Long-Term Outcomes of Resynchronization-Defibrillation for Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: The Resynchronization-Defibrillation for Ambulatory Heart Failure Trial (RAFT) showed a greater benefit with respect to mortality at 5 years among patients who received cardiac-resynchronization therapy (CRT) than among those who received implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). However, the effect of CRT on long-term survival is not known. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II or III heart failure, a left ventricular ejection fraction of 30% or less, and an intrinsic QRS duration of 120 msec or more (or a paced QRS duration of 200 msec or more) to receive either an ICD alone or a CRT defibrillator (CRT-D). We assessed long-term outcomes among patients at the eight highest-enrolling participating sites. The primary outcome was death from any cause; the secondary outcome was a composite of death from any cause, heart transplantation, or implantation of a ventricular assist device. RESULTS: The trial enrolled 1798 patients, of whom 1050 were included in the long-term survival trial; the median duration of follow-up for the 1050 patients was 7.7 years (interquartile range, 3.9 to 12.8), and the median duration of follow-up for those who survived was 13.9 years (interquartile range, 12.8 to 15.7). Death occurred in 405 of 530 patients (76.4%) assigned to the ICD group and in 370 of 520 patients (71.2%) assigned to the CRT-D group. The time until death appeared to be longer for those assigned to receive a CRT-D than for those assigned to receive an ICD (acceleration factor, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.69 to 0.92; P = 0.002). A secondary-outcome event occurred in 412 patients (77.7%) in the ICD group and in 392 (75.4%) in the CRT-D group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with a reduced ejection fraction, a widened QRS complex, and NYHA class II or III heart failure, the survival benefit associated with receipt of a CRT-D as compared with ICD appeared to be sustained during a median of nearly 14 years of follow-up. (RAFT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00251251.).

A randomized clinical trial of catheter ablation and antiarrhythmic drug therapy for suppression of ventricular tachycardia in ischemic cardiomyopathy: The VANISH2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Recurrent ventricular tachycardia (VT) in patients with prior myocardial infarction is associated with adverse quality of life and clinical outcomes, despite the presence of implanted defibrillators (ICDs). Suppression of recurrent VT can be accomplished with antiarrhythmic drug therapy or catheter ablation. The Ventricular Tachycardia Antiarrhythmics or Ablation In Structural Heart Disease 2 (VANISH2) trial is designed to determine whether ablation is superior to antiarrhythmic drug therapy as first line therapy for patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and VT. METHODS: The VANISH2 trial enrolls patients with prior myocardial infarction and VT (with one of: ≥1 ICD shock; ≥3 episodes treated with antitachycardia pacing (ATP) and symptoms; ≥5 episodes treated with ATP regardless of symptoms; ≥3 episodes within 24 hours; or sustained VT treated with electrical cardioversion or pharmacologic conversion). Enrolled patients are classified as either sotalol-eligible, or amiodarone-eligible, and then are randomized to either catheter ablation or to that antiarrhythmic drug therapy, with randomization stratified by drug-eligibility group. Drug therapy, catheter ablation procedures and ICD programming are standardized. All patients will be followed until two years after randomization. The primary endpoint is a composite of mortality at any time, appropriate ICD shock after 14 days, VT storm after 14 days, and treated sustained VT below detection of the ICD after 14 days. The outcomes will be analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle using survival analysis techniques RESULTS: The results of the VANISH2 trial are intended to provide data to support clinical decisions on how to suppress VT for patients with prior myocardial infarction. CLINICALTRIALS: gov registration NCT02830360.

Computerized clinical decision support to improve stroke prevention therapy in primary care management of atrial fibrillation: a cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite guidelines supporting antithrombotic therapy use in atrial fibrillation (AF), under-prescribing persists. We assessed whether computerized clinical decision support (CDS) would enable guideline-based antithrombotic therapy for AF patients in primary care. METHODS: This cluster randomized trial of CDS versus usual care (UC) recruited participants from primary care practices across Nova Scotia, following them for 12 months. The CDS tool calculated bleeding and stroke risk scores and provided recommendations for using oral anticoagulants (OAC) per Canadian guidelines. RESULTS: From June 14, 2014 to December 15, 2016, 203 primary care providers (99 UC, 104 CDS) with access to high-speed Internet were recruited, enrolling 1,145 eligible patients (543 UC, 590 CDS) assigned to the same treatment arm as their provider. Patient mean age was 72.3 years; most were male (350, 64.5% UC, 351, 59.5% CDS) and from a rural area (298, 54.9% UC, 315, 53.4% CDS). At baseline, a higher than anticipated proportion of patients were receiving guideline-based OAC therapy (373, 68.7% UC, 442, 74.9% CDS; relative risk [RR] 0.97 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87-1.07; P = .511)). At 12 months, prescription data were available for 538 usual care and 570 CDS patients, and significantly more CDS patients were managed according to guidelines (415, 77.1% UC, 479, 84.0% CDS; RR 1.08 (95% CI, 1.01-1.15; P = .024)). CONCLUSION: Notwithstanding high baseline rates, primary care provider access to the CDS over 12 months further optimized the prescribing of OAC therapy per national guidelines to AF patients potentially eligible to receive it. This suggests that CDS can be effective in improving clinical process of care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials NCT01927367. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01927367?term=NCT01927367&draw=2&rank=1.

Randomized Ablation-Based Rhythm-Control Versus Rate-Control Trial in Patients With Heart Failure and Atrial Fibrillation: Results from the RAFT-AF trial.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) frequently coexist and can be challenging to treat. Pharmacologically based rhythm control of AF has not proven to be superior to rate control. Ablation-based rhythm control was compared with rate control to evaluate if clinical outcomes in patients with HF and AF could be improved. METHODS: This was a multicenter, open-label trial with blinded outcome evaluation using a central adjudication committee. Patients with high-burden paroxysmal (>4 episodes in 6 months) or persistent (duration <3 years) AF, New York Heart Association class II to III HF, and elevated NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro brain natriuretic peptide) were randomly assigned to ablation-based rhythm control or rate control. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and all HF events, with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Secondary outcomes included left ventricular ejection fraction, 6-minute walk test, and NT-proBNP. Quality of life was measured using the Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire and the AF Effect on Quality of Life. The primary analysis was time-to-event using Cox proportional hazards modeling. The trial was stopped early because of a determination of apparent futility by the Data Safety Monitoring Committee. RESULTS: From December 1, 2011, to January 20, 2018, 411 patients were randomly assigned to ablation-based rhythm control (n=214) or rate control (n=197). The primary outcome occurred in 50 (23.4%) patients in the ablation-based rhythm-control group and 64 (32.5%) patients in the rate-control group (hazard ratio, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.49-1.03]; P=0.066). Left ventricular ejection fraction increased in the ablation-based group (10.1±1.2% versus 3.8±1.2%, P=0.017), 6-minute walk distance improved (44.9±9.1 m versus 27.5±9.7 m, P=0.025), and NT-proBNP demonstrated a decrease (mean change -77.1% versus -39.2%, P<0.0001). Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire demonstrated greater improvement in the ablation-based rhythm-control group (least-squares mean difference of -5.4 [95% CI, -10.5 to -0.3]; P=0.0036), as did the AF Effect on Quality of Life score (least-squares mean difference of 6.2 [95% CI, 1.7-10.7]; P=0.0005). Serious adverse events were observed in 50% of patients in both treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with high-burden AF and HF, there was no statistical difference in all-cause mortality or HF events with ablation-based rhythm control versus rate control; however, there was a nonsignificant trend for improved outcomes with ablation-based rhythm control over rate control. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT01420393.

Paced P-wave morphology templates to guide atrial tachycardia localization: A derivation and validation study.

BACKGROUND: Surface ECG is a useful tool to guide mapping of focal atrial tachycardia (AT). OBJECTIVES: We aimed to construct 12-lead ECG templates for P-wave morphology (PWM) during endocardial pacing from different sites in both atria in patients with no apparent structural heart disease (derivation cohort), with the goal of creating a localization algorithm, which could subsequently be validated in a cohort of patients undergoing catheter ablation of focal AT (validation cohort). METHODS: We prospectively enrolled consecutive patients who underwent electrophysiology study, had no structural heart disease and no atrial enlargement. Atrial pacing, at twice diastolic threshold, was carried out at different anatomical sites in both atria. Paced PWM and duration were assessed. An algorithm was generated from the constructed templates of each pacing site. The algorithm was applied on a retrospective series of successfully ablated AT patients. Overall and site-specific accuracy were determined. RESULTS: Derivation cohort included 65 patients (25 men, age 37 ± 13 years). Atrial pacing was performed in 1025 sites in 61 patients (95%) in RA and in 15 patients (23%) in LA. The validation cohort included 71 patients (28 men, age 52 ± 19 years). AT were right atrial in 66.2%. The algorithm successfully predicted AT origin in 91.5% of patients (100% in LA and 87.2% in RA). It was off by one adjacent segment in the remaining 8.5%. CONCLUSIONS: A simple ECG algorithm based on paced PWM templates was highly accurate in localizing site of origin of focal AT in patients with structurally normal hearts.

Atomoxetine for suppression of vasovagal syncope.

OBJECTIVE: Vasovagal syncope (VVS) is a common clinical condition with few effective medical therapies. The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of atomoxetine in suppressing syncope in patients with recurrent VVS. METHODS: This was a retrospective, open-label, observational case series of 12 patients taking atomoxetine for suppression of recurrent vasovagal syncope. We compared syncope frequency in the 1 year before atomoxetine and while subjects were taking atomoxetine. We used novel applications of the Poisson distribution to describe the results as a collection of n = 1 studies. RESULTS: There were 12 subjects, eight female, with a mean age 47 ± 22 years and a mean Calgary Syncope Symptom Score of 2 (diagnostic of vasovagal syncope). The patients received a mean dose of atomoxetine of 66 ± 16 mg (1.06 ± 0.21 mg/kg). The mean follow-up period was 1.21 ± 1.01 years. While taking atomoxetine, 11/12 patients appeared to improve and 7/12 had no syncope in follow-up (p = 0.0046). The annualized syncope frequency decreased from a median 5.5 (IQR 4, 6.75) syncope per year to 0 (IQR 0, 0.88) syncope per year (p = 0.002, Wilcoxon rank-sum test). According to the Poisson distribution, 7/12 subjects significantly improved with p values of < 0.0001 to 0.0235, 3/12 did not faint but had too brief follow-up times to detect significance, and 2/12 did not improve significantly. CONCLUSIONS: In this case series, atomoxetine was a promising oral agent for the prevention of vasovagal syncope. The Poisson distribution permits individual patient-level assessment of improvement and detects insufficient follow-up despite apparent improvement.

Resource use and cost associated with computerized decision support system and usual care in managing patients with atrial fibrillation: analysis of IMPACT-AF randomized trial data.

BACKGROUND: IMPACT-AF is a prospective, randomized, cluster design trial comparing atrial fibrillation (AF) management with a computerized decision support system (CDS) to usual care (control) in the primary care setting of Nova Scotia, Canada. The objective of this analysis was to compare the resource use and costs between CDS and usual care groups. METHODS: Case costing data, 12-month self-administered questionnaires, and monthly diaries from IMPACT-AF were used in this analysis. Descriptive statistics were used to compare costs and resource use between groups. All costs are presented in 2021 Canadian dollars and cover the 12-month period of participation in the study. RESULTS: A total of 1,145 patients enrolled in the trial. Case costing data were available for 466 participants (41.1%), 12-month self-administered questionnaire data for 635 participants (56.0%) and monthly diary data for 223 participants (19.7%). Emergency department visits and hospitalizations comprised the most expensive component of AF care. Across all three datasets, there were no statistically significant differences in costs or resource use between CDS and usual care groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although there were no significant differences in resource use or costs among CDS and usual care groups in the IMPACT-AF trial, this study provides insight into the methodology and practical challenges of collecting economic data alongside a trial. REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov (registration number: NCT01927367, date of registration: 2013-08-20).

Augmented wide area circumferential catheter ablation for reduction of atrial fibrillation recurrence (AWARE) trial: Design and rationale.

BACKGROUND: Recurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF) after a pulmonary vein isolation procedure is often due to electrical reconnection of the pulmonary veins. Repeat ablation procedures may improve freedom from AF but are associated with increased risks and health care costs. A novel ablation strategy in which patients receive "augmented" ablation lesions has the potential to reduce the risk of AF recurrence. OBJECTIVE: The Augmented Wide Area Circumferential Catheter Ablation for Reduction of Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence (AWARE) Trial was designed to evaluate whether an augmented wide-area circumferential antral (WACA) ablation strategy will result in fewer atrial arrhythmia recurrences in patients with symptomatic paroxysmal AF, compared with a conventional WACA strategy. METHODS/DESIGN: The AWARE trial was a multicenter, prospective, randomized, open, blinded endpoint trial that has completed recruitment (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02150902). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either the control arm (single WACAlesion set) or the interventional arm (augmented- double WACA lesion set performed after the initial WACA). The primary outcome was atrial tachyarrhythmia (AA; atrial tachycardia [AT], atrial flutter [AFl] or AF) recurrence between days 91 and 365 post catheter ablation. Patient follow-up included 14-day continuous ambulatory ECG monitoring at 3, 6, and 12 months after catheter ablation. Three questionnaires were administered during the trial- the EuroQuol-5D (EQ-5D) quality of life scale, the Canadian Cardiovascular Society Severity of Atrial Fibrillation scale, and a patient satisfaction scale. DISCUSSION: The AWARE trial was designed to evaluate whether a novel approach to catheter ablation reduced the risk of AA recurrence in patients with symptomatic paroxysmal AF.

Comparative effectiveness of ventricular tachycardia ablation vs. escalated antiarrhythmic drug therapy by location of myocardial infarction: a sub-study of the VANISH trial.

AIMS: Complexity of the ventricular tachycardia (VT) substrate and the size and thickness of infarction area border zones differ based on location of myocardial infarctions (MIs). These differences may translate into heterogeneity in the effectiveness of treatments. This study aims to examine the influence of infarct location on the effectiveness of VT ablation in comparison with escalated pharmacological therapy in patients with prior MI and antiarrhythmic drug (AAD)-refractory VT. METHODS AND RESULTS: VANISH trial participants were categorized based on the presence or absence of an inferior MI scar. Inverse probability of treatment weighted Cox models were calculated for each subgroup. Of 259 randomized patients (median age 69.8 years, 7.0% women), 135 had an inferior MI and 124 had a non-inferior MI. Among patients with an inferior MI, no statistically significant difference in the composite primary outcome of all-cause mortality, appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shock, and VT storm was detected between treatment arms [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51-1.20]. In contrast, patients with non-inferior MIs had a statistically significant reduction in the incidence of the primary outcome with ablation (aHR 0.48, 95% CI 0.27-0.86). In a sensitivity analysis of anterior MI patients (n = 83), a trend towards a reduction in the primary outcome with ablation was detected (aHR 0.50, 95% CI 0.23-1.09). CONCLUSION: The effectiveness of VT ablation versus escalated AADs varies based on the location of the MI. Patients with MI scars located only in non-inferior regions of the ventricles derive greater benefit from VT ablation in comparison to escalation of AADs in reducing VT-related events.

Ventricular tachycardia characteristics and outcomes with catheter ablation vs. antiarrhythmic therapy: insights from the VANISH trial.

AIMS: Catheter ablation is superior to escalated antiarrhythmic drugs among patients with ventricular tachycardia (VT) and prior myocardial infarction (MI). However, it is uncertain whether clinical VT characteristics, should influence choice of therapy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether presentation with electrical storm and the clinical VT cycle length predicted response to ablation vs. escalated antiarrhythmic therapy. METHODS AND RESULTS: All patients enrolled in the Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation vs. Escalated Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy in Ischaemic Heart Disease (VANISH) trial were included. The association between VT cycle length and presentation with electrical storm and the primary outcome of death, subsequent VT storm or appropriate ICD shock was evaluated. Among the study population of 259 patients, escalated antiarrhythmic drug therapy had worse outcomes for those presenting with a VT cycle length >400 ms [<150 b.p.m., 89/259, hazard ratio (HR) 1.7 (1.02-3.13)]. This effect was more pronounced among those taking amiodarone at baseline [HR of 2.22 (1.19-4.16)]. Presentation with VT storm (32/259) did not affect the primary outcome between groups. However, those presenting with VT storm on amiodarone had a trend towards worse outcomes with escalated antiarrhythmic therapy [HR 4.31 (0.55-33.93)]. CONCLUSION: The VT cycle length can influence response to either ablation or escalated drug therapy in patients with VT and prior MI. Those with slow VT had improved outcomes with ablation. Patients presenting with electrical storm demonstrated similar outcomes to the overall trial population, with a trend to benefit of catheter ablation, particularly in those on amiodarone.