Relationship between dialytic parameters and reviewer confirmed arrhythmias in hemodialysis patients in the monitoring in dialysis study.

BACKGROUND: Hemodialysis patients have high rates of sudden death, but relationships between serum electrolytes, the dialysis prescription, and intra-dialytic shifts in fluid and electrolyte with arrhythmia are uncertain. METHODS: We analyzed sixty-six hemodialysis patients who underwent loop recorder implantation with continuous electrocardiographic monitoring, weekly to bi-weekly testing of pre- and post-dialysis electrolytes, and detailed capture of dialysis prescription and flow sheet data for 6 months. The incidence rate ratio (IRR) of reviewer confirmed arrhythmias (RCA) during dialysis through 8 h after dialysis and associations with serum chemistries and dialytic parameters were assessed using adjusted, negative-binomial regression. RESULTS: Among 66 individuals with a mean age of 56 years, 12,480 events were detected in 64 (97%) patients. RCA nadired 12-24 h after dialysis and increased during the final 12 h of the inter-dialytic interval through the first 8 h after dialysis. Higher pre-dialysis serum magnesium concentration was associated with lower incidence rate ratio for arrythmia (IRR per 1 mg/dL increase 0.49, 95% CI; 0.25, 0.94), as was dialysate calcium concentration > 2.5 mEq/L vs. 2.5 mEq/L (IRR 0.52, 95% CI: 0.39, 0.70). Neither intradialytic serum potassium nor weight change were significantly associated with RCA rate. However, there was effect modification such that arrhythmia rate was maximal with concurrently high intradialytic volume and potassium removal (Pinteraction = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Intra and post-dialytic arrhythmias are common in hemodialysis. Additional studies designed to further elucidate whether modification of the serum magnesium concentration, dialysate calcium concentration, and the extent of intradialytic potassium and fluid removal reduces the risk of per-dialytic arrhythmia are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01779856. Prospectively registered on January 22, 2013.

Primary outcomes of the Monitoring in Dialysis Study indicate that clinically significant arrhythmias are common in hemodialysis patients and related to dialytic cycle.

Sudden death is one of the more frequent causes of death for hemodialysis patients, but the underlying mechanisms, contribution of arrhythmia, and associations with serum chemistries or the dialysis procedure are incompletely understood. To study this, implantable loop recorders were utilized for continuous cardiac rhythm monitoring to detect clinically significant arrhythmias including sustained ventricular tachycardia, bradycardia, asystole, or symptomatic arrhythmias in hemodialysis patients over six months. Serum chemistries were tested pre- and post-dialysis at least weekly. Dialysis procedure data were collected at every session. Associations with clinically significant arrhythmias were assessed using negative binomial regression modeling. Sixty-six patients were implanted and 1678 events were recorded in 44 patients. The majority were bradycardias (1461), with 14 episodes of asystole and only one of sustained ventricular tachycardia. Atrial fibrillation, although not defined as clinically significant arrhythmias, was detected in 41% of patients. With thrice-weekly dialysis, the rate was highest during the first dialysis session of the week and was increased during the last 12 hours of each inter-dialytic interval, particularly the long interval. Among serum and dialytic parameters, only higher pre-dialysis serum sodium and dialysate calcium over 2.5 mEq/L were independently associated with clinically significant arrhythmias. Thus, clinically significant arrhythmias are common in hemodialysis patients, and bradycardia and asystole rather than ventricular tachycardia may be key causes of sudden death in hemodialysis patients. Associations with the temporal pattern of dialysis suggest that modification of current dialysis practices could reduce the incidence of sudden death.

Temporal trends in safety and complication rates of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation.

INTRODUCTION: Atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is increasingly common, but is associated with potential major complications. Technology, experience, and protocols have evolved significantly in recent times, and may have impacted procedural safety. We sought to compare AF ablation safety profiles, including complication rates and fluoroscopy times in a "modern" versus "historical" cohort. METHODS AND RESULTS: We evaluated consecutive patients undergoing AF ablation from a modern cohort (MC) from 2014 to 2015 and a historic cohort (HC) from 2009 to 2011 for complications. Major complications were categorized according to Heart Rhythm Society guidelines. We included 1,425 patients, 726 in the HC and 699 in the MC. The MC was older, had more OSA and less valvular AF. Fifty-two (3.5%) procedures suffered major complications across the cohorts, with significantly fewer in the MC (5.0% vs. 2.3%, P  =  0.007). The largest reductions were seen in vascular, hemorrhagic, ischemic stroke, and perforation/tamponade related complications. Periprocedural antiplatelets drugs (aHR 2.1 [95 CI 1.1-3.9], P  =  0.02) and force-sensing catheters (aHR 0.4 [95 CI 0.2-0.9], P  =  0.03) were independently related to major complication rates. Direct oral anticoagulants and uninterrupted anticoagulation were not associated with complications. There was a decrease in both fluoroscopy (-17.4 minutes [95 CI 19.2-15.6], P < 0.0001) and radiofrequency ablation times (-561 seconds [95CI -750 to -371], P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The safety profile of AF ablation has improved significantly in less than a decade.

Family history of atrial fibrillation as a predictor of atrial substrate and arrhythmia recurrence in patients undergoing atrial fibrillation catheter ablation.

Aims: A commonly held notion is that patients with a family history of atrial fibrillation (AF) have worse atrial substrate and higher rates of arrhythmia recurrence following ablation. We sought to examine differences in atrial substrate and catheter ablation outcomes in patients with a 1st degree family member with paroxysmal or persistent AF (PeAF) compared to those without. Methods and results: A total of 256 consecutive patients undergoing their 1st ablation for AF (123 paroxysmal, 133 persistent) with >1 year follow up were included. The presence of one 1st-degree family relative was defined as a 'positive family history'. Clinical characteristics, electroanatomic map findings, ablation characteristics and outcomes were compared in patients with and without a positive family history of AF. Patients with paroxysmal fibrillation with a positive family history (n = 57; 46%) had similar clinical characteristics and arrhythmia recurrence after catheter ablation as those without. Of those that recurred, patients with a positive family history were more likely to have progressed to PeAF (P = 0.05). Patients with PeAF with a positive family history (n = 75; 56%) had similar clinical characteristics, electroanatomic mapping findings and ablation characteristics, but worse long term arrhythmia free survival (P = 0.04). Conclusion: The presence of a 1st-degree family member with AF does not impact the clinical outcomes of catheter ablation for paroxysmal AF. However, a positive family history is associated with worse arrhythmia free survival in patients with PeAF. This finding is not explained by differences in clinical characteristics, atrial substrate assessed by voltage maps or ablation characteristics.

Beyond the Storm: Comparison of Clinical Factors, Arrhythmogenic Substrate, and Catheter Ablation Outcomes in Structural Heart Disease Patients With versus Those Without a History of Ventricular Tachycardia Storm.

AIMS: Catheter ablation can be lifesaving in ventricular tachycardia (VT) storm, but the underlying substrate in patients with storm is not well characterized. We sought to compare the clinical factors, substrate, and outcomes differences in patients with sustained monomorphic VT who present for catheter ablation with VT storm versus those with a nonstorm presentation. METHODS: Consecutive ischemic (ICM; n = 554) or nonischemic cardiomyopathy patients (NICM; n = 369) with a storm versus nonstorm presentation were studied (ICM storm 186; NICM storm 101). RESULTS: In ICM, storm compared with nonstorm patients had significantly lower left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF), greater number of antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) failures, slower VTs, greater number of scarred LV segments, higher incidence of anterior, septal, and apical endocardial LV scar (all P < 0.05). However, outcomes in follow-up were similar (12-month ventricular arrhythmia [VA]-free survival: 51% vs. 52%, P = 0.6; survival free of death/transplant 75% vs. 87%, P = 0.7). In addition to the above differences, NICM storm patients were also older; however, the extent and distribution of scar was similar except for a higher incidence of lateral endocardial scar in storm patients (P = 0.05). VA-free survival (36% vs. 47%, P = 0.004) and survival free of death/transplant, however, were worse in NICM storm than nonstorm patients (72% vs. 88%, P = 0.001). NICM storm patients had worse VA-free survival than ICM storm patients. CONCLUSION: There are differences in clinical factors and scar patterns in patients undergoing VT ablation who present with VT storm versus those with a nonstorm presentation. Clinical outcomes are worse in NICM storm patients.

Determinants of Heparin Dosing and Complications in Patients Undergoing Left Atrial Ablation on Uninterrupted Rivaroxaban.

BACKGROUND: Patients on rivaroxaban have variable international normalized ratios (INRs) but it is uncertain if INR impacts procedural heparin requirement during left atrial ablation. We sought to examine the determinants of heparin dosing in this patient population. METHODS: We reviewed consecutive patients who received rivaroxaban within 24 hours of left atrial ablation and compared them to patients on uninterrupted warfarin. The determinants of heparin requirement were evaluated using regression analysis. We then tested a weight-based heparin dose prospectively in rivaroxaban patients. RESULTS: There were 258 patients on rivaroxaban and 213 on warfarin. The mean INR was 1.4 in the rivaroxaban group and 2.3 in the warfarin group (P < 0.01). To achieve an activated clotting time (ACT) >350 seconds, rivaroxaban patients required significantly more heparin (166.9 vs. 78.3 units/kg, P < 0.001). In the rivaroxaban group, body weight was the strongest predictor of heparin dose (r = 0.52), while INR was weakly correlated (r = -0.21). In the prospective group, 25 patients were given an initial heparin dose of 120 units/kg with 22/25 (88%) achieving an ACT > 300 seconds. There were seven and three cases of pericardial effusion in rivaroxaban and warfarin patients, respectively (P = 0.41). The average volume drained in the rivaroxaban group was elevated (988.6 vs. 275.0 mL, P = 0.21). CONCLUSIONS: Body weight is the strongest predictor of procedural heparin requirement during left atrial ablation in patients on uninterrupted rivaroxaban, even in those with an elevated INR. A heparin dose of 120 units/kg achieves an ACT > 300 seconds in the majority of patients. In cases of pericardial effusion, bleeding may be prolonged.

Better outcome of ablation for sustained outflow-tract ventricular tachycardia when tachycardia is inducible.

AIMS: In patients presenting with spontaneous sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) from the outflow-tract region without overt structural heart disease ablation may target premature ventricular contractions (PVCs) when VT is not inducible. We aimed to determine whether inducibility of VT affects ablation outcome. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from 54 patients (31 men; age, 52 ± 13 years) without overt structural heart disease who underwent catheter ablation for symptomatic sustained VT originating from the right- or left-ventricular outflow region, including the great vessels. A single morphology of sustained VT was inducible in 18 (33%, SM group) patients, and 11 (20%) had multiple VT morphologies (MM group). VT was not inducible in 25 (46%) patients (VTni group). After ablation, VT was inducible in none of the SM group and in two (17%) patients in the MM group. In the VTni group, ablation targeted PVCs and 12 (48%) patients had some remaining PVCs after ablation. During follow-up (21 ± 19 months), VT recurred in 46% of VTni group, 40% of MM inducible group, and 6% of the SM inducible group (P = 0.004). Analysis of PVC morphology in the VTi group further supported the limitations of targeting PVCs in this population. CONCLUSION: Absence of inducible VT and multiple VT morphologies are not uncommon in patients with documented sustained outflow-tract VT without overt structural heart disease. Inducible VT is associated with better outcomes, suggesting that attempts to induce VT to guide ablation are important in this population.

Reducing radiation exposure in the electrophysiology laboratory: it is more than just fluoroscopy times!

BACKGROUND: To exposure in patients undergoing cardiac electrophysiology (EP) ablation. This included the use of a "very low" dose protocol, and the impact of angulations and patient body mass index (BMI) on radiation dose as a mean to reduce exposure. METHODS: A total of 212 retrospective patient data sets were collected during EP ablation procedures on a biplane fluoroscopy system. Dose metrics were computed based on dose-area product (DAP) measured by the system for each x-ray acquisition. RESULTS: Dose baselines of different ablation procedures were established as DAP and DAP per hour, with respect to patient BMI. The use of a "very low dose" protocol reduced exposure by 62% while providing adequate image quality. With approximate left anterior oblique (LAO) 50° and right anterior oblique (RAO) 30°, DAP and DAP rate were significantly higher in LAO compared to RAO (11.2 [4.8-25.3] Gy · cm(2) vs 5.28 [2.9-11.1] Gy · cm(2) and 74.0 [38.2-136.1] Gy · cm(2)/h vs 25.0 [16.4-44.1] Gy · cm(2)/h, respectively; P < 0.001). DAP and DAP rate were also significantly higher in patients with BMI > 30 vs BMI ≤ 30 (34.2 [22.3-58.7] Gy · cm(2) vs 12.4 [6.0-26.9] Gy · cm(2) and 84.9 [68.1-120.4] Gy · cm(2)/h vs 34.2 [21.7-52.9] Gy · cm(2)/h, respectively; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Protocol setting, system angulation, and BMI, in particular, wider angulation in LAO compared to RAO plane, exposes patients to significant higher radiation doses. Obese patients in standard LAO plane receive six times the radiation dose of nonobese patients in RAO.

Arrhythmia and Time of Day in Maintenance Hemodialysis: Secondary Analysis of the Monitoring in Dialysis Study.

Rationale & Objective: The incidence of arrhythmia varies by time of day. How this affects individuals on maintenance dialysis is uncertain. Our objective was to quantify the relationship of arrhythmia with the time of day and timing of dialysis. Study Design: Secondary analysis of the Monitoring in Dialysis study, a multicenter prospective cohort study. Settings & Participants: Loop recorders were implanted for continuous cardiac monitoring in 66 participants on maintenance dialysis with a follow up of 6 months. Exposure: Time of day based on 6-hour intervals. Outcomes: Event rates of clinically significant arrhythmia. Analytical Approach: Negative binomial mixed effects regression models for repeated measures were used to evaluate data from the Monitoring in Dialysis study for differences in diurnal patterns of clinically significant arrhythmia among those with end-stage kidney disease with heart failure and end-stage kidney disease alone. We additionally analyzed rates according to presence of heart failure, time of dialysis shift, and dialysis versus nondialysis day. Results: Rates of clinically significant arrhythmia peaked between 12:00 AM and 5:59 AM and were more than 1.5-fold as frequent during this interval than the rest of the day. In contrast, variations in atrial fibrillation peaked between 6:00 AM and 11:59 AM, but variations across the day were qualitatively small. Clinically significant arrhythmia occurred at numerically higher rate in individuals with end-stage kidney disease and heart failure (5.9 events/mo; 95% CI, 1.3-26.8) than those without heart failure (4.0 events/mo; 95% CI, 0.9-17.9). Although differences in overall rate were not significant, their periodicity was significantly different (P < 0.001), with a peak between 12:00 AM and 6:00 AM with kidney failure alone and between 6:00 AM and 11:59 AM in those with heart failure. Although the overall clinically significant arrhythmia rate was similar in morning compared with evening dialysis shifts (P = 0.43), their periodicity differed with a peak between 12:00 AM and 5:59 AM in those with AM dialysis and a later peak between 6:00 AM and 11:59 AM in those with PM shifts. Limitations: Post hoc analysis, unable to account for unmeasured confounders. Conclusion: Clinically significant arrhythmias showed strong diurnal patterns with a maximal peak between 12:00 AM and 5:59 AM and noon. Although overall arrhythmia rates were similar, the peak rate occurred overnight in individuals without heart failure and during the morning in individuals with heart failure. Further exploration of the influence of circadian rhythm on arrhythmia in the setting of hemodialysis is needed.

Arrhythmias occur with a high frequency in individuals with kidney failure. We sought to understand whether there were diurnal patterns for common types of arrhythmias in individuals with kidney failure. We used continuous rhythm data from 66 individuals on dialysis with implantable loop recorders. We found that clinically significant arrhythmias including bradycardia primarily occur overnight and in the early morning, whereas atrial fibrillation is more evenly distributed during the day.

Improved all-cause mortality with left bundle branch area pacing compared to biventricular pacing in cardiac resynchronization therapy: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has emerged as a physiological alternative pacing strategy to biventricular pacing (BIVP) in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). We aimed to assess the impact of LBBAP vs. BIVP on all-cause mortality and heart failure (HF)-related hospitalization in patients undergoing CRT. METHODS: Studies comparing LBBAP and BIVP for CRT in patients with HF with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were included. The coprimary outcomes were all-cause mortality and HF-related hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included procedural and fluoroscopy time, change in QRS duration, and change in LVEF. RESULTS: Thirteen studies (12 observational and 1 RCT, n = 3239; LBBAP = 1338 and BIVP = 1901) with a mean follow-up duration of 25.8 months were included. Compared to BIVP, LBBAP was associated with a significant absolute risk reduction of 3.2% in all-cause mortality (9.3% vs 12.5%, RR 0.7, 95% CI 0.57-0.86, p < 0.001) and an 8.2% reduction in HF-related hospitalization (11.3% vs 19.5%, RR 0.6, 95% CI 0.5-0.71, p < 0.00001). LBBAP also resulted in reductions in procedural time (mean weighted difference- 23.2 min, 95% CI - 42.9 to - 3.6, p = 0.02) and fluoroscopy time (- 8.6 min, 95% CI - 12.5 to - 4.7, p < 0.001) as well as a significant reduction in QRS duration (mean weighted difference:- 25.3 ms, 95% CI - 30.9 to - 19.8, p < 0.00001) and a greater improvement in LVEF of 5.1% (95% CI 4.4-5.8, p < 0.001) compared to BIVP in the studies that reported these outcomes. CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis, LBBAP was associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality as well as HF-related hospitalization when compared to BIVP. Additional data from large RCTs is warranted to corroborate these promising findings.

Left Bundle Branch Pacing vs Left Ventricular Septal Pacing vs Biventricular Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) and left ventricular septal pacing (LVSP) are considered to be acceptable as LBBAP strategies. Differences in clinical outcomes between LBBP and LVSP are yet to be determined. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of LBBP vs LVSP vs BIVP for CRT. METHODS: In this prospective multicenter observational study, LBBP was compared with LVSP and BIVP in patients undergoing CRT. The primary composite outcome was freedom from heart failure (HF)-related hospitalization and all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included individual components of the primary outcome, postprocedural NYHA functional class, and electrocardiographic and echocardiographic parameters. RESULTS: A total of 415 patients were included (LBBP: n = 141; LVSP: n = 31; BIVP: n = 243), with a median follow-up of 399 days (Q1-Q3: 249.5-554.8 days). Freedom from the primary composite outcomes was 76.6% in the LBBP group and 48.4% in the LVSP group (HR: 1.37; 95% CI: 1.143-1.649; P = 0.001), driven by a 31.4% absolute increase in freedom from HF-related hospitalizations (83% vs 51.6%; HR: 3.55; 95% CI: 1.856-6.791; P < 0.001) without differences in all-cause mortality. LBBP was also associated with a higher freedom from the primary composite outcome compared with BIVP (HR: 1.43; 95% CI: 1.175-1.730; P < 0.001), with no difference between LVSP and BIVP. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing CRT, LBBP was associated with improved outcomes compared with LVSP and BIVP, while outcomes between BIVP and LVSP are similar.

Sex Differences in Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Versus Biventricular Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Women respond more favorably to biventricular pacing (BIVP) than men. Sex differences in atrioventricular and interventricular conduction have been described in BIVP studies. Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) offers advantages due to direct capture of the conduction system. We hypothesized that men could respond better to LBBAP than BIVP. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to describe the sex differences in response to LBBAP vs BIVP as the initial cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). METHODS: In this multicenter prospective registry, we included patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% and left bundle branch block or a left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40% with an expected right ventricular pacing exceeding 40% undergoing initial CRT with LBBAP or BIVP. The composite primary outcome was heart failure-related hospitalization and all-cause mortality. The primary safety outcome included all procedure-related complications. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the primary outcome when comparing men and women receiving LBBAP (P = 0.46), whereas the primary outcome was less frequent in women in the BIVP group than men treated with BIVP (P = 0.03). The primary outcome occurred less frequently in men undergoing LBBAP (29.9%) compared to those treated with BIVP (46.5%) (P = 0.004). In women, the incidence of the primary endpoint was 24.14% in the LBBAP group and 36.2% in the BIVP group; however, this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.23). Complication rates remained consistent across all groups. CONCLUSIONS: Men and women undergoing LBBAP for CRT had similar clinical outcomes. Men undergoing LBBAP showed a lower risk of heart failure-related hospitalizations and all-cause mortality compared to men undergoing BIVP, whereas there was no difference between LBBAP and BIVP in women.

Ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death.

Management strategies for ventricular arrhythmias are guided by the risk of sudden death and severity of symptoms. Patients with a substantial risk of sudden death usually need an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). Although ICDs effectively end most episodes of ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation and decrease mortality in specific populations of patients, they have inherent risks and limitations. Generally, antiarrhythmic drugs do not provide sufficient protection from sudden death, but do have a role in reducing arrhythmias that cause symptoms. Catheter ablation is likewise important for reducing the frequency of spontaneous arrhythmias and is curative for some patients, usually those with idiopathic arrhythmias and no heart disease. Arrhythmia surgery is now infrequent, offered by only a few specialised centres for refractory arrhythmias. Advances in understanding of genetic arrhythmia syndromes and in technology for mapping and ablation of ventricular arrhythmias, and enhanced algorithms in implantable devices for rhythm management, have contributed to improved outcomes.

Catheter ablation of atrial arrhythmias after cardiac transplantation: findings at EP study utility of 3-D mapping and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Management of atrial arrhythmias (AA) in orthotopic heart transplant (OHT) patients is challenging. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to define the mechanisms of these arrhythmias and to evaluate the role of ablation. METHODS: Patients with OHT referred for ablation of AA from 1999 to 2011 were included (n = 15). Entrainment and anatomic 3-D mapping were utilized to identify AA mechanism and guide ablation. RESULTS: The median time from OHT to ablation was 8 years (range: 1 month-16 years). AA types included 1 (7%) AVNRT, 5 (33%) cavotricuspid isthmus (CTI) dependent donor atrial flutter (AFl), 3 (20%) non-CTI-dependent donor AFL (n = 3), focal atrial tachycardia (AT) (n = 2) and in 4 (27%) recipient to donor atria conduction (RDC) that involved the right atrial anastomosis in 3 and left atrial anastamosis in 1 patient. In RDC tachycardia, ablation was performed at the site of earliest donor atrial activation on the suture line. AA in the recipient atria were not targeted. This resulted in acute success in all cases. In most patients 12/15 (80%) only right atrial ablation was necessary. Regardless of surgical technique (bicaval vs biatrial) right-sided AA was most common. Acute success occurred in 14/15 (93%) patients and 3/15 (20%) required repeat Abl for recurrence. There were no major complications. CONCLUSION: AA after OHT are most commonly due to atrial macroreentry, but focal arrhythmias and RDC atrial conduction also occur. Ablation of organized AA is usually successful with low risk, warranting early consideration in preference to medical treatment.

Sustained Apnea for Epicardial Access With Right Ventriculography: The SAFER Epicardial Approach.

BACKGROUND: Epicardial access (EA) has emerged as an increasingly important approach for the treatment of ventricular arrhythmias and to perform other interventional cardiology procedures. EA is frequently underutilized because the current approach is challenging and carries a high risk of life-threatening complications. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of the SAFER (Sustained Apnea for Epicardial Access With Right Ventriculography) epicardial approach. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent EA with the SAFER technique were included in this multicenter study. The primary efficacy outcome was the successful achievement of EA. The primary safety outcomes included right ventricular (RV) perforation, major hemorrhagic pericardial effusion (HPE), and bleeding requiring surgical intervention. Secondary outcomes included procedural characteristics and any complications. Our results were compared with those from previous studies describing other EA techniques to assess differences in outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 105 patients undergoing EA with the SAFER approach from June 2021 to February 2023 were included. EA was used for ventricular tachycardia ablation in 98 patients (93.4%), left atrial appendage closure in 6 patients (5.7%), and phrenic nerve displacement in 1 patient (0.9%). EA was successful in all subjects (100%). The median time to EA was 7 minutes (IQR: 5-14 minutes). No cases of RV perforation, HPE, or need of surgical intervention were observed in this cohort. Comparing our results with previous studies about EA, the SAFER epicardial approach resulted in a significant reduction in major pericardial bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: The SAFER epicardial approach is a simple, efficient, effective, and low-cost technique easily reproducible across multiple centers. It is associated with lower complication rates than previously reported techniques for EA.

Left Bundle Branch Area Pacing Versus Biventricular Pacing as Initial Strategy for Cardiac Resynchronization.

BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is an alternative to biventricular pacing (BiVp). OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes between LBBAP and BiVp as an initial implant strategy for CRT. METHODS: In this prospective multicenter, observational, nonrandomized study, first-time CRT implant recipients with LBBAP or BiVp were included. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of heart failure (HF)-related hospitalization and all-cause mortality. The primary safety outcomes were acute and long-term complications. Secondary outcomes included postprocedural New York Heart Association functional class and electrocardiographic and echocardiographic parameters. RESULTS: A total of 371 patients (median follow-up of 340 days [IQR: 206-477 days]) were included. The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 24.2% in the LBBAP vs 42.4% in the BiVp (HR: 0.621 [95% CI: 0.415-0.93]; P = 0.021) group, driven by a reduction in HF-related hospitalizations (22.6% vs 39.5%; HR: 0.607 [95% CI: 0.397-0.927]; P = 0.021) without significant difference in all-cause mortality (5.5% vs 11.9%; P = 0.19) or differences in long-term complications (LBBAP: 9.4% vs BiVp: 15.2%; P = 0.146). LBBAP resulted in shorter procedural (95 minutes [IQR: 65-120 minutes] vs 129 minutes [IQR: 103-162 minutes]; P < 0.001) and fluoroscopy times (12 minutes [IQR: 7.4-21.1 minutes] vs 21.7 minutes [IQR: 14.3-30 minutes]; P < 0.001), shorter QRS duration (123.7 ± 18 milliseconds vs 149.3 ± 29.1 milliseconds; P < 0.001), and higher postprocedural left ventricular ejection fraction (34.1% ± 12.5% vs 31.4% ± 10.8%; P = 0.041). CONCLUSIONS: LBBAP as an initial CRT strategy resulted in a lower risk of HF-related hospitalizations compared to BiVp. A reduction in procedural and fluoroscopy times, shorter paced QRS duration, and improvements in left ventricular ejection fraction compared with BiVp were observed.

Implantable Loop Recorder Monitoring and the Incidence of Previously Unrecognized Atrial Fibrillation in Patients on Hemodialysis.

INTRODUCTION: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in patients with kidney failure on hemodialysis (KF-HD). We determined both AF incidence and burden in patients with KF-HD using implantable loop recorder (ILR) monitoring. METHODS: Patients with KF-HD were enrolled and received an ILR. In 6 monitoring months, the incidence of AF events lasting ≥6 minutes was captured. Demographic, clinical, and dialysis characteristics were collected, and associations with incident AF were estimated using negative binomial regression models and expressed as incidence rate ratios and 95% CIs. RESULTS: We enrolled 66 patients with KF-HD (mean age = 56 years, 70% male); 59 (90%) were without previously diagnosed AF. AF lasting ≥6 minutes was detected in 18 of 59 subjects (31%) without previously diagnosed AF and in 5 of 7 subjects (71%) with a previous AF diagnosis. Among the 23 with detected AF, episodes were present on 16% of patient days. Although 14 of 23 patients (61%) had AF on <5% of monitored days, the average duration of AF episodes was <1 hour in 13 of 23 patients (52%). Among patients with AF ≥6 minutes, 19 of 23 (83%) had a CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2. When investigating individual HD parameters, higher dialysate calcium (>2.5 vs. 2.5 mEq/l: incidence rate ratio = 0.62; 95% CI, 0.48-0.80) was associated with lower AF risk whereas higher dialysate bicarbonate concentrations (>35 vs. 35 mEq/l: incidence rate ratio = 3.18; 95% CI, 1.13-8.94) were associated with higher AF risk. CONCLUSION: New AF was detected in approximately one-third of patients with KF-HD. AF affects a substantial proportion of patient days and may be an underappreciated cause of stroke in KF-HD.

Association of Bradycardia and Asystole Episodes with Dialytic Parameters: An Analysis of the Monitoring in Dialysis (MiD) Study.

Background: Bradycardia and asystole events are common among patients treated with maintenance hemodialysis. However, triggers of these events in patients on maintenance hemodialysis (HD), particularly during the long interdialytic period when these events cluster, are uncertain. Methods: The Monitoring in Dialysis Study (MiD) enrolled 66 patients on maintenance HD who were implanted with loop recorders and followed for 6 months. We analyzed associations of predialysis laboratory values with clinically significant bradyarrhythmia or asystole (CSBA) during the 12 hours before an HD session. Associations with CSBA were analyzed with mixed-effect models. Adjusted negative binomial mixed-effect regression was used to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRR) for CSBA. We additionally evaluated associations of CSBA at any time during follow-up with time-averaged dialytic and laboratory parameters and associations of peridialytic parameters with occurrence of CSBA from the start of one HD session to the beginning of the next. Results: There were 551 CSBA that occurred in the last 12 hours of the interdialytic interval preceding 100 HD sessions in 12% of patients and 1475 CSBA events in 23% of patients overall. We did not identify significant associations between dialytic parameters or serum electrolytes and CSBA in the last 12 hours of the interdialytic interval in adjusted analyses. Median time-averaged ultrafiltration rate was significantly higher in individuals without CSBA (9.8 versus 8, P=0.04). Use of dialysate sodium concentrations ≤135 (versus 140) mEq/L was associated with a reduced risk of CSBA from the start of one session to the beginning of next. Conclusions: Although a few factors had modest associations with CSBA in some analyses, we did not identify any robust associations of modifiable parameters with CSBA in the MiD Study. Further investigation is needed to understand the high rates of arrhythmia in the hemodialysis population.