MUSTT allowed enrollment of patients who were 4 days after an acute MI or revascu- larization. The ICD was of no benefit in 2 other RCTs that examined the efficacy of the ICD in the acute phase of an MI.S7.1.2-10,S7.1.2-11 In a single cen- ter observational study, an electrophysiological study was performed a median of 9 days after acute MI in 115 patients with LVEF <40% and ICDs recommended for those with inducible VT. Median follow-up was 12 months. Sustained VT was induced in 27% of patients, and 22% of those who received ICDs had spontanous VT terminated by the ICD during follow-up. None of the patients without inducible VT had VT or SCD 5. In a retrospective analysis of the UNOS (United Network for Organ Sharing) registry that extended from 1999 to 2014, data on 32599 patients showed that during a median follow-up of 154 days, 3638 patients (11%) died while on the wait- list for cardiac transplantation (9% in the ICD group versus 15% in the non-ICD group; P<0.0001). The presence of an ICD at listing was associated with an adjusted 13% relative risk reduction in mor- tality. In the subgroup of patients with an LVAD (n=9478), an ICD was associated with an adjusted 19% relative risk reduction in mortality.S7.1.2-9 In another study of 380 patients listed for heart trans- plantation between 2005 and 2009 at 1 tertiary heart transplant center, 122 patients received an ICD before or within 3 months after being listed for heart transplantation. Non-ICD patients were more likely to die while on the transplant list. 