Prevalence of frequent premature ventricular contractions and left-ventricular systolic dysfunction in patients receiving Holter monitoring.

BACKGROUND: Premature ventricular contractions (PVCs) are frequently observed with left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction, although the prevalence of these associated conditions in the general population remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: We sought to understand the prevalence of frequent PVCs (defined PVCs > 5%) and high burden PVCs (defined PVCs > 10%) and LV systolic dysfunction in patients receiving ambulatory Holter monitors (HM). METHODS: A prospective multicenter (eight US medical centers) cross-sectional study collected demographic and PVC burden data from consecutive patients undergoing 24-h, 48-h, and 14-day HM (July 2018-June 2020). Left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) data was collected if obtained within 6 months of HM. Four PVC burden groups were analyzed (<1%, 1%-5%, 5.1%-10%, and >10% burden) and stratified by normal LVEF (≥50%) or presence LVEF < 50%. RESULTS: The prevalence of PVC burden of 5.1%-10% and >10% was 4% and 5%, respectively in the population undergoing HM (n = 6529). Age was significantly different between PVC groups (p < .001). In those with LVEF assessment (n = 3713), the prevalence of LVEF < 50% and both LVEF < 50% and PVC > 5% was 16.4% and 4.2%, respectively. The prevalence of PVC > 5% and PVC > 10% in patients with LVEF < 50% was 26% and 16%, respectively. PVC > 5% were more prevalent in older, male, and Caucasians (p < .001). Females had a lower prevalence of PVC > 5% than males (6% vs. 11%; p < .001), but not among those with LVEF < 50% (24% vs. 26%, p = .10). CONCLUSION: PVC > 5% and PVC > 10% and LVEF < 50% are prevalent in patients undergoing HM. PVC > 5% are associated with older age. Females have a lower prevalence of PVC > 5% than males but similar combined PVC > 5% and LVEF < 50%. CLINICALTRIAL: gov identifier: NCT03228823.

Design and characteristics of the prophylactic intra-operative ventricular arrhythmia ablation in high-risk LVAD candidates (PIVATAL) trial.

BACKGROUND: The use of a Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD) in patients with advanced heart failure refractory to optimal medical management has progressed steadily over the past two decades. Data have demonstrated reduced LVAD efficacy, worse clinical outcome, and higher mortality for patients who experience significant ventricular tachyarrhythmia (VTA). We hypothesize that a novel prophylactic intra-operative VTA ablation protocol at the time of LVAD implantation may reduce the recurrent VTA and adverse events postimplant. METHODS: We designed a prospective, multicenter, open-label, randomized-controlled clinical trial enrolling 100 patients who are LVAD candidates with a history of VTA in the previous 5 years. Enrolled patients will be randomized in a 1:1 fashion to intra-operative VTA ablation (n = 50) versus conventional medical management (n = 50) with LVAD implant. Arrhythmia outcomes data will be captured by an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) to monitor VTA events, with a uniform ICD programming protocol. Patients will be followed prospectively over a mean of 18 months (with a minimum of 9 months) after LVAD implantation to evaluate recurrent VTA, adverse events, and procedural outcomes. Secondary endpoints include right heart function/hemodynamics, healthcare utilization, and quality of life. CONCLUSION: The primary aim of this first-ever randomized trial is to assess the efficacy of intra-operative ablation during LVAD surgery in reducing VTA recurrence and improving clinical outcomes for patients with a history of VTA.

Long-term mortality in heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction: systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: Heart failure patients with mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF) have overlapping clinical features, compared with patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). We aim to perform a meta-analysis of studies reporting long-term outcomes in HFmrEF compared with HFrEF and HFpEF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from 18 eligible large-scale studies including 126 239 patients were pooled. Patients with HFmrEF had a lower risk of all-cause death than those with HFrEF [risk ratio (RR) = 0.92; 95% CI = 0.85-0.98; P < 0.001]. This significant difference was seen in the follow-up at 1, 2, and 3 years. Patients with HFmrEF had significantly lower risk of cardiovascular (CV) deaths than HFrEF (RR = 0.77; 95% CI = 0.65-0.92; P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis showed that studies recruiting >50% of males had higher risk of deaths with HFrEF (RR = 1.15; 95% CI = 1.04-1.26; P = 0.006). When compared with HFpEF, patients with HFmrEF had comparable risk of all-cause death (RR = 1.02; 95% CI = 0.96-1.09; P = 0.53). Similarly, there were no differences in the 1, 2, and 3 year deaths; CV and non-CV deaths were insignificant between HFmrEF and HFpEF. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the study support that HFmrEF has better prognosis than HFrEF but similar prognosis when compared with HFpEF. Gender disparity between studies seems to influence the results between HFmrEF and HFrEF. Transition in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), which could not be addressed in the study, may play a decisive role in determining outcomes. PROSPERO review registration number CRD42021277107.

Feasibility of "natural surface" epicardial mapping from the pulmonary artery for management of atrial arrhythmias.

BACKGROUND: The right and left pulmonary artery branches (RPA, LPA) overlie inaccessible left atrial (LA) epicardium, containing the Bachmann bundle (BB), that participate in arrhythmia pathogenesis and offer an opportunity for natural surface epicardial mapping (NSEM). OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the feasibility of NSEM of BB and LA roof arrhythmias. METHODS: Electrogram recording, pacing, and ablation was performed in 2 swine. Subsequently, NSEM and pacing from the RPA and LPA was performed in 11 consecutive patients undergoing ablation of atrial fibrillation or flutter. Pacing entrainment and ablation of LA epicardium, from the pulmonary artery (PA), was performed in cases of atypical flutter. RESULTS: Swine specimens revealed no vascular disruption and LA epicardial lesions up to 7 mm in diameter and 3 mm in depth. In clinical cases, RPA mapping was performed in 11 (100%) and LPA mapping in 6 (55%) patients. Simultaneous leftward activation of the BB followed by rightward activation of the opposing LA endocardium was recorded during crista pacing. Right and left PA median signal amplitudes were 0.71 mV and 0.30 mV, respectively. Endocardial LA median distance was 9 mm to the RPA and 15.6 mm to the LPA and LA capture was successful in 7 of 8 (88%). In cases of atypical flutter, entrainment was successful in 3 of 3 (100%) and ablation was performed. CONCLUSION: PA NSEM can enable safe recording and entrainment of the BB, providing otherwise inaccessible epicaridal arrhythmia measurements. The safety and efficacy of ablation from the PA requires further study.

Comparison of antiarrhythmic drug therapy and radiofrequency catheter ablation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Antiarrhythmic drugs are commonly used for prevention of recurrent atrial fibrillation (AF) despite inconsistent efficacy and frequent adverse effects. Catheter ablation has been proposed as an alternative treatment for paroxysmal AF. OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of catheter ablation compared with antiarrhythmic drug therapy (ADT) in treating symptomatic paroxysmal AF. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A prospective, multicenter, randomized (2:1), unblinded, Bayesian-designed study conducted at 19 hospitals of 167 patients who did not respond to at least 1 antiarrhythmic drug and who experienced at least 3 AF episodes within 6 months before randomization. Enrollment occurred between October 25, 2004, and October 11, 2007, with the last follow-up on January 19, 2009. INTERVENTION: Catheter ablation (n = 106) or ADT (n = 61), with assessment for effectiveness in a comparable 9-month follow-up period. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Time to protocol-defined treatment failure. The proportion of patients who experienced major treatment-related adverse events within 30 days of catheter ablation or ADT was also reported. RESULTS: At the end of the 9-month effectiveness evaluation period, 66% of patients in the catheter ablation group remained free from protocol-defined treatment failure compared with 16% of patients treated with ADT. The hazard ratio of catheter ablation to ADT was 0.30 (95% confidence interval, 0.19-0.47; P < .001). Major 30-day treatment-related adverse events occurred in 5 of 57 patients (8.8%) treated with ADT and 5 of 103 patients (4.9%) treated with catheter ablation. Mean quality of life scores improved significantly in patients treated by catheter ablation compared with ADT at 3 months; improvement was maintained during the course of the study. CONCLUSION: Among patients with paroxysmal AF who had not responded to at least 1 antiarrhythmic drug, the use of catheter ablation compared with ADT resulted in a longer time to treatment failure during the 9-month follow-up period. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00116428.