6/30/23, 12:11 AM VEST Pathway Feedback Search Clinical Topics Home Studies VEST VEST Disease Disease Disease Non-ST-elevation myocardial inf ST-elevation myocardial infarction Ventric Trial question What is the effect of a wearable cardioverter-defibrillator in patients with acute myocardial infarction and an ejection fraction 35%? Study design Multi-center Single blinded RCT Population Characteristics of study participants 26.3% female N = 2302 73.7% male 2302 patients (608 female, 1685 male) Inclusion criteria: patients with acute myocardial infarction and an ejection fraction 35% Key exclusion criteria: ICD or unipolar pacemaker, clinically significant valve disease, undergoing long-term hemodialysis, chest circumference too small or too large to accommodate the wearable cardioverter-defibrillator, pregnancy Interventions N=1524 use of a wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (wearable cardioverter-defibrillator plus guideline-directed medical therapy) N=778 standard medical therapy (guideline-directed medical therapy alone) Primary outcome Death due to arrhythmic causes 2.4 % 2.4 https://web.pathway.md/studies/recmMvJu3MGx6XTRd 1/2 6/30/23, 12:11 AM VEST Pathway 1.8 % 1.6 1.2 % 0.6 % No significant difference 0.0 % Use of a wearable cardioverter-defibrillator Standard medical therapy No significant difference in death due to arrhythmic causes (1.6% vs. 2.4%; RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.21) Secondary outcomes Significant decrease in death from any cause (3.1% vs. 4.9%; RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.98) Conclusion In patients with acute myocardial infarction and an ejection fraction 35%, use of a wearable cardioverter-defibrillator was not superior to standard medical therapy with respect to death due to arrhythmic causes. Reference Olgin JE, Pletcher MJ, Vittinghoff E et al. Wearable Cardioverter-Defibrillator after Myocardial Infarction. N Engl J Med. 2018 Sep 27;379(13):1205-1215. Open reference URL https://web.pathway.md/studies/recmMvJu3MGx6XTRd 2/2