Mast Cell Activation Disorder and Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome: A Clinical Association.

Background Recently there has been increased interest in a possible association between mast cell activation (MCA) disorder and postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS). This study examined the frequency with which symptoms and laboratory findings suggesting MCA disorder occurred in patients diagnosed with POTS. Methods and Results Data were obtained from patients in whom symptoms and orthostatic testing were consistent with a POTS diagnosis. Individuals with <4 months symptom duration, evident ongoing inflammatory disease, suspected volume depletion, or declined consent were excluded. All patients had typical POTS symptoms; some, however, had additional nonorthostatic complaints not usually associated with POTS. The latter patients underwent additional testing for known MCA biochemical mediators including prostaglandins, histamine, methylhistamine, and plasma tryptase. The study comprised 69 patients who met POTS diagnostic criteria. In 44 patients (44/69, 64%) additional nonorthostatic symptoms included migraine, allergic complaints, skin rash, or gastrointestinal symptoms. Of these 44 patients, 29 (66%) exhibited at least 1 laboratory abnormality suggesting MCA disorder, and 11/29 patients had 2 or more such abnormalities. Elevated prostaglandins (n=16) or plasma histamine markers (n=23) were the most frequent findings. Thus, 42% (29/69) of patients initially diagnosed with POTS exhibited both additional symptoms and at least 1 elevated biochemical marker suggesting MCA disorder. Conclusions Laboratory findings suggesting MCA disorder were relatively common in patients diagnosed with POTS and who present with additional nonorthostatic gastrointestinal, cutaneous, and allergic symptoms. While solitary abnormal laboratory findings are not definitive, they favor MCA disorder being considered in such cases.

Safety of Sports for Young Patients With Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators: Long-Term Results of the Multinational ICD Sports Registry.

BACKGROUND: Despite safety concerns, many young patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) participate in sports. We undertook a prospective, multinational registry to determine the incidence of serious adverse events because of sports participation. The primary end points were death or resuscitated arrest during sports or injury during sports because of arrhythmia or shock. Secondary end points included system malfunction and incidence of ventricular arrhythmias requiring multiple shocks for termination. METHODS: Athletes with ICDs aged ≤21 years were included in this post hoc subanalysis of the ICD Sports Registry. Data on sports and clinical outcomes were obtained by phone interview and medical records review. ICD shocks and clinical details of lead malfunction were classified by 2 electrophysiologists. RESULTS: A total of 129 young athletes participating in competitive (n=117) or dangerous (n=12) sports were enrolled. The mean age was 16 years (range, 10-21; 40% female; 92% white). The most common diagnoses were long QT syndrome (n=49), hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (n=30), and congenital heart disease (n=16). The most common sports were basketball and soccer, including 79 varsity/junior varsity high school and college athletes. During a median follow-up of 42 months, 35 athletes (27%) received 38 shocks. There were no occurrences of death, arrest, or injury related to arrhythmia, during sports. There was 1 ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation storm during competition. Freedom from lead malfunction was 92.3% at 5 years and 79.6% at 10 years. CONCLUSIONS: Although shocks related to competition/practice are not uncommon, there were no serious adverse sequelae. Lead malfunction rates were similar to previously reported in unselected pediatric ICD populations. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00637754.

Mortality reduction in relation to implantable cardioverter defibrillator programming in the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial-Reduce Inappropriate Therapy (MADIT-RIT).

BACKGROUND: The benefit of novel implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) programming in reducing inappropriate ICD therapy and mortality was demonstrated in Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial-Reduce Inappropriate Therapy (MADIT-RIT). However, the cause of mortality reduction remains incompletely evaluated. We aimed to identify factors associated with mortality, with focus on ICD therapy and programming in the MADIT-RIT population. METHODS AND RESULTS: In MADIT-RIT, 1500 patients with a primary prophylactic indication for ICD or cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator were randomized to 1 of 3 different ICD programming arms: conventional programming (ventricular tachycardia zone ≥170 beats per minute), high-rate programming (ventricular tachycardia zone ≥200 beats per minute), and delayed programming (60-second delay before therapy ≥170 beats per minute). Multivariate Cox models were used to assess the influence of time-dependent appropriate and inappropriate ICD therapy (shock and antitachycardia pacing) and randomized programming arm on all-cause mortality. During an average follow-up of 1.4±0.6 years, 71 of 1500 (5%) patients died: cardiac in 40 patients (56.3%), noncardiac in 23 patients (32.4%), and unknown in 8 patients (11.3%). Appropriate shocks (hazard ratio, 6.32; 95% confidence interval, 3.13-12.75; P<0.001) and inappropriate therapy (hazard ratio, 2.61; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-5.31; P=0.01) were significantly associated with an increased mortality risk. There was no evidence of increased mortality risk in patients who experienced appropriate antitachycardia pacing only (hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.36-2.88; P=0.98). Randomization to conventional programming was identified as an independent predictor of death when compared with patients randomized to high-rate programming (hazard ratio, 2.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-3.71; P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: In MADIT-RIT, appropriate shocks, inappropriate ICD therapy, and randomization to conventional ICD programming were independently associated with an increased mortality risk. Appropriate antitachycardia pacing was not related to an adverse outcome. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: clinicaltrials.gov Unique identifier: NCT00947310.

Survival with cardiac-resynchronization therapy in mild heart failure.

BACKGROUND: The Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial with Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (MADIT-CRT) showed that early intervention with cardiac-resynchronization therapy with a defibrillator (CRT-D) in patients with an electrocardiographic pattern showing left bundle-branch block was associated with a significant reduction in heart-failure events over a median follow-up of 2.4 years, as compared with defibrillator therapy alone. METHODS: We evaluated the effect of CRT-D on long-term survival in the MADIT-CRT population. Post-trial follow-up over a median period of 5.6 years was assessed among all 1691 surviving patients (phase 1) and subsequently among 854 patients who were enrolled in post-trial registries (phase 2). All reported analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS: At 7 years of follow-up after initial enrollment, the cumulative rate of death from any cause among patients with left bundle-branch block was 18% among patients randomly assigned to CRT-D, as compared with 29% among those randomly assigned to defibrillator therapy alone (adjusted hazard ratio in the CRT-D group, 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43 to 0.80; P<0.001). The long-term survival benefit of CRT-D in patients with left bundle-branch block did not differ significantly according to sex, cause of cardiomyopathy, or QRS duration. In contrast, CRT-D was not associated with any clinical benefit and possibly with harm in patients without left bundle-branch block (adjusted hazard ratio for death from any cause, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.03 to 2.39; P=0.04; P<0.001 for interaction of treatment with QRS morphologic findings). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that in patients with mild heart-failure symptoms, left ventricular dysfunction, and left bundle-branch block, early intervention with CRT-D was associated with a significant long-term survival benefit. (Funded by Boston Scientific; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00180271, NCT01294449, and NCT02060110.).

Amiodarone reduces the amount of ablation during catheter ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation.

AIMS: The step-wise approach to catheter ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) requires considerable substrate modification targeting at complex fractionated atrial electrograms (CFAEs) in addition to pulmonary vein (PV) isolation. An alternative strategy that minimizes the amount of ablation would be desirable. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the use of pre-procedural amiodarone affects: (i) the amount of ablation required to achieve procedural success, and (ii) long-term outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied 121 consecutive patients with persistent AF who underwent catheter ablation. The patients were divided into two groups: Group 1, amiodarone (n = 31); Group 2, other antiarrhythmic drugs or rate control (n = 90). All the patients underwent a step-wise ablation procedure beginning with PV isolation, then proceeding with ablation of the CFAEs and linear lesions until sinus rhythm was achieved. Mean left atrial cycle length of AF (AFCL) was recorded at each step. The number of CFAE ablation sites was recorded. The number of CFAE sites in Group 1 was significantly less than that in Group 2 (P = 0.0121). The AFCLs after each step in Group 1 were significantly longer than those in Group 2. The procedure time and the radiofrequency time of CFAE ablation in Group 1 were significantly shorter than that in Group 2 (P = 0.0276 and P = 0.0458, respectively). There was no significant difference between the two groups in early and long-term outcomes. CONCLUSION: Use of pre-procedural amiodarone prolongs AFCL during catheter ablation and reduces the number of CFAE sites requiring ablation to achieve procedural success while maintaining equivalent long-term results.

History of syncope in the cardiac literature.

The rich cardiology literature of the past 100 years in which the most important forms of syncope are described - including vasodepressor syncope, postural orthostatic hypotension, and Morgagni-Stokes-Adams syncope - is fascinating. These conditions were of interest to some of our most astute clinicians who were also excellent writers. We thus have available for review the remarkable description of patients with these entities written by clinicians such as Soma Weiss, Sir Thomas Lewis, Laurence Ellis, David Sherf, Milton Shy, and Glenn Drager. In their detailed clinical descriptions we identify the pertinent symptoms and signs we see in our patients today years later. A group of brilliant basic physiologists and cardiologists was able to explain the altered physiology responsible for the clinical presentations of syncope patients. Basic investigations were done by investigators such as Arnold Weissler, James Warren, J. Erlanger and clinical cardiologists including John Parkinson, Cornelio Papp, and William Evans to name just a few. Between the early precise clinical descriptions and the subsequent thorough definition of the altered physiology, a surprisingly complete understanding of these clinical entities was established 50 years ago. It took another generation before clinicians developed methods of caring for patients with these clinical entities. The development of implantable devices, e.g., pacemakers and defibrillators, for use in Morgagni-Adams-Stokes attacks is the best example of curative therapies catching up with clinical diagnoses. Other more simple relevant therapies were developed for patients with vasodepressor syncope and postural orthostatic hypotension. Finally, the development and acceptance of clinical guidelines for the treatment of these conditions brought the original clinical observations and description of altered physiology into focus and ushered in a new generation of improved care for these patients.

Reduction in inappropriate therapy and mortality through ICD programming.

BACKGROUND: The implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is highly effective in reducing mortality among patients at risk for fatal arrhythmias, but inappropriate ICD activations are frequent, with potential adverse effects. METHODS: We randomly assigned 1500 patients with a primary-prevention indication to receive an ICD with one of three programming configurations. The primary objective was to determine whether programmed high-rate therapy (with a 2.5-second delay before the initiation of therapy at a heart rate of ≥200 beats per minute) or delayed therapy (with a 60-second delay at 170 to 199 beats per minute, a 12-second delay at 200 to 249 beats per minute, and a 2.5-second delay at ≥250 beats per minute) was associated with a decrease in the number of patients with a first occurrence of inappropriate antitachycardia pacing or shocks, as compared with conventional programming (with a 2.5-second delay at 170 to 199 beats per minute and a 1.0-second delay at ≥200 beats per minute). RESULTS: During an average follow-up of 1.4 years, high-rate therapy and delayed ICD therapy, as compared with conventional device programming, were associated with reductions in a first occurrence of inappropriate therapy (hazard ratio with high-rate therapy vs. conventional therapy, 0.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.13 to 0.34; P<0.001; hazard ratio with delayed therapy vs. conventional therapy, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.40; P<0.001) and reductions in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio with high-rate therapy vs. conventional therapy, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.85; P=0.01; hazard ratio with delayed therapy vs. conventional therapy, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.30 to 1.02; P=0.06). There were no significant differences in procedure-related adverse events among the three treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Programming of ICD therapies for tachyarrhythmias of 200 beats per minute or higher or with a prolonged delay in therapy at 170 beats per minute or higher, as compared with conventional programming, was associated with reductions in inappropriate therapy and all-cause mortality during long-term follow-up. (Funded by Boston Scientific; MADIT-RIT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00947310.).

Improved outcome with preventive cardiac resynchronization therapy in the elderly: a MADIT-CRT substudy.

BACKGROUND: Elderly patients comprise a large portion of patients with heart failure (HF). Limited data exist on the effectiveness of cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D) in patients with mild HF symptoms in this population. METHODS AND RESULTS: The benefit of CRT-D compared with ICD-only therapy in reducing HF or death was assessed by age categories (prespecified as <60 [n = 548], 60-74 [n = 941], and ≥75 [n = 331] years) among 1,820 patients in MADIT-CRT. In patients with ICD-only, there was a graded age-related increase in the Kaplan-Meier cumulative probability of HF or death at 3-year follow-up (19%, 33%, and 36%, in patients aged <60, 60-74, and ≥75 years, respectively, P = 0.003). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that CRT-D therapy was associated with a significant reduction in the risks of HF or death in patients aged 60-74, and ≥75 years (HR = 0.57, P = <0.001 and HR = 0.59, P = 0.017, respectively), and no significant benefit in patients aged <60 years (HR = 0.81, P = 0.3; P-value for all treatment-by-age interactions >0.10). There was no significant difference in the rate of device-related adverse events within 90 days following CRT-D implantation among age-subgroups (16.7%, 15.7%, and 11.7%, in patients <60, 60-74, and ≥75 years, respectively, P = 0.42). CONCLUSION: CRT-D was associated with a significant clinical benefit in older patients (≥60 years) during an average 2.4-year follow-up. These effects were preserved for the elderly patients ≥75 years of age but attenuated in patients <60 years. Elderly patients had no increase in device-related adverse events compared with younger patients.

Management of atrial fibrillation: translating clinical trial data into clinical practice.

Atrial fibrillation is a supraventricular tachyarrhythmia with significant consequences in terms of morbidity and mortality. In light of the limitations of available pharmacologic treatment options (suboptimal efficacy plus safety and tolerability issues), atrial fibrillation management should be individualized based on patient characteristics and comorbidities that could influence response to specific management approaches. The importance of adequate anticoagulation should not be overlooked. This review provides a practical guide for primary care physicians, internists, and cardiologists on current management strategies for atrial fibrillation, based on recent guidelines and current clinical data.