Limited Relationship Between Echocardiographic Measures and Electrocardiographic Markers of Left Ventricular Size in Healthy Children.

Pediatric ECG standards have been defined without echocardiographic confirmation of normal anatomy. The Pediatric Heart Network Normal Echocardiogram Z-score Project provides a racially diverse group of healthy children with normal echocardiograms. We hypothesized that ECG and echocardiographic measures of left ventricular (LV) dimensions are sufficiently correlated in healthy children to imply a clinically meaningful relationship. This was a secondary analysis of a previously described cohort including 2170 digital ECGs. The relationship between 6 ECG measures associated with LV size were analyzed with LV Mass (LVMass-z) and left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV-z) along with 11 additional parameters. Pearson or Spearman correlations were calculated for the 78 ECG-echocardiographic pairs with regression analyses assessing the variance in ECG measures explained by variation in LV dimensions and demographic variables. ECG/echocardiographic measurement correlations were significant and concordant in 41/78 (53%), though many were significant and discordant (13/78). Of the 6 ECG parameters, 5 correlated in the clinically predicted direction for LV Mass-z and LVEDV-z. Even when statistically significant, correlations were weak (0.05-0.24). R2 was higher for demographic variables than for echocardiographic measures or body surface area in all pairs, but remained weak (R2 ≤ 0.17). In a large cohort of healthy children, there was a positive association between echocardiographic measures of LV size and ECG measures of LVH. These correlations were weak and dependent on factors other than echocardiographic or patient derived variables. Thus, our data support deemphasizing the use of solitary, traditional measurement-based ECG markers traditionally thought to be characteristic of LVH as standalone indications for further cardiac evaluation of LVH in children and adolescents.

Epicardial Devices in Pediatrics and Congenital Heart Disease.

Epicardial cardiac implantable electronic device implant remains a common option in pediatric patients and certain patients with congenital heart disease due to patient size, complex anatomy, residual intracardiac shunts, and prior surgery precluding transvenous implant. Advantages include the lack of thromboembolic and vascular risks and ability to implant during concomitant surgery. Significant disadvantages include the occurrence of lead dysfunction that can result in bradycardia events in pacemaker patients, inappropriate shocks in implantable cardiac defibrillator patients, and overall a more invasive procedure.

Ensuring access to innovative therapies for children, adolescents, and young adults across Canada: The single patient study experience.

Innovative therapeutic approaches are needed to alleviate the burden of life-limiting, rare, and chronic conditions affecting children, adolescents, and young adults (CAYA). This includes a need for improved access to both clinical research and to non-approved or off-label therapies, together with, ultimately, more therapies achieving regulatory approval in Canada. The single patient study (SPS), also known as an open label individual patient (OLIP) study, was introduced by Health Canada to open access to non-marketed drugs where a clinical trial is not readily available, but the drug is considered too investigational to be managed on a standard Special Access Program. SPS is designed for patients who have a serious or life-threatening condition and have exhausted available treatment options. Our report summarizes this relatively new development in the Canadian regulatory environment and highlights the opportunities and challenges as identified by regulators, pharmaceutical representatives, academic researchers, and patient/parent advocates.

Perspectives of Youths on the Ethical Use of Artificial Intelligence in Health Care Research and Clinical Care.

Importance: Understanding the views and values of patients is of substantial importance to developing the ethical parameters of artificial intelligence (AI) use in medicine. Thus far, there is limited study on the views of children and youths. Their perspectives contribute meaningfully to the integration of AI in medicine. Objective: To explore the moral attitudes and views of children and youths regarding research and clinical care involving health AI at the point of care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study recruited participants younger than 18 years during a 1-year period (October 2021 to March 2022) at a large urban pediatric hospital. A total of 44 individuals who were receiving or had previously received care at a hospital or rehabilitation clinic contacted the research team, but 15 were found to be ineligible. Of the 29 who consented to participate, 1 was lost to follow-up, resulting in 28 participants who completed the interview. Exposures: Participants were interviewed using vignettes on 3 main themes: (1) health data research, (2) clinical AI trials, and (3) clinical use of AI. Main Outcomes and Measures: Thematic description of values surrounding health data research, interventional AI research, and clinical use of AI. Results: The 28 participants included 6 children (ages, 10-12 years) and 22 youths (ages, 13-17 years) (16 female, 10 male, and 3 trans/nonbinary/gender diverse). Mean (SD) age was 15 (2) years. Participants were highly engaged and quite knowledgeable about AI. They expressed a positive view of research intended to help others and had strong feelings about the uses of their health data for AI. Participants expressed appreciation for the vulnerability of potential participants in interventional AI trials and reinforced the importance of respect for their preferences regardless of their decisional capacity. A strong theme for the prospective use of clinical AI was the desire to maintain bedside interaction between the patient and their physician. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, children and youths reported generally positive views of AI, expressing strong interest and advocacy for their involvement in AI research and inclusion of their voices for shared decision-making with AI in clinical care. These findings suggest the need for more engagement of children and youths in health care AI research and integration.

Risk of Sudden Death in Patients With RASopathy Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy.

BACKGROUND: Genetic defects in the RAS/mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway are an important cause of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (RAS-HCM). Unlike primary HCM (P-HCM), the risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) and long-term survival in RAS-HCM are poorly understood. OBJECTIVES: The study's objective was to compare transplant-free survival, incidence of SCD, and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) use between RAS-HCM and P-HCM patients. METHODS: In an international, 21-center cohort study, we analyzed phenotype-positive pediatric RAS-HCM (n = 188) and P-HCM (n = 567) patients. The between-group differences in cumulative incidence of all outcomes from first evaluation were compared using Gray's tests, and age-related hazard of all-cause mortality was determined. RESULTS: RAS-HCM patients had a lower median age at diagnosis compared to P-HCM (0.9 years [IQR: 0.2-5.0 years] vs 9.8 years [IQR: 2.0-13.9 years], respectively) (P < 0.001). The 10-year cumulative incidence of SCD from first evaluation was not different between RAS-HCM and P-HCM (4.7% vs 4.2%, respectively; P = 0.59). The 10-year cumulative incidence of nonarrhythmic deaths or transplant was higher in RAS-HCM compared with P-HCM (11.0% vs 5.4%, respectively; P = 0.011). The 10-year cumulative incidence of ICD insertions, however, was 5-fold lower in RAS-HCM compared with P-HCM (6.9% vs 36.6%; P < 0.001). Nonarrhythmic deaths occurred primarily in infancy and SCD primarily in adolescence. CONCLUSIONS: RAS-HCM was associated with a higher incidence of nonarrhythmic death or transplant but similar incidence of SCD as P-HCM. However, ICDs were used less frequently in RAS-HCM compared to P-HCM. In addition to monitoring for heart failure and timely consideration of advanced heart failure therapies, better risk stratification is needed to guide ICD practices in RAS-HCM.

"Acquired" Brugada syndrome in a cardiac allograft.

INTRODUCTION: Brugada syndrome is an inherited channelopathy characterized by arrhythmia and an increased risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD). Implantation of a defibrillator for primary or secondary prevention is the only effective strategy to decrease the risk of SCD in Brugada syndrome. We present a case in which a cardiac donor had a pathogenic variant for Brugada syndrome, discovered on genetic testing after transplantation. CASE REPORT: A young child with dilated cardiomyopathy underwent orthotopic heart transplantation from a donor with in-hospital cardiac arrest in the context of fever and a normal ECG. Approximately 1 month after transplant, the donor's post mortem genetic testing revealed a pathogenic loss-of-function SCN5A variant associated with Brugada syndrome, which was confirmed on genetic testing on a post-transplant endomyocardial biopsy from the recipient. The recipient's post-transplant electrocardiographic monitoring revealed persistent right bundle branch block and progressive, asymptomatic sinus node dysfunction. The recipient was managed with precautionary measures including aggressive fever management, avoidance of drugs that increase arrhythmia risk in Brugada syndrome, and increased frequency of arrhythmia surveillance. The recipient remains asymptomatic at over 3 years post-transplant with preserved graft function and no documented ventricular arrhythmias. CONCLUSION: We describe the clinical course of "acquired" Brugada syndrome in a cardiac allograft recipient, which has not been previously reported. The time-sensitive nature of donor organ selection, especially in critically ill recipients, combined with the growing use of molecular autopsies in patients with unexplained etiologies for death may increasingly result in important donor genetic information being made available after transplantation.

Medical Management of Infants With Supraventricular Tachycardia: Results From a Registry and Review of the Literature.

Background: Several medication choices are available for acute and prophylactic treatment of refractory supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) in infants. There are almost no controlled trials, and medication choices are not necessarily evidence based. Our objective was to report the effectiveness of management strategies for infant SVT. Methods: A registry of infants admitted to hospital with re-entrant SVT and no haemodynamically significant heart disease were prospectively followed at 11 international tertiary care centres. In addition, a systematic review of studies on infant re-entrant SVT in MEDLINE and EMBASE was conducted. Data on demographics, symptoms, acute and maintenance treatments, and outcomes were collected. Results: A total of 2534 infants were included: n = 108 from the registry (median age, 9 days [0-324 days], 70.8% male) and n = 2426 from the literature review (median age, 14 days; 62.3% male). Propranolol was the most prevalent acute (61.4%) and maintenance treatment (53.8%) in the Registry, whereas digoxin was used sparingly (4.0% and 3.8%, respectively). Propranolol and digoxin were used frequently in the literature acutely (31% and 33.2%) and for maintenance (17.8% and 10.1%) (P < 0.001). No differences in acute or prophylactic effectiveness between medications were observed. Recurrence was higher in the Registry (25.0%) vs literature (13.4%) (P < 0.001), and 22 (0.9%) deaths were reported in the literature vs none in the Registry. Conclusion: This was the largest cohort of infants with SVT analysed to date. Digoxin monotherapy use was rare amongst contemporary paediatric cardiologists. There was limited evidence to support one medication over another. Overall, recurrence and mortality rates on antiarrhythmic treatment were low.

Contexte: De nombreux choix de médicaments existent pour le traitement aigu et prophylactique de la tachycardie supraventriculaire (TSV) réfractaire chez les nourrissons. Or, il n'y a presque pas d'essais contrôlés à ce sujet, et les choix de médicaments ne sont pas nécessairement fondés sur des données probantes. Notre objectif était de faire état de l'efficacité des stratégies de prise en charge de la TSV chez les nourrissons. Méthodologie: Un registre des nourrissons admis à l'hôpital pour une TSV par réentrée, sans cardiopathie d'importance hémodynamique, a été tenu de façon prospective dans 11 centres de soins tertiaires à l'échelle mondiale. De plus, une revue systématique des études sur la TSV par réentrée chez le nourrisson a été effectuée dans MEDLINE et EMBASE. Des données sur les caractéristiques démographiques, les symptômes, les traitements aigus et d'entretien, et les résultats ont été recueillis. Résultats: Un total de 2 534 nourrissons ont été inclus : n = 108 du registre (âge médian de 9 jours [0-324 jours], 70,8 % de sexe masculin) et n = 2 426 de la revue de la littérature (âge médian de 14 jours; 62,3 % de sexe masculin). Le propranolol était le traitement de soins aigus (61,4 %) et d'entretien (53,8 %) le plus fréquent dans le registre, alors que la digoxine a été utilisée occasionnellement (respectivement dans 4,0 % et 3,8 % des cas). Dans la littérature, le propranolol et la digoxine étaient fréquemment utilisés en soins aigus (31 % et 33,2 %) et en traitement d'entretien (17,8 % et 10,1 %) (p < 0,001). Aucune différence n'a été observée entre les médicaments au chapitre de l'efficacité du traitement de soins aigus ou du traitement prophylactique. Le taux de récurrence était plus élevé dans le registre (25,0 %) que dans la littérature (13,4 %) (p < 0,001), et 22 (0,9 %) décès ont été signalés dans la littérature, mais aucun dans le registre. Conclusion: Il s'agit de la plus grande cohorte de nourrissons atteints de TSV analysée à ce jour. De nos jours, les cardiologues pédiatriques prescrivent rarement la digoxine en monothérapie. Peu de données probantes favorisent l'utilisation d'un médicament par rapport à l'autre. Dans l'ensemble, les taux de récurrence et de mortalité sous traitement antiarythmique étaient faibles.

2021 PACES Expert Consensus Statement on the Indications and Management of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices in Pediatric Patients: Developed in collaboration with and endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC) Endorsed by the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS).

In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.

2021 PACES expert consensus statement on the indications and management of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in pediatric patients.

In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.

2021 PACES Expert Consensus Statement on the Indications and Management of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices in Pediatric Patients.

In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.

Management and outcomes of atrial fibrillation in 241 healthy children and young adults: Revisiting "lone" atrial fibrillation-A multi-institutional PACES collaborative study.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) in healthy children and young adults is rare. Risk of recurrence and treatment efficacy are not well defined. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess recurrence patterns and treatment efficacy in AF. METHODS: A retrospective multicenter cohort study including 13 congenital heart centers was facilitated by the Pediatric & Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES). Patients ≤21 years of age with documented AF from January 2004 to December 2018 were included. Demographics, family and clinical history, medications, electrophysiological study parameters, and outcomes related to the treatment of AF were recorded and analyzed. Patients with contributory diseases were excluded. RESULTS: In 241 subjects (83% male; mean age at onset 16 years), AF recurred in 94 patients (39%) during 2.1 ± 2.6 years of follow-up. In multivariable analysis, predictors of AF recurrence were family history in a first-degree relative <50 years of age (odds ratio [OR] 1.9; P = .047) and longer PR interval in sinus rhythm (OR 1.1 per 10 ms; P = .037). AF recurrence was similar whether patients began no treatment (39/125 [31%]), began daily antiarrhythmic therapy (24/63 [38%]), or had an ablation at any time (14/53 [26%]; P = .39). Ablating non-AF substrate with supraventricular tachycardia improved freedom from AF recurrence (P = .013). CONCLUSION: Recurrence of AF in the pediatric population is common, and the incidence of recurrence was not impacted by "no treatment," "medication only," or "ablation" treatment strategy. Ablation of pathways and other reentrant targets was the only intervention that decreased AF recurrence in children and young adults.

2021 PACES expert consensus statement on the indications and management of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in pediatric patients: Executive summary.

Guidelines for the implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) have evolved since publication of the initial ACC/AHA pacemaker guidelines in 1984 [1]. CIEDs have evolved to include novel forms of cardiac pacing, the development of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) and the introduction of devices for long term monitoring of heart rhythm and other physiologic parameters. In view of the increasing complexity of both devices and patients, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. In 2018, the ACC/AHA/HRS published Guidelines on the Evaluation and Management of Patients with Bradycardia and Cardiac Conduction Delay [2], which were specific recommendations for patients >18 years of age. This age-specific threshold was established in view of the differing indications for CIEDs in young patients as well as size-specific technology factors. Therefore, the following document was developed to update and further delineate indications for the use and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, with recognition that there is often overlap in the care of patents between 18 and 21 years of age. This document is an abbreviated expert consensus statement (ECS) intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease/diagnostic categories. This document will also provide guidance regarding the management of lead systems and follow-up evaluation for pediatric patients with CIEDs. The recommendations are presented in an abbreviated modular format, with each section including the complete table of recommendations along with a brief synopsis of supportive text and select references to provide some context for the recommendations. This document is not intended to provide an exhaustive discussion of the basis for each of the recommendations, which are further addressed in the comprehensive PACES-CIED document [3], with further data easily accessible in electronic searches or textbooks.

2021 PACES expert consensus statement on the indications and management of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in pediatric patients.

In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.