Congestive heart failure (CHF) represents a major health care concern in the United States. It has been estimated that approximately 5 million patients in the U.S. have CHF, and nearly 550,000 people are diagnosed with this disease annually. It is known that sudden cardiac death occurs more frequently in the setting of structural heart disease. Moreover, the risk for sudden cardiac death is 6 to 9 times greater in the heart failure population, and cardiac arrhythmias are perhaps the leading cause of death in CHF patients. Currently, both the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association endorse the placement of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy, reasonable life expectancy, and reduced ejection fraction below 40% (class I, level of evidence A). Additionally, placement of ICDs is recommended in non-ischemic cardiomyopathy patients who meet similar requirements with an ejection fraction of less than 35% (class I, level of evidence B). Despite these recommendations for primary prevention of sudden death by way of ICD implantation, more than half of the patients receiving a device are likely to not experience an arrhythmic event that necessitates ICD therapy delivery. ICD devices, on average, cost $20,000-50,000 exclusive of operative and follow up costs. Currently, risk stratification of sudden cardiac death and the need for ICD placement are essentially dependent upon assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction. Other methods employed for risk stratification are signal averaged electrocardiogram (ECG) and another electrocardiographic technique known as T-wave alternans. Although these methods are FDA approved for risk prediction of cardiac death, such techniques are not widely employed in the U.S. given equipment and personnel costs to implement them. Thus, alternative testing for risk assessment for the development of sudden cardiac death in the heart failure population is desirable.