The simulated effect of using different strategies and thresholds of 5-year SCD end point to implant an ICD in the study cohort
| SCD group (n: 25) | No SCD group (n: 598) | NNTx-5 years | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ICD implant | No ICD implant | ICD implant | No ICD implant | ||
| 2011 ACCF/AHA guidelines | |||||
| ≥1 major RF (Class IIa) | 17 (68%) | 8 (32%) | 168 | 430 | 13 |
| ≥1 major RF and 1 minor RF+VE/VCO2 slope ≥31 | 20 (80%) | 5 (20%) | 225 | 373 | 14 |
| 2014 ESC guidelines (HCM Risk-SCD score) | |||||
| ≥3% | 19 (76%) | 6 (24%) | 271 | 327 | 21 |
| ≥4% | 15 (60%) | 10 (40%) | 185 | 413 | 19 |
| ≥6% (Class IIa) | 12 (48%) | 13 (52%) | 75 | 523 | 9 |
| ≥6% and ≥3% <6%+VE/VCO2 slope ≥31 | 17 (68%) | 8 (32%) | 145 | 453 | 11 |
| ≥6% and ≥4% <6%+VE/VCO2 slope ≥31 | 14 (56%) | 11 (44%) | 111 | 487 | 12 |
ACCF, American College of Cardiology Foundation; AHA, American Heart Association; ESC, European Society of Cardiology; HCM, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy; ICD, implantable cardioverter defibrillator; NNTx-5 years, number of patients needed to treat with an ICD implant to save one patient at 5 years; RF, risk factors; SCD, sudden cardiac death; VE/VCO2 slope, relation between ventilation versus carbon dioxide production.