Skip to content

Author

John G. F. Cleland

1 paper indexed here

We haven’t gathered this author’s papers yet. Follow them and we’ll fetch their work.

Not the right person? Other researchers publish under this name.

Open access Aug 2026

Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance to Guide Defibrillator Implantation for LVEF of 36% to 50%: The CMR GUIDE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance Current guidelines do not recommend primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) unless a patient's left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is 35% or less. Many sudden cardiac deaths (SCD) occur when LVEF is 36% to 50%. Myocardial scar (a key arrhythmic substrate) can be assessed by late gadolinium enhancement on cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR), but robust evidence is lacking regarding a scar-based approach to ICD insertion. Objective To determine whether implantation of ICDs reduces SCD or hemodynamically significant ventricular arrhythmia (HSVA) in patients with an LVEF of 36% to 50% and myocardial scar. Design, Setting, and Participants An open-label randomized clinical trial enrolled adults between 2015 and 2022 who had ischemic or nonischemic cardiomyopathy, an LVEF of 36% to 50%, CMR-defined myocardial scar, and were receiving guideline-directed medical therapy at 18 sites in Australia, Germany, and the UK. Follow-up assessments were completed in 2026. Interventions A primary prevention ICD (n = 180) vs an implantable loop recorder (ILR) (n = 173). Main Outcomes and Measures The primary composite outcome was SCD or HSVA. Five secondary outcomes were evaluated: SCD, HSVA, heart failure-related hospitalization, cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality. Results Of 353 patients randomized (median age, 65 years [IQR, 57-61 years]; 18% female; and 72% had an ischemic etiology), 70% had an LVEF of 40% or greater. The median follow-up was 6.3 years (IQR, 4.8-7.6 years). The primary composite outcome occurred in 14 patients (7.8%) in the ICD group compared with 16 patients (9.2%) in the ILR group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.76 [95% CI, 0.37-1.58]). For the individual components of the primary composite outcome, SCD occurred in 3 patients (1.7%) vs 10 patients (5.8%) in the ILR group (HR, 0.26 [95% CI, 0.07-0.95]) and HSVA occurred in 12 patients (6.7%) vs 6 patients (3.5%), respectively (HR, 1.77 [95% CI, 0.65-4.81]). The rates for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and heart failure-related hospitalization were similar between groups. In a prespecified analysis of 6 subgroups, the primary outcome occurred less often in patients younger than 70 years in the ICD group (3.3%) vs patients in the ILR group (10.0%) (HR, 0.28 [95% CI, 0.09-0.89]) but not in those aged 70 years or older (16.9% vs 7.5%, respectively) (HR, 2.33 [95% CI, 0.75-7.26]; P = .01 for interaction). Conclusions and Relevance Implantation of an ICD did not reduce the composite outcome of SCD or HSVA in patients with an LVEF of 36% to 50% and myocardial scar. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01918215.

J. Selvanayagam, John G. F. Cleland, G. Hillis et al. · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.