and limit cost-effectiveness. The aim of the study was to determine the incidence and causes of inappropriate ICD interventions, and to identify patients at risk.Methods: For this observational longitudinal study, consecutive patients undergoing ICD implantation at the University Hospital of Berne were included in a registry. All stored electrograms of episodes triggering ICD interventions were systematically reviewed and analysed to determine whether ICD interventions were appropriate or inappropriate. Inappropriate ICD interventions were classified according to their cause, and risk factors were sought.Results: 2 14 consecutive patients were followed during a median time of 2.7 years (3.7 years IQR, 698 patient years). 81 inappropriate ICD interventions occurred in 58 patients (27%). Factors triggering inappropriate ICD interventions included atrial fibrillation and flutter (n = 35, 44%), sinus tachycardia (n = 26, 32%), lead fracture (n = 12), recurrent self-terminating ventricular tachycardia (n = 5), double-counting due to T-wave oversensing (n = 3). The only identifiable risk factor for inappropriate ICD interventions was sustained ventricular tachycardia as index arrhythmia.Conclusions: An important proportion of ICD patients suffer inappropriate ICD interventions that are most commonly due to supraventricular arrhythmias. Patients with ventricular tachycardia prior to ICD implantation are at higher risk of inappropriate ICD interventions. Interventions aiming at decreasing the risk of inappropriate ICD interventions should be considered in these patients.

Background: Clustering ventricular arrhythmias are the consequence of acute ventricular electrical instability and represent a challenge in the management of the growing number of patients with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). Triggering factors can rarely be identified.Objectives: Several studies have revealed seasonal variations in the frequency of cardiovascular events and life-threatening arrhythmias, and we sought to establish whether seasonal factors may exacerbate ventricular electrical instability leading to arrhythmia clusters and electrical storm.Methods: Two hundred and fourteen consecutive defibrillator recipients were followed-up during 3.3 +/- 2.2 years. Arrhythmia cluster was defined as the occurrence of three or more arrhythmic events triggering appropriate defibrillator therapies within 2 weeks. Time intervals between two clusters were calculated for each month and each season, and were compared using Kruskal-Wallis test and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test with Bonferroni adjustment.Results: During a follow-up of 698 patient years, 98 arrhythmia clusters were observed in 51 patients; clustering ventricular arrhythmias were associated with temporal variables; they occurred more frequently in the winter and spring months than during the summer and fall. Accordingly, the time intervals between two clusters were significantly shorter during winter and spring (median and 95% Q: winter 16 (5-19), spring 11.5 (7-25), summer 34.5 (15-55), fall 50.5 (19-65), P = 0.0041.Conclusion: There are important seasonal variations in the incidence of arrhythmia clusters in ICD recipients. Whether these variations are related to environmental factors, change in physical activity, or psychological factors requires further study.

Introduction: Studies of recurrent ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF) have been limited to “electrical storms,” where recurrent arrhythmias necessitate repeated external cardioversions or defibrillations. Patients with an implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator (ICD) may also suffer frequently recurrent arrhythmias. The aim of this study was to analyze the temporal pattern and the clinical relevance of clustering ventricular arrhythmias in ICD recipients. Methods: The incidence and the type of arrhythmias were determined by reviewing stored electrograms. VT/VF clusters were defined as the occurrence of three or more adequate and successful ICD interventions within 2 weeks. Two hundred and fourteen consecutive ICD recipients were followed during an average of 3.3 ± 2.2 years (698 patient‐years). Results: Fifty‐one patients (24%) suffered 98 VT/VF clusters 21 ± 22 months after ICD implantation, 93% of these clusters consisting of recurrent regular VT. Monomorphic VT as index event leading to ICD implantation was the only factor predicting VT/VF clusters. Kaplan‐Meier estimates of the combined end‐point of death or heart transplantation showed a 5‐year event‐free survival of 67% versus 87% in patients with and without clusters, respectively (P = 0.026). Adjusted hazard ratios for death or heart transplantation in the group with arrhythmia clusters was 3.5 (95% confidence interval 1.5–7.9 P = 0.003). Conclusions: VT/VF clusters are frequent late after ICD implantation particularly in patients who had VT as index‐event. As arrhythmias and recurrent ICD interventions are responsible for an important morbidity, there is a possible role for a prophylactic intervention. Furthermore, VT/VF clusters are an independent marker of increased risk of death or need for heart transplantation.