Relationship Between Obesity and Youth Athletes' Physical Activity and Exercise-Related Cardiac Symptoms.

Background: While studies have identified the negative cardiovascular effects of obesity, the effects of obesity on youth athletes are less studied. This study investigates the associations between obesity in youth athletes and exercise activity and exertional cardiac symptoms. Methods: The HeartBytes National Youth Database produced by Simon's Heart, a nonprofit that organizes adolescents' sports pre-participation examinations (PPEs), was used. This database contains demographic data, exercise-related symptoms, and electrocardiogram data obtained during PPEs. BMI was converted to percentiles, with obesity defined as BMI ≥95th percentile. Outcomes were evaluated using a chi-squared test with odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Of 7363 patients, there were 634 individuals with obesity. Youth athletes within normal weight ranges (5th-85th percentile) had higher exercise rates than those with underweight, overweight, or obesity (p < 0.001 for each). Athletes with obesity had higher odds of exertional symptoms overall (OR: 1.63 [CI: 1.36-1.96]; p < 0.001). However, for athletes who exercised >10 hours a week, there was no association between obesity and exertional symptoms. Athletes with obesity had higher odds of elevated blood pressure (OR: 5.35 [CI: 2.00-14.30]; p < 0.001) and hypercholesterolemia (OR: 3.84 [CI: 2.51-5.86]; p < 0.001). Conclusions: In this dataset, obesity in youth athletes is associated with decreased physical activity and increased exertional symptoms in general. Obesity is not associated with exertional symptoms in athletes who participated in higher weekly physical activity. Further studies are needed to elucidate the cause-effect relationship of these findings.

Post-Capillary Pulmonary Hypertension: Clinical Review.

Pulmonary hypertension (PH) caused by left heart disease, also known as post-capillary PH, is the most common etiology of PH. Left heart disease due to systolic dysfunction or heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, valvular heart disease, and left atrial myopathy due to atrial fibrillation are causes of post-capillary PH. Elevated left-sided filling pressures cause pulmonary venous congestion due to backward transmission of pressures and post-capillary PH. In advanced left-sided heart disease or valvular heart disease, chronic uncontrolled venous congestion may lead to remodeling of the pulmonary arterial system, causing combined pre-capillary and post-capillary PH. The hemodynamic definition of post-capillary PH includes a mean pulmonary arterial pressure > 20 mmHg, pulmonary vascular resistance < 3 Wood units, and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure > 15 mmHg. Echocardiography is important in the identification and management of the underlying cause of post-capillary PH. Management of post-capillary PH is focused on the treatment of the underlying condition. Strategies are geared towards pharmacotherapy and guideline-directed medical therapy for heart failure, surgical or percutaneous management of valvular disorders, and control of modifiable risk factors and comorbid conditions. Referral to centers with advanced heart and pulmonary teams has shown to improve morbidity and mortality. There is emerging interest in the use of targeted agents classically used in pulmonary arterial hypertension, but current data remain limited and conflicting. This review aims to serve as a comprehensive summary of postcapillary PH and its etiologies, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management, particularly as it pertains to advanced heart failure.

Comparison of very high-power short-duration, high-power short-duration, and low-power long-duration radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The optimal power and duration settings for radiofrequency (RF) atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation to improve efficacy and safety is unclear. We compared low-power long-duration (LPLD), high-power short-duration (HPSD), and very HPSD (vHPSD) RF settings for AF ablation. METHODS: This network meta-analysis (NMA) was structured according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Medline, Scopus and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched to identify relevant studies. Observational and randomized studies were included. Eligible studies compared outcomes in AF patients who underwent first-time RF ablation with the following settings: vHPSD (70-90 W, 3-10 s), HPSD (45-60 W, 5-10 s), or LPLD (20-40 W, 20-60 s). RESULTS: Thirty-six studies comprising 10,375 patients were included (33% female). Frequentist NMA showed LPLD tended toward a lower odds of freedom from arrhythmia (FFA) versus HPSD (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.86-1.00). There was no difference in FFA between vHPSD versus HPSD. Splitwise interval estimates showed a lower odds of FFA in LPLD versus vHPSD on direct (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.65-0.93) and network estimates (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.73-0.98). Frequentist NMA showed less total procedural (TP) time with HPSD versus LPLD (generic variance 1.06, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.29) and no difference between HPSD versus vHPSD. CONCLUSION: This NMA shows improved procedural times in HPSD and vHPSD versus LPLD. Although HPSD tended toward improved odds of FFA compared to LPLD, the overall result was not statistically significant. The odds of FFA in LPLD was lower versus vHPSD on direct and network estimates on splitwise interval analysis. Large prospective head-to-head randomized trials are needed to validate HPSD and vHPSD settings.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Cardiac Amyloidosis and Aortic Stenosis.

Aortic stenosis (AS) and cardiac amyloidosis (CA) occur concomitantly in a significant number of patients and portend a higher risk of all-cause mortality. Previous studies have investigated outcomes in patients with concomitant CA/AS who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) versus medical therapy alone, but no evidence-based consensus regarding the ideal management of these patients has been established. Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched to identify relevant studies. Methodologic bias was assessed using the modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies. A total of 4 observational studies comprising 83 patients were included. Of these, 45 patients (54%) underwent TAVI, whereas 38 (46%) were managed conservatively. Of the 3 studies that included baseline characteristics by treatment group, 30% were women. The risk of all-cause mortality was found to be significantly lower in patients who underwent TAVI than those treated with conservative medical therapy alone (odds ratio 0.24, 95% confidence interval 0.08 to 0.73). In conclusion, this meta-analysis suggests a lower risk of all-cause mortality in patients with CA with AS who underwent TAVI than those managed with medical therapy alone.

Catheter ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) is a proven alternative to pharmacologic rhythm control in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Whether outcomes differ in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is of interest. Methods: Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched to identify relevant studies. Primary efficacy outcomes of interest include atrial arrythmia recurrence and repeat ablation. Harm outcomes of interest include all-cause mortality, all-cause hospitalizations, cardiovascular hospitalizations, stroke/transient ischemic attack, and cardiac tamponade. Results: We included 7 observational studies comprising 2554 patients with HFpEF who underwent catheter ablation for AF. When comparing patients with HFpEF versus without HF, there was no significant difference in atrial arrhythmia recurrence (risk ratio [RR] 1.39; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.91-2.13), stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) (RR 0.47; 95% CI 0.03-6.54), or cardiac tamponade (RR 1.20; 95% CI 0.12-12.20). When comparing patients with HFpEF versus HFrEF, there was no significant difference in atrial arrhythmia recurrence (RR 1.12; 95% CI 0.92-1.37), repeat ablation (RR 1.19; 95% CI 0.74-1.93), all-cause mortality (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.67-1.13), all-cause hospitalizations (RR 1.10; 95% CI 0.94-1.30), cardiovascular hospitalizations (RR 0.83; 95% CI 0.69-1.01), stroke or TIA (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.29-2.25), or cardiac tamponade (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.19-5.16). Conclusions: Non-randomized studies suggest that catheter ablation for AF in patients with HFpEF is associated with similar arrythmia-free survival and safety profile when compared to patients with HFrEF or without heart failure.

Low-voltage area substrate modification for atrial fibrillation ablation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials.

AIMS: The value of additional ablation beyond pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is unclear, especially for persistent AF. The optimal target for substrate modification to improve outcomes is uncertain. We investigate the utility of low-voltage area (LVA) substrate modification in patients undergoing catheter ablation for AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: This meta-analysis was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Medline, Scopus and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched to identify relevant studies. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Only randomized studies were included. AF patients who underwent catheter ablation with voltage-guided substrate modification targeting LVA (LVA group) vs. conventional ablation approaches not targeting LVA (non-LVA group) were compared. Four studies comprising 539 patients were included (36% female). Freedom from arrhythmia (FFA) in patients with persistent AF was greater in the LVA group [risk ratio (RR) 1.30; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03-1.64]. There was no difference in FFA in patients with paroxysmal AF between groups (RR 1.30; 95% CI 0.89-1.91). There was no difference in total procedural time (mean difference -17.54 min; 95% CI -64.37 to 29.28 min) or total ablation time (mean difference -36.17 min; 95% CI -93.69 to 21.35 min) in all included patients regardless of AF type between groups. There was no difference in periprocedural complications between groups in all included patients regardless of AF type (RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.22-3.82). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis demonstrates improved FFA in persistent AF patients who underwent voltage-guided substrate modification targeting LVA.

External validation of the COVID-19 4C mortality score in an urban United States cohort.

BACKGROUND: Identifying patients at risk for mortality from COVID-19 is crucial to triage, clinical decision-making, and the allocation of scarce hospital resources. The 4C Mortality Score effectively predicts COVID-19 mortality, but it has not been validated in a United States (U.S.) population. The purpose of this study is to determine whether the 4C Mortality Score accurately predicts COVID-19 mortality in an urban U.S. adult inpatient population. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included adult patients admitted to a single-center, tertiary care hospital (Philadelphia, PA) with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR from 3/01/2020 to 6/06/2020. Variables were extracted through a combination of automated export and manual chart review. The outcome of interest was mortality during hospital admission or within 30 days of discharge. RESULTS: This study included 426 patients; mean age was 64.4 years, 43.4% were female, and 54.5% self-identified as Black or African American. All-cause mortality was observed in 71 patients (16.7%). The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve of the 4C Mortality Score was 0.85 (95% confidence interval, 0.79-0.89). CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians may use the 4C Mortality Score in an urban, majority Black, U.S. inpatient population. The derivation and validation cohorts were treated in the pre-vaccine era so the 4C Score may over-predict mortality in current patient populations. With stubbornly high inpatient mortality rates, however, the 4C Score remains one of the best tools available to date to inform thoughtful triage and treatment allocation.

Comparing reliability of ICD-10-based COVID-19 comorbidity data to manual chart review, a retrospective cross-sectional study.

International Statistical Classification of Disease and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision codes (ICD-10) are used to characterize cohort comorbidities. Recent literature does not demonstrate standardized extraction methods. OBJECTIVE: Compare COVID-19 cohort manual-chart-review and ICD-10-based comorbidity data; characterize the accuracy of different methods of extracting ICD-10-code-based comorbidity, including the temporal accuracy with respect to critical time points such as day of admission. DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study. MEASUREMENTS: ICD-10-based-data performance characteristics relative to manual-chart-review. RESULTS: Discharge billing diagnoses had a sensitivity of 0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.79-0.85; comorbidity range: 0.35-0.96). The past medical history table had a sensitivity of 0.72 (95% CI: 0.69-0.76; range: 0.44-0.87). The active problem list had a sensitivity of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.63-0.71; range: 0.47-0.71). On day of admission, the active problem list had a sensitivity of 0.58 (95% CI: 0.54-0.63; range: 0.30-0.68)and past medical history table had a sensitivity of 0.48 (95% CI: 0.43-0.53; range: 0.30-0.56). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: ICD-10-based comorbidity data performance varies depending on comorbidity, data source, and time of retrieval; there are notable opportunities for improvement. Future researchers should clearly outline comorbidity data source and validate against manual-chart-review.

Association of race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status with COVID-19 30-day mortality at a Philadelphia medical center using a retrospective cohort study.

COVID-19 has disproportionately affected low-income communities and people of color. Previous studies demonstrated that race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status (SES) are not independently correlated with COVID-19 mortality. The purpose of our study is to determine the effect of race/ethnicity and SES on COVID-19 30-day mortality in a diverse, Philadelphian population. This is a retrospective cohort study in a single-center tertiary care hospital in Philadelphia, PA. The study includes adult patients hospitalized with polymerase-chain-reaction-confirmed COVID-19 between March 1, 2020 and June 6, 2020. The primary outcome was a composite of COVID-19 death or hospice discharge within 30 days of discharge. The secondary outcome was intensive care unit (ICU) admission. The study included 426 patients: 16.7% died, 3.3% were discharged to hospice, and 20.0% were admitted to the ICU. Using multivariable analysis, race/ethnicity was not associated with the primary nor secondary outcome. In Model 4, age greater than 75 (odds ratio [OR]: 11.01; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.96-61.97) and renal disease (OR: 2.78; 95% CI: 1.31-5.90) were associated with higher odds of the composite primary outcome. Living in a "very-low-income area" (OR: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.12-0.71) and body mass index (BMI) 30-35 (OR: 0.24; 95% CI: 0.08-0.69) were associated with lower odds of the primary outcome. When controlling for demographics, SES, and comorbidities, race/ethnicity was not independently associated with the composite primary outcome. Very-low SES, as extrapolated from census-tract-level income data, was associated with lower odds of the composite primary outcome.

Describing heart rate variability in patients with chronic atrial fibrillation during hospitalization for COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Myriad cardiovascular manifestations have been reported with COVID-19. We previously reported that failure of PR interval shortening with increasing heart rate (HR) in patients with COVID-19 is associated with adverse outcomes. Here, we report on heart rate variability (HRV) and clinical outcomes in patients with chronic atrial fibrillation (cAF) hospitalized for COVID-19. METHODS: A retrospective review of admitted COVID-19 patients with cAF between 1 March 2020 to 30 June 2020 was performed. HRV in cAF was compared during pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 admissions; we selected pre-COVID-19 ECGs with HRs that were within 10 beats per minute of the COVID-19 ECGs. Mean HR and each RR interval were recorded. Time-domain measurements of HR variability were then calculated (SDSD, RMSSD, pNN50). Clinical outcomes during COVID-19 were correlated to indices of HRV. RESULTS: A total of 184 ECGs (95 pre-COVID-19, 89 COVID-19) from 38 cAF in-patients were included. Mean age 78.6 ± 11.4 years, male 44.7%. The mean number of ECGs analyzed per patient pre-COVID-19 was 2.50 and during COVID-19 was 2.34. Comparing pre-COVID-19 versus COVID-19 ECGs showed: mean HR (95.9 ± 24.3 vs. 101.6 ± 22.8 BPM; P = .10), SDSD (109.0 ± 50.6 vs. 90.3 ± 37.2 ms; P < .01), RMSSD (184.1 ± 80.4 vs. 147.3 ± 59.8 ms; P < .01), pNN50 (73.8 ± 16.3 vs. 65.6 ± 16.6%; P < .01). Patients who had a smaller pNN50 during a COVID-19 admission had increased mortality (50.0% vs. 14.3%; log-rank test P = .02). CONCLUSION: In patients with cAF, the HRV was reduced during COVID-19 compared with prior illnesses at similar average heart rates. Patients with the most depressed HRV as measured by pNN50 had an associated increase in mortality compared with patients whose HRV was preserved.

Development and Validation of a Web-Based Severe COVID-19 Risk Prediction Model.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) carries high morbidity and mortality globally. Identification of patients at risk for clinical deterioration upon presentation would aid in triaging, prognostication, and allocation of resources and experimental treatments. RESEARCH QUESTION: Can we develop and validate a web-based risk prediction model for identification of patients who may develop severe COVID-19, defined as intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mechanical ventilation, and/or death? METHODS: This retrospective cohort study reviewed 415 patients admitted to a large urban academic medical center and community hospitals. Covariates included demographic, clinical, and laboratory data. The independent association of predictors with severe COVID-19 was determined using multivariable logistic regression. A derivation cohort (n=311, 75%) was used to develop the prediction models. The models were tested by a validation cohort (n=104, 25%). RESULTS: The median age was 66 years (Interquartile range [IQR] 54-77) and the majority were male (55%) and non-White (65.8%). The 14-day severe COVID-19 rate was 39.3%; 31.7% required ICU, 24.6% mechanical ventilation, and 21.2% died. Machine learning algorithms and clinical judgment were used to improve model performance and clinical utility, resulting in the selection of eight predictors: age, sex, dyspnea, diabetes mellitus, troponin, C-reactive protein, D-dimer, and aspartate aminotransferase. The discriminative ability was excellent for both the severe COVID-19 (training area under the curve [AUC]=0.82, validation AUC=0.82) and mortality (training AUC= 0.85, validation AUC=0.81) models. These models were incorporated into a mobile-friendly website. CONCLUSIONS: This web-based risk prediction model can be used at the bedside for prediction of severe COVID-19 using data mostly available at the time of presentation.

Behavior of the PR interval with increasing heart rate in patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Myriad manifestations of cardiovascular involvement have been described in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but there have been no reports of COVID-19 affecting the cardiac conduction system. The PR interval on the electrocardiogram (ECG) normally shortens with increasing heart rate (HR). The case of a patient with COVID-19 manifesting Mobitz type 1 atrioventricular (AV) block that normalized as the patient's condition improved prompted us to investigate PR interval behavior in patients with COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to characterize PR interval behavior in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and to correlate that behavior with clinical outcomes. METHODS: This study was a cross-sectional cohort analysis of confirmed COVID-19 cases (March 26, 2020, to April 25, 2020). We reviewed pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 ECGs to characterize AV conduction by calculating the PR interval to HR (PR:HR) slope. Clinical endpoints were death or need for endotracheal intubation. RESULTS: ECGs from 75 patients (246 pre-COVID-19 ECGs and 246 COVID-19 ECGs) were analyzed for PR:HR slope. Of these patients, 38 (50.7%) showed the expected PR interval shortening with increasing HR (negative PR:HR slope), whereas 37 (49.3%) showed either no change (8 with PR:HR slope = 0) or paradoxical PR interval prolongation (29 with positive PR:HR slope) with increasing HR. Patients without PR interval shortening were more likely to die (11/37 [29.7%] vs 3/38 [7.9%]; P = .019) or require endotracheal intubation (16/37 [43.2%] vs 8/38 [21.1%]; P = .05) compared to patients with PR interval shortening. CONCLUSION: Half of patients with COVID-19 showed abnormal PR interval behavior (paradoxical prolongation or lack of shortening) with increasing HR. This finding was associated with increased risk of death and need for endotracheal intubation.