Predicting Major Adverse Events in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion.

BACKGROUND: The National Cardiovascular Data Registry Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Registry (LAAO) includes the vast majority of transcatheter LAAO procedures performed in the United States. The objective of this study was to develop a model predicting adverse events among patients undergoing LAAO with Watchman FLX. METHODS: Data from 41 001 LAAO procedures with Watchman FLX from July 2020 to September 2021 were used to develop and validate a model predicting in-hospital major adverse events. Randomly selected development (70%, n=28 530) and validation (30%, n=12 471) cohorts were analyzed with 1000 bootstrapped samples, using forward stepwise logistic regression to create the final model. A simplified bedside risk score was also developed using this model. RESULTS: Increased age, female sex, low preprocedure hemoglobin, no prior attempt at atrial fibrillation termination, and increased fall risk most strongly predicted in-hospital major adverse events and were included in the final model along with other clinically relevant variables. The median in-hospital risk-standardized adverse event rate was 1.50% (range, 1.03%-2.84%; interquartile range, 1.42%-1.64%). The model demonstrated moderate discrimination (development C-index, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.65-0.70] and validation C-index, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.62-0.70]) with good calibration. The simplified risk score was well calibrated with risk of in-hospital major adverse events ranging from 0.26% to 3.90% for a score of 0 to 8, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A transcatheter LAAO risk model using National Cardiovascular Data Registry and LAAO Registry data can predict in-hospital major adverse events, demonstrated consistency across hospitals and can be used for quality improvement efforts. A simple bedside risk score was similarly predictive and may inform shared decision-making.

Off-Label Dosing of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Among Inpatients With Atrial Fibrillation in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Among patients hospitalized for atrial fibrillation, the frequency of off-label direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) dosing, associated factors, hospital-level variation, and temporal trends in contemporary practice are unknown. METHODS: Using the Get With The Guidelines-Atrial Fibrillation registry, patients admitted from January 1, 2014, to March 31, 2020, and discharged on DOACs were stratified according to receipt of underdosing, overdosing, or recommended dosing. Factors associated with off-label dosing (defined as underdosing or overdosing) were identified using logistic regression. Median odds ratio (OR) and time-series analyses were used to assess hospital-level variation and temporal trends, respectively. RESULTS: Of 22 470 patients (70.1±12.1 years, 48.1% female, 82.5% White) prescribed a DOAC at discharge from hospitalization for atrial fibrillation (66% apixaban, 29% rivaroxaban, and 5% dabigatran), underdosing occurred among 2006 (8.9%), overdosing among 511 (2.3%), and recommended dosing among 19 953 (88.8%). The overall rate of off-label dosing was 11.2%. Patient-related factors associated with off-label dose included age (underdosing: OR, 1.06 per 1-year increase [95% CI, 1.06-1.07]; overdosing: OR, 1.07 per 1-year increase [95% CI, 1.06-1.09]), dialysis dependence (underdosing: OR, 5.50 [95% CI, 3.76-8.05]; overdosing: OR, 5.47 [95% CI, 2.74-10.88]), female sex (overdosing: OR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.63-0.99]), and weight (overdosing: OR, 0.96 per 1-kg increase [95% CI, 0.95-1.00]). Across hospitals, the adjusted median OR for off-label DOAC dose was 1.45 (95% CI, 1.34-1.65; underdosing: OR, 1.52 [95% CI, 1.39-1.76]; overdosing: OR, 1.32 [95% CI, 1.20-1.84]), indicating significant hospital-level variation. Over the study period, recommended dosing significantly increased over time (81.9%-90.9%; P<0.0001 for trend) with a corresponding decline in underdosing (14.4%-6.6%; P<0.0001 for trend) and overdosing (3.8%-2.5%; P=0.001 for trend). CONCLUSIONS: Over 1 in 10 patients hospitalized for atrial fibrillation are discharged on an off-label DOAC dose with significant variation across hospitals. While the proportion of patients receiving recommended dosing has significantly improved over time, opportunities to improve DOAC dosing persist.

2023 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS Expert Consensus Statement on Practical Management of the Remote Device Clinic.

Remote monitoring is beneficial for the management of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices by impacting morbidity and mortality. With increasing numbers of patients using remote monitoring, keeping up with higher volume of remote monitoring transmissions creates challenges for device clinic staff. This international multidisciplinary document is intended to guide cardiac electrophysiologists, allied professionals, and hospital administrators in managing remote monitoring clinics. This includes guidance for remote monitoring clinic staffing, appropriate clinic workflows, patient education, and alert management. This expert consensus statement also addresses other topics such as communication of transmission results, use of third-party resources, manufacturer responsibilities, and programming concerns. The goal is to provide evidence-based recommendations impacting all aspects of remote monitoring services. Gaps in current knowledge and guidance for future research directions are also identified.

2023 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS Expert Consensus Statement on Practical Management of the Remote Device Clinic.

Remote monitoring is beneficial for the management of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices by impacting morbidity and mortality. With increasing numbers of patients using remote monitoring, keeping up with higher volume of remote monitoring transmissions creates challenges for device clinic staff. This international multidisciplinary document is intended to guide cardiac electrophysiologists, allied professionals, and hospital administrators in managing remote monitoring clinics. This includes guidance for remote monitoring clinic staffing, appropriate clinic workflows, patient education, and alert management. This expert consensus statement also addresses other topics such as communication of transmission results, use of third-party resources, manufacturer responsibilities, and programming concerns. The goal is to provide evidence-based recommendations impacting all aspects of remote monitoring services. Gaps in current knowledge and guidance for future research directions are also identified.

Device-Sizing and Associated Complications With Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: Findings From the NCDR LAAO Registry.

BACKGROUND: Left atrial appendage occlusion is an important alternative to anticoagulation in select patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Trends in real-world device sizing and associated short-term complications have not been characterized. METHODS: Using the National Cardiovascular Data Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion (NCDR LAAO) Registry, patients who underwent left atrial appendage occlusion with a Watchman 2.5 device from January 1, 2016, to June 30, 2020, were identified. Patients were stratified by device size based on left atrial appendage orifice size, and categorized as receiving a device that was undersized, oversized, or per manufacturer recommendation. Relationships between device sizing and short-term outcomes, including pericardial effusion, device embolism, and significant leak, were assessed. RESULTS: Of the 68 456 patients, 6539 (10.5%) of patients received undersized devices, 17 791 (26.0%) according to manufacturer recommendations, and 44 126 (64.4%) received an oversized device. The 27-mm device was most commonly deployed [21 736 (31.8%)], whereas the smallest and largest devices (21 and 33 mm) were least commonly deployed [7695 (11.2%) and 9077 (13.3%), respectively]. Compared with manufacturer recommended sizing, there was no difference in the odds of pericardial effusion for either undersized (1.048 [95% CI' 0.801-1.372]; P=0.733) or oversized (1.101 [95% CI' 0.933-1.298]; P=0.254) devices. Similarly, relative to manufacturer recommended sizing, the odds of a composite adverse outcome of device migration or embolization and significant peridevice leak at 45 days were similar among undersized devices (1.030 [95% CI' 0.735-1.444]; P=0.863) and favorable for oversized devices (0.701 [95% CI' 0.561-0.876]; P=0.002) devices, primarily driven by lower odds of leak. Selection of oversized devices increased significantly over the study period (from 60.3% in 2016 to 66.0% in 2020; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing left atrial appendage occlusion with the first-generation Watchman device, receipt of oversized devices was common and increased over time. The high prevalence of oversizing was associated with lower odds of significant leak or device embolization without increased odds of other adverse events.

Experiences Implementing a Suite of Decision Aids for Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators: Qualitative Insights From the DECIDE-ICD Trial.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making (SDM) is gaining importance in cardiology, including Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) reimbursement policies requiring documented SDM for patients considering primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators. The DECIDE-ICD Trial (Decision Support Intervention for Patients offered implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators) assessed the implementation and effectiveness of patient decision aids (DAs) using a stepped-wedge design at 7 sites. The purpose of this subanalysis was to qualitatively describe electrophysiology clinicians' experience implementing and using the DAs. METHODS: This included semi-structured individual interviews with electrophysiology clinicians at participating sites across the US, at least 6 months following conversion into the implementation phase of the trial (from June 2020 through February 2022). The interview guide was structured according to the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance [implementation evaluation model]) framework, assessing clinician experiences, which can impact implementation domains, and was qualitatively assessed using a mixed inductive/deductive method. RESULTS: We completed 22 interviews post-implementation across all 7 sites. Participants included both physicians (n=16) and other clinicians who counsel patients regarding treatment options (n=6). While perception of SDM and the DA were positive, participants highlighted reasons for uneven delivery of DAs to appropriate patients. The CMS mandate for SDM was not universally viewed as associating with patients receiving DA's, but rather (1) logistics of DA delivery, (2) perceived effectiveness in improving patient decision-making, and (3) match of DA content to current patient populations. Remaining tensions include the specific trial data used in DAs and reconciling timing of delivery with when patients are actively making decisions. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians charged with delivering DAs to patients considering primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators were generally supportive of the tenets of SDM, and of the DA tools themselves, but noted several opportunities to improve the reach and continued use of them in routine care. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique Identifier: NCT03374891.

Indications for Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in the United States and Associated In-Hospital Outcomes: Results From the NCDR LAAO Registry.

BACKGROUND: The Food and Drug Administration approved left atrial appendage occlusion with the Watchman device for patients who are at increased stroke risk and are suitable for oral anticoagulation but who have an appropriate reason to seek a nondrug alternative. These broad criteria raise the question of their interpretation in clinical practice. There is a lack of studies comprehensively evaluating the indications for Watchman implantation among a large series of patients from contemporary, real-world practice in the United States. METHODS: We used the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Registry to identify Watchman procedures performed between 2016 and 2018. We assessed procedural indications for Watchman implantation in the United States and evaluated the association between procedural indications and in-hospital adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 38 314 procedures were included. The mean patient age was 76.1±8.1 years, and 58.9% were men. The mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4.8±1.5, whereas the mean hypertension, abnormal renal/liver function, stroke, bleeding history or predisposition, labile international normalized ratio, elderly, drugs/alcohol (HAS-BLED) score was 3.0±1.1. Prior stroke or transient ischemic attack was reported in 40.2% and prior bleeding in 70.1%, with gastrointestinal bleeding being most common (41.9%). The most common site-reported procedural indications for Watchman implantation were increased thromboembolic risk (64.8%) and history of major bleed (64.3%), followed by high fall risk (35.5%). Most (71.9%) had ≥2 procedural indications. Patients with high fall risk had increased risk of in-hospital adverse events (adjusted OR, 1.12; P=0.025), but no other differences were found in the risk of in-hospital adverse events by procedural indication. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Registry, the most common procedural indications for Watchman implantation were increased thromboembolic risk, history of major bleed, and high fall risk. A majority of patients had multiple procedural indications. High fall risk conferred a modestly increased risk of in-hospital adverse events.

Development and validation of an automated algorithm for end point adjudication for a large U.S. national registry.

BACKGROUND: Clinical events committee (CEC) evaluation is the standard approach for end point adjudication in clinical trials. Due to resource constraints, large registries typically rely on site-reported end points without further confirmation, which may preclude use for regulatory oversight. METHODS: We developed a novel automated adjudication algorithm (AAA) for end point adjudication in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion (LAAO) Registry using an iterative process using CEC adjudication as the "gold standard." A ≥80% agreement rate between automated algorithm adjudication and CEC adjudication was prespecified as clinically acceptable. Agreement rates were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 92 in-hospital and 127 post-discharge end points were evaluated between January 1, 2016 and June 30, 2019 using AAA and CEC. Agreement for neurologic events was >90%. Percent agreement for in-hospital and post-discharge events was as follows: ischemic stroke 95.7% and 94.5%, hemorrhagic stroke 97.8% and 96.1%, undetermined stroke 97.8% and 99.2%, transient ischemic attack 98.9% and 98.4% and intracranial hemorrhage 100.0% and 94.5%. Agreement was >80% for major bleeding (83.7% and 90.6%) and major vascular complication (89.1% and 97.6%). With this approach, <1% of site reported end points require CEC adjudication. Agreement remained very good during the period after algorithm derivation. CONCLUSIONS: An AAA-guided approach for end point adjudication was successfully developed and validated for the LAAO Registry. With this approach, the need for formal CEC adjudication was substantially reduced, with accuracy maintained above an 80% agreement threshold. After application specific validation, these methods could be applied to large registries and clinical trials to reduce the cost of event adjudication while preserving scientific validity.

Limitations of Unipolar Signals in Guiding Successful Outflow Tract Premature Ventricular Contraction Ablation.

BACKGROUND: Unipolar electrograms (UniEGMs) are commonly used to annotate earliest local activation of focal arrhythmias. However, their utility in guiding premature ventricular contractions (PVCs) ablation may be limited when the PVC source is less superficial. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to compare bipolar electrograms (BiEGMs) vs UniEGMs in guiding successful ablation of right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) vs intramural outflow tract (OT) PVCs. The authors hypothesized that: 1) earliest bipolar local activation time (LATBi) would better guide mapping and ablation, vs UniEGM dV/dt (LATUni) or QS morphology; and 2) LAT differences using bipolar vs unipolar EGMs (ΔLATBi-Uni) would be greater for intramural OT than RVOT PVCs. METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing successful PVC ablation 2017 to2020 requiring only RVOT or RVOT+left ventricular OT (RVOT+LVOT) ablation were retrospectively analyzed. BiEGMs and UniEGMs at successful ablation sites were compared. RESULTS: Of 70 patients, 50 required RVOT-only, and 20 required RVOT+LVOT ablation for acute and long-term PVC suppression. Mean ΔLATBi-Uni was lower for RVOT vs RVOT+LVOT groups (9.3 ± 6.4 ms vs 17.4 ± 9.9 ms; P < 0.01). QS UniEGM was seen in 78% of RVOT, compared with 53% of RVOT+LVOT patients (P < 0.016). RVOT+LVOT sites most frequently included the posteroseptal RVOT and adjacent LVOT (73%), and 43% lacked a QS unipolar EGM. ΔLATBi-Uni ≥15 ms best distinguished sites in which RVOT-only vs RVOT+LVOT ablation achieved acute PVC suppression (area under the curve: 0.77). CONCLUSIONS: Earliest BiEGM activation guides successful ablation of OT PVCs better than UniEGM-guided analysis, especially when an intramural PVC source is present.

Antithrombotic Therapy After Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Pivotal trials of percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) used specific postprocedure treatment protocols. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate patterns of postprocedure care after LAAO with the Watchman device in clinical practice and compare the risk of adverse events for different discharge antithrombotic strategies. METHODS: We evaluated patients in the LAAO Registry of the National Cardiovascular Data Registry who underwent LAAO with the Watchman device between 2016 and 2018. We assessed adherence to the full postprocedure trial protocol including standardized follow-up, imaging, and antithrombotic agents and then evaluated the most commonly used antithrombotic strategies and compared the rates and risk of adverse events at 45 days and 6 months by means of multivariable COX frailty regression. RESULTS: Among 31,994 patients undergoing successful LAAO, only 12.2% received the full postprocedure treatment protocol studied in pivotal trials; the most common protocol deviations were with discharge antithrombotic medications. The most common discharge medication strategies were warfarin and aspirin (36.9%), direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) and aspirin (20.8%), warfarin only (13.5%), DOAC only (12.3%), and dual antiplatelet therapy (5.0%). In multivariable Cox frailty regression, the adjusted risk of any adverse event through the 45-day follow-up visit were significantly lower for discharge on warfarin alone (HR: 0.692; 95% CI: 0.569-0.841) and DOAC alone (HR: 0.731; 95% CI: 0.574-0.930) compared with warfarin and aspirin. Warfarin alone retained lower risk at the 6-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: In contemporary U.S. practice, practitioners rarely used the full U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved postprocedure treatment protocols studied in pivotal trials of the Watchman device. Discharge after implantation on warfarin or DOAC without concomitant aspirin was associated with lower risk of adverse outcomes.

Patient-Level Analysis of Watchman Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Practice Versus Clinical Trials.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare outcomes among patients from the PROTECT-AF (WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage System for Embolic PROTECTion in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation) and PREVAIL (Evaluation of the WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage [LAA] Closure Device in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Versus Long Term Warfarin Therapy) left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) trials with matched patients from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry LAAO Registry using patient-level data. BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing LAAO in clinical practice generally have more comorbidities than trial participants. METHODS: Propensity-matched analyses, with up to 3 registry patients matched to each trial patient, were performed using Cox proportional hazards and Fine-Gray models. RESULTS: A total of 1,904 registry patients were matched to 667 trial LAAO patients; 1,010 registry patients were matched to 348 warfarin patients. Compared with registry patients, trial LAAO patients experienced more pericardial effusion requiring intervention (3.8% vs 0.6%, P < 0.001), periprocedural ischemic stroke (0.9% vs 0.2%, P = 0.005), and failed device implantation (7.5% vs 3.6%, P < 0.001). The 425-day risk of ischemic stroke in trial LAAO patients was higher than in registry patients (2.70% vs 1.21%; HR: 1.951; P = 0.03); warfarin patients had comparable rates of ischemic stroke compared with registry patients (1.15% vs 1.29%; HR: 0.728; P = 0.57). Hemorrhagic stroke risk was similar among trial LAAO and registry patients (P = 0.88). Hemorrhagic stroke risk was greater among warfarin patients versus registry patients (1.44% vs 0.20%; HR: 5.871, P = 0.03). Mortality was lower in trial LAAO patients than in registry patients (2.92% vs 6.23%; HR: 0.477; P = 0.004), a difference attributable to noncardiovascular deaths. Mortality was similar (P = 0.44) among trial warfarin (4.48%) and registry (5.86%) patients. CONCLUSION: In clinical practice, patients who meet trial criteria and undergo LAAO experience a lower risk of ischemic stroke, a similar risk of hemorrhagic stroke, and a higher risk of death after implant versus LAAO trial patients. (WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage System for Embolic PROTECTion in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation [PROTECT-AF], NCT00129545; Evaluation of the WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage [LAA] Closure Device in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Versus Long Term Warfarin Therapy [PREVAIL], NCT01182441).

Clinical Outcomes at 1 Year Following Transcatheter Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to report 1-year clinical outcomes following commercial transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) in the United States. BACKGROUND: The National Cardiovascular Data Registry LAAO Registry was initiated to meet a condition of Medicare coverage and allow the assessment of clinical outcomes. The 1-year rates of thromboembolic events after transcatheter LAAO in such a large cohort of "real-world" patients have not been previously reported. METHODS: Patients entered into the National Cardiovascular Data Registry LAAO Registry for a Watchman procedure between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2018, were included. The primary endpoint was ischemic stroke. Key secondary endpoints included the rate of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism, mortality, and major bleeding. Major bleeding was defined as any bleeding requiring hospitalization, and/or causing a decrease in hemoglobin level > 2g/dL, and/or requiring blood transfusion that was not hemorrhagic stroke. The Kaplan-Meier method was used for 1-year estimates of cumulative event rates. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 36,681 patients. The mean age was 76.0 ± 8.1 years, the mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4.8 ± 1.5, and the mean HAS-BLED score was 3.0 ± 1.1. Prior stroke was present in 25.5%, clinically relevant bleeding in 69.5%, and intracranial bleeding in 11.9%. Median follow-up was 374 days (IQR: 212-425 days). The Kaplan-Meier-estimated 1-year rate of ischemic stroke was 1.53% (95% CI: 1.39%-1.69%), the rate of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism was 2.19% (95% CI: 2.01%-2.38%), and the rate of mortality was 8.52% (95% CI: 8.19%-8.87%). The 1-year estimated rate of major bleeding was 6.93% (95% CI: 6.65%-7.21%). Most bleeding events occurred between discharge and 45 days following the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: This study characterizes important outcomes in a national cohort of patients undergoing transcatheter LAAO in the United States. Clinicians and patients can integrate these data in shared decision making when considering this therapy.

Heart Rhythm Society Atrial Fibrillation Centers of Excellence Study: A survey analysis of stakeholder practices, needs, and barriers.

BACKGROUND: An integrated, coordinated, and patient-centered approach to atrial fibrillation (AF) care delivery may improve outcomes and reduce cost. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to gain a better understanding from key stakeholder groups on current practices, needs, and potential barriers to implementing optimal integrated AF care. METHODS: A series of comprehensive questionnaires were designed by the Heart Rhythm Society Atrial Fibrillation Centers of Excellence (CoE) Task Force to conduct surveys with physicians, advanced practice professionals, patients, and hospital administrators. Data collected focused on the following areas: access to care, stroke prevention, education, AF quality improvement, and AF CoE needs and barriers. Survey responses were collated and analyzed by the Task Force. RESULTS: The surveys identified 5 major unmet needs: (1) Standardized protocols, order sets, or care pathways in the emergency department or inpatient setting were uncommon (36%-42%). (2) All stakeholders agreed stroke prevention was a top priority; however, prior bleeding or risk of bleeding was the most frequent barrier for initiation. (3) Patients indicated that education on modifiable causes, AF-related complications, and lowering stroke risk is most important. (4) Less than half (43%) of the health care systems track patients with AF or treatment status. Patients reported that stroke and heart failure prevention and access to procedures were priority areas for an AF CoE. The most common barriers to implementing AF CoE identified by clinicians were administrative support (69%) and cost (52%); administrators reported physical space (43%). CONCLUSION: On the basis of the findings of this study, the Task Force identified high priority areas to develop initiatives to aid the implementation of AF CoE.

Designing an Efficient and Quality-focused Integrated Atrial Fibrillation Care Center.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) represents a significant health care burden in the United States that will continue to increase as the population ages; thus, the introduction of cost-effective strategies to limit this burden is critical. The establishment of dedicated electrophysiology programs focusing on AF care within hospitals can improve patient care while providing added financial benefits for institutions if properly planned and delivered. This paper explains how to develop an efficient and quality-focused AF ablation program as part of a larger AF center of excellence by highlighting the experience of a single center and demonstrating how the same principles were adopted to implement a similar program at another institution.

Use of oral anticoagulants in patients with valvular atrial fibrillation: findings from the NCDR PINNACLE Registry.

Recent data suggest direct oral anticoagulants are as safe and efficacious as warfarin among select patients with valvular heart disease and atrial fibrillation (AF). However, real-world treatment patterns of AF stroke prophylaxis in the setting of valvular AF are currently unknown. Accordingly, using the prospective, ambulatory National Cardiovascular Data Registry Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence (PINNACLE) Registry, we sought to characterize overall use, temporal trends in use, and the extent of practice-level variation in the use of any direct oral anticoagulant and warfarin among patients with valvular AF from January 1, 2013, to March 31, 2019.

The Addition of a Defibrillator to Resynchronization Therapy Decreases Mortality in Patients With Nonischemic Cardiomyopathy.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine whether patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) due to nonischemic etiology eligible for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) benefit from an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). BACKGROUND: It is uncertain whether CRT with an ICD (CRT-D) compared to without an ICD (CRT-P) is associated with a survival benefit in patients with nonischemic etiologies of HFrEF. METHODS: Analyses of the COMPANION (Comparison of Medical Therapy, Pacing, and Defibrillation in Heart Failure) trial were performed, using Cox proportional hazards modeling stratified by HFrEF etiology of nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) or ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality (ACM), and secondary outcomes were the combination of cardiovascular mortality or heart failure hospitalization and sudden cardiac death. RESULTS: Among patients randomized to CRT (n = 1,212), 236 (19.5%) died, 131 and 105 in the CRT-P and CRT-D arms, respectively. The unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for CRT-D versus CRT-P were both 0.84 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.65 to 1.09) for ACM, with a significant device-etiology interaction (pinteraction = 0.015 adjusted; pinteraction = 0.040 unadjusted). In patients with NICM (n = 555), CRT-D versus CRT-P was associated with reduced ACM (adjusted HR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.34 to 0.86), while patients with ICM (n = 657) did not exhibit a between-device reduction in ACM (adjusted HR: 1.05; 95% CI: 0.77 to 1.44). The effects of CRT-D versus CRT-P on sudden cardiac death (advantage CRT-D) and cardiovascular mortality or heart failure hospitalization (no difference between CRT-P and CRT-D) were similar between the 2 HFrEF etiologies. CONCLUSIONS: COMPANION patients with NICM exhibited a decrease in ACM associated with CRT-D but not CRT-P treatment, whereas patients with ICM did not.

Use of cell phone adapters is associated with reduction in disparities in remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices.

BACKGROUND: Remote monitoring (RM) of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is standard of care. However, it is underutilized. In July 2012, our institution began providing cell phone adapters (CPAs) to patients free of charge following CIED implantation to improve remote transmission (RT) adherence. METHODS: Patients in our institution's RM database from January 1, 2010, thru June 30, 2015, were retrospectively reviewed. There were 2157 eligible patients. Remote transmission proportion (RTP) and time to transmission (TT) were compared pre- and post-implementation of free CPA. Chi-squared analysis and Kruskal-Wallis tests were performed to compare RTP and TT. RESULTS: There was a significant increase in RTP (134 [18.4%] vs 99 [54.7%]; p < 0.001) and decrease in median TT in days (189[110-279] vs 58 [10-149]; p < 0.001) after CPAs were provided to patients. Caucasian patients were more likely than African Americans and Hispanics to use RM prior to CPAs (p = 0.04). After the implementation of CPAs, there was a significant increase in RTP for all racial groups (< 0.001) with no difference in RTP among racial groups (p = 0.18). The RTP for urban residents was significantly greater than non-urban residents with CPAs (p = 0.008). Patients greater than 70 years of age were significantly less likely to participate in RT before and after CPAs were provided (p = 0.03, p = 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: CPAs significantly improve RTP and reduce median TT for all patients regardless of race, geographic residence, and age (> 70 years old to lesser extent). Broad institution of CPAs following ICD implantation could potentially reduce disparity in RTP and deserves more study.