Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 9, 2026

Post-Myocardial Infarction Heart Failure in Closed-chest Coronary Occlusion/Reperfusion Model in Göttingen Minipigs and Landrace Pigs
Published on: April 17, 2021
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Improvement and Ventricular Arrhythmia Risk in Patients With Heart Failure
Toshihiro Nakamura1, Kohei Ishibashi1, Nobuhiko Ueda1
1Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center.
Insights
Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) help prevent sudden cardiac death. Even with improved heart function (LVEF recovery), some patients may still need ICD therapy, indicating personalized management is key.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Electrophysiology
Background:
- Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are crucial for preventing sudden cardiac death in heart failure patients.
- The efficacy of ICDs after recovery of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) remains uncertain.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the long-term outcomes of primary prevention ICD therapy in patients who experience LVEF recovery.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of 118 patients receiving primary prevention ICDs between 2013 and 2022.
- Patients were categorized based on LVEF improvement (impEF: LVEF >35%) versus persistently low LVEF.
Main Results:
- 34% of patients (40/118) achieved improved LVEF (impEF).
- The impEF group experienced significantly less appropriate ICD therapy (P=0.008) over 4.4 years.
- However, 4 impEF patients required antitachycardia pacing; no patient with LVEF ≥40% received therapy.
Conclusions:
- LVEF recovery significantly reduces ventricular arrhythmia risk in ICD patients.
- Risk is not eliminated, underscoring the need for individualized ICD management strategies.
Background:
Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) prevent sudden cardiac death in patients with heart failure, but the value of ICD therapy after left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) recovery is uncertain.
Methods And Results:
We retrospectively studied 118 patients undergoing primary prevention ICD therapy (2013-2022). Of them, 40 (34%) improved to LVEF >35% (impEF). Over 4.4 years, appropriate ICD therapy occurred significantly less in the impEF group vs. the persistently low LVEF group (P=0.008), but 4 impEF patients still required antitachycardia pacing therapy. No patient with LVEF ≥40% received such therapy.
Conclusions:
LVEF recovery reduces but does not eliminate ventricular arrhythmia risk, supporting individualized ICD management.
More Related Videos
12:45Benefits of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in an Asynchronous Heart Failure Model Induced by Left Bundle Branch Ablation and Rapid Pacing
Published on: December 11, 2017
09:20Lumped-Parameter and Finite Element Modeling of Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction
Published on: February 13, 2021
Related Concept Videos
Heart Failure V: Medical Management
Heart Failure II: Pathophysiology
Cardiomyopathy V: Interprofessional Care
Cardiomyopathy III: Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy
Heart Failure VI: Adjunct Therapies
ECG Interpretation of Arrhythmias II: Atrial, Junctional and Ventricular Arrhythmias