Table 1.
Biographical and medical characteristics
| ToF + ICD (N = 26) | ToF (N = 28) | ICD (N = 35) | Group effect | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ToF + ICD vs. ToF (p value) | ToF + ICD vs. ICD (p value) | ||||
| Response rate | 93% | 88% | |||
| Gender | |||||
| Male | 15 (57.7%) | 19 (67.9%) | 28 (80.0%) | 0.4 | 0.06 |
| Agea | 44 (±11.58) | 40 (±10.26) | 72 (±8.28) | 0.1 | <0.0001 |
| Nationality | |||||
| Dutch | 18 (69.2%) | 28 (100.0%) | 35 (100.0%) | <0.01 | <0.0001 |
| Belgian | 8 (30.8%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | <0.01 | 0.001 |
| Living conditions | |||||
| With parents | 2 (7.7%) | 3 (10.7%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1.0 | 0.1 |
| Living alone | 21 (80.8%) | 22 (78.6%) | 34 (97.1%) | 0.1 | 0.02 |
| Institution/home replacement | 3 (11.5%) | 3 (10.7%) | 1 (2.9%) | 1.0 | 0.1 |
| Marital status | |||||
| No relationship | 8 (30.8%) | 8 (28.6%) | 2 (5.7%) | 0.9 | 0.02 |
| Stable relationship | 0 (0.0%) | 2 (7.1%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0.5 | – |
| Cohabitant | 1 (3.8%) | 6 (21.4%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0.1 | 0.2 |
| Married | 15 (57.7%) | 9 (32.1%) | 21 (60.0%) | 0.06 | 0.9 |
| Divorced | 1 (3.8%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (2.9%) | 0.5 | 0.8 |
| Cohabitant or married after divorce | 1 (3.8%) | 1 (3.6%) | 1 (2.9%) | 1.0 | 0.8 |
| Widowed | 0 (0.0%) | 2 (7.1%) | 8 (22.9%) | 0.5 | 0.02 |
| Stable relationship or married after being widowed | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 2 (5.7%) | – | 0.2 |
| Occupational level | |||||
| Elementary | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (3.6%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1.0 | – |
| Lower | 3 (11.5%) | 6 (21.4%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1.0 | 0.5 |
| Average | 7 (26.9%) | 8 (28.6%) | 6 (17.1%) | 0.3 | 0.3 |
| Higher | 3 (11.5%) | 8 (28.6%) | 1 (2.9%) | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| No job/missing data | 13 (50.0%) | 5 (17.9%) | 28 (80.0%) | ||
| Educational attainmentb | |||||
| Lower | 2 (7.7%) | 2 (7.1%) | 8 (22.9%) | 1.0 | 0.1 |
| Average | 17 (65.4%) | 21 (75.0%) | 20 (57.1%) | 0.7 | 0.3 |
| Higher | 5 (19.2%) | 5 (17.9%) | 5 (14.3%) | 1.0 | 0.5 |
| Other | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (2.9%) | ||
| Missing | 1 (3.8%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | ||
| Medical data | |||||
| Age fallot correction (years)a | 9.9 (±10.80) | 5.9 (±3.91) | – | 0.1 | – |
| Shunt before correction | 8 (30.8%) | 13 (48.1%) | – | 0.2 | – |
| Reoperations | 15 (57.7%) | 12 (44.4%) | – | 0.3 | – |
| Age at implantation (years)a | 36.5 (±11.25) | – | 64.7 (±8.19) | – | <0.0001 |
| Follow-up (years)a | 7.9 (±3.73) | – | 7.4 (±2.08) | – | 0.5 |
| Indication for ICD | |||||
| Primary prevention | 6 (23.1%) | – | 13 (37.1%) | – | 0.2 |
| Secondary prevention | 20 (76.9%) | – | 22 (62.9%) | – | 0.2 |
| NYHA-class | |||||
| I | 19 (73.1%) | 24 (85.7%) | 9 (25.7%) | 0.2 | <0.0001 |
| II | 5 (19.2%) | 3 (10.7%) | 24 (68.6%) | 0.5 | <0.0001 |
| III | 2 (7.7%) | 1 (3.6%) | 2 (5.7%) | 0.6 | 1.0 |
| Brady pacingc | 7 (33.3%) | (0.0%) | 15 (42.9%) | 0.5 | |
| QRS durationa | 176 (±27.2) | 150 (±25.2) | 138 (±39.3) | <0.01 | <0.0001 |
| RV dilatation | |||||
| None | 2 (10.0%) | 6 (21.4%) | 0.195 | ||
| Moderate | 11 (55.0%) | 18 (64.3%) | |||
| Severe | 7 (35.0%) | 4 (14.3%) | |||
| RV function | |||||
| Good | 10 (50.0%) | 26 (92.9%) | <0.01 | ||
| Reduced | 10 (50.0%) | 2 (7.1%) | |||
| Pulmonary regurgitation | |||||
| None/mild | 12 (63.2%) | 13 (46.4%) | 0.05 | ||
| Moderate | 6 (31.6%) | 5 (17.9%) | |||
| Severe | 1 (5.3%) | 10 (35.7%) | |||
| Inappropriate ICD shocks | 10 (38.5%) | 5 (14.3%) | 0.03 | ||
| Appropriate ICD shocks | 2 (7.7%) | 11 (31.4%) | 0.03 | ||
ToF + ICD, patients with Tetralogy of Fallot with an ICD
ToF, patients with Tetralogy of Fallot (without an ICD)
ICD, patients with ICD (without congenital heart disease)
NYHA New York Heart Association class
aData are presented as mean (±SD)
bExcluding two patients living in institutions because of psychosocial problems
cThere were 5 patients in the ToF + ICD group of which the ECG could not be examined
The bold numbers in the text indicate significant results