Electrical cardioversion of atrial arrhythmias with cardiac amyloidosis in the era of direct oral anticogulants.

AIMS: Atrial fibrillation (AF)/atrial flutter is common during cardiac amyloidosis (CA). Electrical cardioversion (EC) is a strategy to restore sinus rhythm (SR). However, left atrial thrombus (LAT) represents a contraindication for EC. CA patients with AF/atrial flutter have a high prevalence of LAT. We aimed to evaluate EC characteristics, LAT prevalence and risk factors, and AF/atrial flutter outcome in CA patients undergoing EC, predominantly treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). METHODS AND RESULTS: All patients with CA and AF/atrial flutter referred for the first time to our national referral centre of amyloidosis for EC from June 2017 to February 2021 were included in this study. In total, 66 patients (median age 74.5 [70;80.75] years, 67% male) were included with anticoagulation consisted of DOAC in 74% of cases. All patients underwent cardiac imaging before EC to rule out LAT. EC was cancelled due to LAT in 14% of cases. Complete thrombus resolution was observed in only 17% of cases. The two independent parameters associated with LAT were creatinine [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.01; confidence interval (CI) = 1.00-1.03, P = 0.036] and the use of antiplatelet agents (HR = 13.47; CI = 1.85-98.02). EC acute success rate was 88%, and we observed no complication after EC. With 64% of patients under amiodarone, AF/atrial flutter recurrence rate following EC was 51% after a mean follow-up of 30 ± 27 months. CONCLUSIONS: Left atrial thrombus was observed in 14% of CA patients listed for EC and mainly treated with DOAC. The acute EC success rate was high with no complication. The long-term EC success rate was acceptable (49%).

Takotsubo cardiomyopathy after cardiac surgery: A case-series and systematic review of literature.

Background: Takotsubo cardiomyopathy (TTC) is a rare entity after cardiac surgery. Aims: To describe patients' profile who developed postoperative TTC after cardiac surgery, management, and outcomes. Methods: We performed a systematic literature search to extract cases of TTC after adult cardiac surgery (from 1990 to 2021). Additionally, we extracted all cases of TTC in a prospective single-center cohort database of 10,000+ patients (from 2007 to 2019). We then combined all cases in a single cohort to describe its clinical features. Results: From 694 screened articles, we retained 71 individual cases published in 20 distinct articles (19 cases reports and 1 case-series). We combined these to 10 cases extracted from our cohort [among 10,682 patients (0.09%)]. Overall, we included 81 cases. Patients were aged 68 ± 10 years-old and 64/81 (79%) were women. Surgery procedures included mitral valve and/or tricuspid valve surgery in 70/81, 86%. TTC was diagnosed in the first days after surgery [median 4 (1-4) days]. Incidence of cardiogenic shock, defined as requirement of vasopressor and/or inotropic support was 24/29, 83% (data available on 29/81 patients). Refractory cardiogenic appeared in 5/81, 6% who required implantation of arterio-venous extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation, and 6/81, 7%, intra-aortic balloon pump. In-hospital mortality was 5/81, 6%. Conclusion: This systematic review, based on case reports and case series, showed that postoperative TTC appears as a rare complication after cardiac surgery and mainly occurred after mitral and/or tricuspid valve repair procedures. In this population, TTC is associated with high rate of cardiogenic shock.

Pacemaker implantation after aortic valve replacement: rapid-deployment Intuity® compared to conventional bioprostheses.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation after aortic valve replacement by rapid-deployment bioprosthesis (RDB) and standard valve (Standard). METHODS: All patients undergoing aortic valve replacement between 2015 and 2018, in 1 centre, were included. A multivariate analysis on the whole cohort and then a propensity score matching were used to compare the 2 groups. The primary end point was PPM implantation. RESULTS: We studied 924 patients (256 RDBs and 668 Standards). Overall, 67 PPM were implanted, 37 (14.5%) in the RDB group and 26 (3.9%) in the Standard group (P < 0.0001, univariate analysis). The multivariate analysis in the unmatched population found 4 independent factors associated with PPM implantation: right bundle branch block with odds ratios (ORs 3.7, 95% CI 2.9-6.7; P < 0.0001), RDB (OR 3.6, 95% CI 2.0-6.2; P < 0.0001), age (OR 1.1, 95% CI 1.0-1.1; P < 0.006) and endocarditis (OR 3.4, 95% CI 1.0-11.0; P < 0.04). In the propensity score-matched RDB group (203 patients per group), 25 patients required PPM implantation versus 3 in the Standard group (12.3% vs 1.5%, P < 0.0001). RDBs also had more postoperative left bundle branch block and new onset of atrial fibrillation (30.2% vs 5.1%, P < 0.0001 and 34.0% vs 24.1%, P = 0.029). RDBs had lower operating times (in min): aortic cross-clamping = 62 (44-76.5) vs 72 (57.5-91.5) and cardiopulmonary bypass = 81 (63-98.5) vs 91 (75-112), P < 0.0001. There was no significant difference in other outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: RDBs were associated with reduced operating times, increased risk of atrial fibrillation and PPM implantation as compared with standard aortic valves.