Long COVID-19: A Primer for Cardiovascular Health Professionals, on Behalf of the CCS Rapid Response Team.

It is now widely recognized that COVID-19 illness can be associated with significant intermediate and potentially longer-term physical limitations. The term, "long COVID-19" is used to define any patient with persistent symptoms after acute COVID-19 infection (ie, after 4 weeks). It is postulated that cardiac injury might be linked to symptoms that persist after resolution of acute infection, as part of this syndrome. The Canadian Cardiovascular Society Rapid Response Team has generated this document to provide guidance to health care providers on the optimal management of patients with suspected cardiac complications of long COVID-19.

Cardiovascular Care Delivery During the Second Wave of COVID-19 in Canada.

Hospitals and ambulatory facilities significantly reduced cardiac care delivery in response to the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. The deferral of elective cardiovascular procedures led to a marked reduction in health care delivery with a significant impact on optimal cardiovascular care. International and Canadian data have reported dramatically increased wait times for diagnostic tests and cardiovascular procedures, as well as associated increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. In the wake of the demonstrated ability to rapidly create critical care and hospital ward capacity, we advocate a different approach during the second and possible subsequent COVID-19 pandemic waves. We suggest an approach, informed by local data and experience, that balances the need for an expected rise in demand for health care resources to ensure appropriate COVID-19 surge capacity with continued delivery of essential cardiovascular care. Incorporating cardiovascular care leaders into pandemic planning and operations will help health care systems minimise cardiac care delivery disruptions while maintaining critical care and hospital ward surge capacity and continuing measures to reduce transmission risk in health care settings. Specific recommendations targeting the main pillars of cardiovascular care are presented: ambulatory, inpatient, procedural, diagnostic, surgical, and rehabilitation.

Differentiating Ventricular From Supraventricular Arrhythmias Using the Postpacing Interval After Failed Antitachycardia Pacing.

BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter defibrillator arrhythmia discrimination algorithms often are unable to discriminate ventricular from supraventricular arrhythmias. We sought to evaluate whether the response to antitachycardia pacing (ATP) in patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator could further discriminate ventricular from supraventricular arrhythmias in patients receiving ATP. METHODS AND RESULTS: All episodes of ventricular or supraventricular tachycardia where ATP was delivered in patients enrolled in RAFT (Cardiac-Resynchronization Therapy for Mild-to-Moderate Heart Failure Trial) were included. RAFT randomized 1798 patients with New York Heart Association class II/III heart failure, left ventricular ejection fraction ≤30%, and QRS duration of ≥120 ms to a implantable cardioverter defibrillator±cardiac resynchronization therapy. The tachycardia cycle lengths (TCLs) before and after the delivery of ATP and the postpacing intervals were assessed. Overall, 10 916 ATP attempts were reviewed for 8150 tachycardia episodes in 924 patients. After excluding tachycardias where ATP terminated the episode or where the specific mechanism of the tachycardia was uncertain, we analyzed 3676 ATP attempts delivered for 2046 tachycardia episodes in 541 patients. A shorter difference between postpacing interval and TCL (PPI-TCL) was more likely to be associated with ventricular tachycardia than with supraventricular tachyarrhythmia (138.1±104.2 versus 277.4±126.9 ms; p<0.001). Analysis of the receiver operator curve for the PPI-TCL revealed an area under the curve of 0.803 (p<0.001; 95% confidence interval, 0.784-0.822). The majority of tachycardias with a PPI-TCL >360 ms were supraventricular with a PPI-TCL value of ≤360 ms having a sensitivity of 97.4% and specificity of 28.3% for ventricular tachycardia. CONCLUSIONS: The ATP response, specifically the PPI-TCL, can further discriminate ventricular from supraventricular arrhythmias in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators when the currently available discriminators fail. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00251251.

Sprint Fidelis lead fractures in patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy devices: insight from the Resynchronization/Defibrillation for Ambulatory Heart Failure (RAFT) study.

BACKGROUND: Using data from the Resynchronization/Defibrillation for Ambulatory Heart Failure (RAFT) study, we examined whether Fidelis lead failure was more common in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) and cardiac resynchronization therapy (ICD-CRT) than in patients with an ICD only. METHODS AND RESULTS: All cases of patients who had a right ventricular defibrillation lead revision in the RAFT study were adjudicated for the presence of lead fracture. Criteria for fracture were at least 2 of the following: (1) Impedance rise (>50% or >500 Ω in 1 week), (2) short interval count >10 times per day or 300 times per month, or (3) inappropriate shock caused by noise, verified by stored electrogram. A total of 1798 patients were enrolled into the RAFT study, with a mean follow-up of 40±20 months. There were 818 patients (45.5%) who received a Fidelis lead at the original implantation, 405 with an ICD only and 413 with an ICD-CRT. There were 47 confirmed defibrillation lead fractures; 45 were Fidelis leads (5.5% of Fidelis leads). The overall rate of fracture in the ICD group was 3.2% compared with 7.8% in the ICD-CRT group (P=0.006; hazard ratio, 2.42; 95% confidence interval, 1.27-4.61). Significant correlates of lead fracture in this population were undergoing an ICD-CRT implantation and having ≥2 leads. CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis of the RAFT study, patients with an ICD-CRT were found to have a significantly higher fracture rate than patients with an ICD. This finding needs to be considered when these patients are assessed for possible lead revision at the time of an elective generator replacement.

Assessment of resynchronization therapy on functional status and quality of life in patients requiring an implantable defibrillator.

BACKGROUND: The effect of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) on physical function and Quality of Life (QoL) in patients who require an implantable defibrillator but do not meet guideline criteria for CRT has not been studied in detail. METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a randomized study of 72 patients with high risk of sudden cardiac death, ejection fraction (EF) < or =35%, mild-to-moderate heart failure symptoms, and QRS > 120 ms. Patients received a CRT defibrillator and were randomized to CRT turned ON or OFF. Objective and subjective measures were performed at baseline and after 6 months. There was no difference in change in left ventricular end-systolic volume (ESV) by radionuclid angiogram scan, the primary endpoint, between the CRT ON group (DeltaESV =-7 +/- 52 mL), and CRT OFF group (DeltaESV =-30 +/- 47 mL). Similarly, echocardiogram measures of ESV and EF showed no difference between the two groups. In the CRT ON group, selected measures of QoL and subjective exercise tolerance but not heart failure symptoms improved significantly. Six-minute walk distance prolonged in the CRT ON group (baseline 313.6 +/- 114.4 m, 6-month 365.0 +/- 122.5 m, P = 0.01), but the difference in change in walk distance between the two groups was not significant. CONCLUSION: Further studies with larger sample size and longer follow-up will be required to allow definite conclusions regarding the potential benefit of CRT in this patient population.

Universal access -- but when? Treating the right patient at the right time: access to electrophysiology services in Canada.

The Canadian Cardiovascular Society Access to Care Working Group has published a series of commentaries on access to cardiovascular care in Canada. The present article reviews the evidence for timely access to electrophysiology services. Using the best available evidence along with expert consensus by the Canadian Heart Rhythm Society, the panel proposed a series of benchmarks for access to the full scope of electrophysiology services, from initial consultation through to operative procedures. The proposed benchmarks are presented herein.

Randomized controlled study of detection enhancements versus rate-only detection to prevent inappropriate therapy in a dual-chamber implantable cardioverter-defibrillator.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare rate-only detection to enhanced detection in a dual-chamber implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), to discriminate ventricular tachycardia from supraventricular tachycardia. BACKGROUND: ICDs are highly effective in treating ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF). However, they frequently deliver inappropriate therapy during supraventricular tachycardia (SVT). METHODS: We conducted a randomized clinical trial of detection enhancements in a dual-chamber ICD compared to control (rate-only) detection to discriminate VT from SVT. Detection enhancements included a specific standardized protocol identical for all patients for programming rate stability, sudden onset, atrial-to-ventricular relationship (sudden onset = 9% and rate stability = 10 ms; V > A "on"), and "sustained rate duration" (3 minutes). The primary endpoint was the time to first inappropriate therapy classified by a blinded events committee. RESULTS: One hundred forty-nine patients had a history of sustained VT or VF. Mean age (+/- SD) was 60 +/- 13 years; 83% were male, and mean ejection fraction was 35 +/- 15%. Control (n = 70) and "enhanced" (n = 79) groups did not differ with regard to age, sex, ejection fraction, or primary arrhythmia. The proportion of patients free of inappropriate therapy over time was significantly higher in the enhanced versus the control group (hazard ratio = 0.47, P = .011). High-energy shocks were reduced from 0.58 +/- 4.23 shocks/patient/month in the control group to 0.04 +/- 0.15 shocks/patient/month in the enhanced group (P = .0425). No patient programmed per protocol failed to receive therapy for VT detected by the ICD (422 VT episodes). CONCLUSIONS: Standardized programming in a dual-chamber ICD leads to a significant and clinically important reduction in inappropriate therapies compared to rate-only detection and does not compromise safety with respect to appropriate treatment of VT.