Association between high-density mapping of atypical atrial flutter, clinical outcomes and healthcare utilization.

BACKGROUND: Success of atypical atrial flutter (AAFL) ablation has historically been limited by difficulty mapping the complex re-entrant circuits involved. While high-density (HD) mapping has become commonplace in clinical practice, there are limited data on outcomes of HD versus non-HD mapping for AAFL ablation. OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical outcomes and healthcare utilization using HD mapping versus non-HD mapping for AAFL ablation. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of all AAFL procedures between 2005 and 2022 at an academic medical center was conducted. Procedures utilizing a 16-electrode HD Grid catheter and Precision mapping system were compared to procedures using prior generation 10-20 electrode spiral catheters and the Velocity system (Abbott, IL). Cox regression models and Poisson regression models were utilized to examine procedural and healthcare utilization outcomes. Models were adjusted for left ventricular ejection fraction, CHA2DS2-VASc, and history of prior ablation. RESULTS: There were 108 patients (62% HD mapping) included in the analysis. Baseline clinical characteristics were similar between groups. Use of HD mapping was associated with a higher rate of AAFL circuit delineation (92.5% vs. 76%; p = .014) and a greater adjusted procedure success rate, defined as non-inducibility at procedure end, (aRR (95% CI) 1.26 (1.02-1.55) p = .035) than non-HD mapping. HD mapping was also associated with a lower rate of ED visits (aIRR (95% CI) 0.32 (0.14-0.71); p = .007) and hospitalizations (aIRR (95% CI) 0.32 (0.14-0.68); p = .004) for AF/AFL/HF through 1 year. While there was a lower rate of recurrent AFL through 1 year among HD mapping cases (aHR (95% CI) 0.60 (0.31-1.16) p = .13), statistical significance was not met likely due to the low sample size and higher rate of ambulatory rhythm monitoring in the HD group (61% vs. 39%, p = .025). CONCLUSION: Compared to non-HD mapping, AAFL ablation with HD mapping is associated with improvements in the ability to define the AAFL circuit, greater procedural success, and a reduction in the number of ED visits and hospitalization for AF/AFL/HF.

Efficacy and Safety of Appropriate Shocks and Antitachycardia Pacing in Transvenous and Subcutaneous Implantable Defibrillators: Analysis of All Appropriate Therapy in the PRAETORIAN Trial.

BACKGROUND: The PRAETORIAN trial (A Prospective, Randomized Comparison of Subcutaneous and Transvenous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Therapy) showed noninferiority of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) compared with transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (TV-ICD) with regard to inappropriate shocks and complications. In contrast to TV-ICD, S-ICD cannot provide antitachycardia pacing for monomorphic ventricular tachycardia. This prespecified secondary analysis evaluates appropriate therapy and whether antitachycardia pacing reduces the number of appropriate shocks. METHODS: The PRAETORIAN trial was an international, investigator-initiated randomized trial that included patients with an indication for implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy. Patients with previous ventricular tachycardia <170 bpm or refractory recurrent monomorphic ventricular tachycardia were excluded. In 39 centers, 849 patients were randomized to receive an S-ICD (n=426) or TV-ICD (n=423) and were followed for a median of 49.1 months. ICD programming was mandated by protocol. Appropriate ICD therapy was defined as therapy for ventricular arrhythmias. Arrhythmias were classified as discrete episodes and storm episodes (≥3 episodes within 24 hours). Analyses were performed in the modified intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: In the S-ICD group, 86 of 426 patients received appropriate therapy, versus 78 of 423 patients in the TV-ICD group, during a median follow-up of 52 months (48-month Kaplan-Meier estimates 19.4% and 17.5%; P=0.45). In the S-ICD group, 83 patients received at least 1 shock, versus 57 patients in the TV-ICD group (48-month Kaplan-Meier estimates 19.2% and 11.5%; P=0.02). Patients in the S-ICD group had a total of 254 shocks, compared with 228 shocks in the TV-ICD group (P=0.68). First shock efficacy was 93.8% in the S-ICD group and 91.6% in the TV-ICD group (P=0.40). The first antitachycardia pacing attempt successfully terminated 46% of all monomorphic ventricular tachycardias, but accelerated the arrhythmia in 9.4%. Ten patients with S-ICD experienced 13 electrical storms, versus 18 patients with TV-ICD with 19 electrical storms. Patients with appropriate therapy had an almost 2-fold increased relative risk of electrical storms in the TV-ICD group compared with the S-ICD group (P=0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, no difference was observed in shock efficacy of S-ICD compared with TV-ICD. Although patients in the S-ICD group were more likely to receive an ICD shock, the total number of appropriate shocks was not different between the 2 groups. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01296022.

Implementation of an intravenous sotalol initiation protocol: Implications for feasibility, safety, and length of stay.

INTRODUCTION: Oral sotalol initiation requires a multiple-day, inpatient admission to monitor for QT prolongation during loading. A 1-day intravenous (IV) sotalol loading protocol was approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration in March 2020, but limited data on clinical use and administration currently exists. This study describes implementation of an IV sotalol protocol within an integrated health system, provides initial efficacy and safety outcomes, and examines length of stay (LOS) compared with oral sotalol initiation. METHODS: IV sotalol was administered according to a prespecified initiation protocol to adult patients with refractory atrial or ventricular arrhythmias. Baseline characteristics, safety and feasibility outcomes, and LOS were compared with patients receiving oral sotalol over a similar time period. RESULTS: From January 2021 to June 2022, a total of 29 patients (average age 66.0 ± 8.6 years, 27.6% women) underwent IV sotalol load and 20 patients (average age 60.4 ± 13.9 years, 65.0% women) underwent oral sotalol load. The load was successfully completed in 22/29 (75.9%) patients receiving IV sotalol and 20/20 (100%) of patients receiving oral sotalol, although 7/20 of the oral sotalol patients (35.0%) required dose reduction. Adverse events interrupting IV sotalol infusion included bradycardia (seven patients, 24.1%) and QT prolongation (three patients, 10.3%). No patients receiving IV or oral sotalol developed sustained ventricular arrhythmias before discharge. LOS for patients completing IV load was 2.6 days shorter (mean 1.0 vs. 3.6, p < .001) compared with LOS with oral load. CONCLUSION: IV sotalol loading has a safety profile that is similar to oral sotalol. It significantly shortens hospital LOS, potentially leading to large cost savings.

Device-related complications in subcutaneous versus transvenous ICD: a secondary analysis of the PRAETORIAN trial.

BACKGROUND: The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) is developed to overcome lead-related complications and systemic infections, inherent to transvenous ICD (TV-ICD) therapy. The PRAETORIAN trial demonstrated that the S-ICD is non-inferior to the TV-ICD with regard to the combined primary endpoint of inappropriate shocks and complications. This prespecified secondary analysis evaluates all complications in the PRAETORIAN trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: The PRAETORIAN trial is an international, multicentre, randomized trial in which 849 patients with an indication for ICD therapy were randomized to receive an S- ICD (N = 426) or TV-ICD (N = 423) and followed for a median of 49 months. Endpoints were device-related complications, lead-related complications, systemic infections, and the need for invasive interventions. Thirty-six device-related complications occurred in 31 patients in the S-ICD group of which bleedings were the most frequent. In the TV-ICD group, 49 complications occurred in 44 patients of which lead dysfunction was most frequent (HR: 0.69; P = 0.11). In both groups, half of all complications were within 30 days after implantation. Lead-related complications and systemic infections occurred significantly less in the S-ICD group compared with the TV-ICD group (P < 0.001, P = 0.03, respectively). Significantly more complications required invasive interventions in the TV-ICD group compared with the S-ICD group (8.3% vs. 4.3%, HR: 0.59; P = 0.047). CONCLUSION: This secondary analysis shows that lead-related complications and systemic infections are more prevalent in the TV-ICD group compared with the S-ICD group. In addition, complications in the TV-ICD group were more severe as they required significantly more invasive interventions. This data contributes to shared decision-making in clinical practice.

Esophageal temperature management during cryoballoon ablation for atrial fibrillation.

INTRODUCTION: Esophageal thermal injury (ETI) is a well-recognized complication of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. Previous studies have demonstrated that direct esophageal cooling reduces ETI during radiofrequency AF ablation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of an esophageal warming device to prevent ETI during cryoballoon ablation (CBA) for AF. METHODS: This prospective, double-blinded study enrolled 42 patients with symptomatic AF undergoing CBA. Patients were randomized to the treatment group with esophageal warming (42°C) using recirculated water through a multilumen, silicone tube inserted into the esophagus (EnsoETM®; Attune Medical) (WRM) or the control group with a luminal single-electrode esophageal temperature monitoring probe (LET). Patients underwent upper endoscopy esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) the following day. ETI was classified into four grades. RESULTS: Baseline patient characteristics were similar between groups. Procedural characteristics including number of freezes, total freeze time, early freeze terminations, coldest balloon temperature, procedure duration, posterior wall ablation, and proton pump inhibitor and transesophageal echocardiogram use before procedure were not different between groups. The EGD was completed in 40/42 patients. There was significantly more ETI in the WRM group compared to the LET group (n = 8 [38%] vs. n = 1 [5%], p = 0.02). All ETI lesions were grade 1 (erythema) or 2 (superficial ulceration). Total freeze time in the left inferior pulmonary vein was predictive of ETI (360 vs. 300 s, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Use of a luminal heat exchange tube for esophageal warming during CBA for AF was paradoxically associated with a higher risk of ETI.

Use of a novel 4D intracardiac echocardiography catheter to guide interventional electrophysiology procedures.

INTRODUCTION: Standard two-dimensional (2D), phased-array intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) is routinely used to guide interventional electrophysiology (EP) procedures. A novel four-dimensional (4D) ICE catheter (VeriSight Pro, Philips) can obtain 2D and three-dimensional (3D) volumetric images and cine-videos in real-time (4D). The purpose of this study was to determine the early feasibility and safety of this 4D ICE catheter during EP procedures. METHODS: The 4D ICE catheter was placed from the femoral vein in ten patients into various cardiac chambers to guide EP procedures requiring transseptal catheterization, including ablation for atrial fibrillation and left atrial appendage closure. 2D- and 3D-ICE images were acquired in real-time by the electrophysiologist. A dedicated imaging expert performed digital steering to optimize and postprocess 4D images. RESULTS: Eight patients underwent pulmonary vein isolation (cryoballoon in seven patients, pulsed field ablation in one, additional radiofrequency left atrial ablation in one). Two patients underwent left atrial appendage closure. High quality images of cardiac structures, transseptal catheterization equipment, guide sheaths, ablation tools, and closure devices were acquired with the ICE catheter tip positioned in the right atrium, left atrium, pulmonary vein, coronary sinus, right ventricle, and pulmonary artery. There were no complications. CONCLUSION: This is the first experience of a novel deflectable 4D ICE catheter used to guide EP procedures. 4D ICE imaging is safe and allows for acquisition of high-quality 2D and 3D images in real-time. Further use of 4D ICE will be needed to determine its added value for each EP procedure type.

Impact of pre-ablation weight loss on the success of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation.

INTRODUCTION: Obesity is an established risk factor for recurrent atrial fibrillation (AF) after ablation. The impact of pre-procedure weight changes on freedom from AF (FFAF) after ablation in obese and nonobese patients is unknown. METHODS: A single-center retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing pulmonary vein isolation was performed. Before ablation, all candidates were encouraged to adopt healthy lifestyle habits according to American Heart Association guidelines, including weight loss, by their physician. The primary endpoint was FFAF through 1-year after completion of the 3-month blanking period. RESULTS: Of the 601 patients (68% male; average age 62.1 ± 10.3 years) included in analysis, 234 patients (38.9%) were obese (body mass index ≥ 30) and 315 (52.4%) had paroxysmal AF. FFAF was observed in 420 patients (69.9%) at 15 months. Percent change in weight that occurred during the year before ablation independently predicted FFAF through 15-months in all patients (adjusted odds ratio = 1.17, 95% confidence interval: 1.11-1.23). Subgroup analyses based on paroxysmal vs persistent AF, presence of obesity, and history of prior ablation were performed. Percent change in weight over the year before ablation was independently associated with FFAF in all subgroups except nonobese patients with persistent AF. CONCLUSION: Pre-ablation weight loss was associated with FFAF in both obese and nonobese patients. Further studies are needed to define the optimal approach to weight loss before AF ablation.

Repeat pulmonary vein isolation with or without FIRM-guided ablation for recurrent atrial fibrillation with pulmonary vein reconnection.

INTRODUCTION: Focal impulse and rotor modulation (FIRM) ablation can be used to target nonpulmonary vein (PV) sources of atrial fibrillation (AF). No published studies have compared freedom from atrial fibrillation (FFAF) after pulmonary vein reisolation (PVRI) plus FIRM to PVRI alone in patients with reconnected PVs undergoing repeat ablation. METHODS: A 3:1 matched retrospective cohort study was performed on 21 patients with recurrent AF and PV reconnection who underwent PVRI plus FIRM-guided ablation and 63 patients with recurrent AF treated with PVRI alone at a single institution. All patients in the PVRI-alone cohort had cryoballoon PVRI at the time of repeat ablation without additional lesion sets for AF. Cases were matched based on the type of AF (paroxysmal vs nonparoxysmal), left atrial diameter (±4 mm), left ventricular ejection fraction (±10%), duration of AF (±18 months), and age (±5 years). The primary endpoint was FFAF after a 3-month blanking period. RESULTS: Out of 53 total FIRM cases performed at Northwestern Memorial Hospital between 2015 and 2017, 21 patients had PVRI plus FIRM for recurrent AF with PV reconnection. These patients had an average of 3.3 ± 2.1 rotors (60% left atrial) ablated. Over a median follow-up time of 24.7 months (interquartile range, 13-36 months), patients in the PVRI-alone cohort demonstrated a higher rate of FFAF (n = 35; 55.6%) than patients in the PVRI plus FIRM-guided ablation cohort (n = 7; 33.3%) (logrank P = .049). CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing repeat ablation for AF with PV reconnection, PVRI plus FIRM did not increase FFAF compared to PVRI alone.

Patient-reported outcomes after cryoballoon ablation are equivalent between moderate sedation and general anesthesia.

INTRODUCTION: Moderate sedation (MS) during cryoballoon ablation (CBA) avoids risks of general anesthesia (GA) and improves electrophysiology (EP) lab throughput. However, one barrier to the use of MS is the potential for patient discomfort. The objective of this study was to compare patient-reported outcome measures following CBA for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (pAF) under MS and GA. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients undergoing a first CBA for pAF under GA or MS were prospectively enrolled. The sedation method was assigned based on patient and provider preference, and perceived airway risk. The primary outcomes were quality of recovery (measured using a validated 40 question survey; QoR-40) and likelihood to recommend (LTR) the procedure and sedation method (measured by Likert scale). Secondary outcomes were acute pulmonary vein (PV) isolation rate, procedure, fluoroscopy and ablation times, and complication rates. Forty-seven GA and 53 MS patients were included. The mean age was 64.9 ± 9.4 years and mean CHA2 DS2 -VASc score was 2.0 ± 1.4. QoR-40 scores were 184.6 ± 16.4 for GA and 187.6 ± 10.2 for MS (P = .28). LTR responses were similar between groups. Mean procedure times were 148.2 ± 56.0 minutes for GA and 129.4 ± 31.4 minutes for MS (P = .038). Fluoroscopy and ablation times were similar between groups. A total of 100% (409/409) of PVs were acutely isolated. One hemopericardium occurred in the MS group requiring pericardiocentesis. CONCLUSION: MS for CBA offers an alternative to GA that is safe and well-tolerated by patients with comparable success rates and improved EP lab throughput.

Patient characteristics as predictors of recurrence of atrial fibrillation following cryoballoon ablation.

BACKGROUND: While several studies have evaluated predictors for atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence following catheter ablation, there are limited data specific to cryoballoon ablation (CBA). METHODS: We analyzed a prospective registry of patients at a single institution who underwent CBA. Recurrence of AF (RAF) was defined as recurrence of AF by 12-month follow-up, excluding the 3-month blanking period. Univariate analysis was performed to evaluate predictors of RAF. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to compare and evaluate the performance of various risk scores for discriminating risk of RAF. RESULTS: There were 542 patients included in the analysis with mean age 61.3 ± 10.6 years, 67.9% male, and 51.6% paroxysmal AF (PAF). Overall, only left atrial diameter (LAD) > 40 mm and ERAF (early recurrence of AF within 0-3 month blanking period) were significant predictors of RAF. In the PAF specific subgroup, LAD > 40 mm, AF duration > 12 months, prior stroke or transient ischemic attack, ERAF, and having previously failed an antiarrhythmic drug were significant predictors of RAF. In persistent AF (PeAF) subgroup, obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and ERAF were significant predictors of RAF. Out of clinical risk scores tested, BASEAF2 had the highest performance with area under the curve of 0.646 (95% confidence interval [0.548, 0.708]; P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: In this single-center retrospective study of CBA, we found only LAD > 40 mm and ERAF to be predictors of RAF. We identified OSA as a potential targetable risk factor in PeAF patients undergoing CBA. Out of risk scores tested for discriminating risk of RAF, BASEAF2 had the best performance.

Early Cardioversion in Atrial Fibrillation: Earlier Is Better, but Not Always and (Maybe) Not Immediately.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia in humans. One of its important features is the tendency to become more persistent over time, even in the absence of underlying progressive heart disease. Conversion and maintenance of sinus rhythm by pharmacological or electrical methods become increasingly difficult the longer the arrhythmia persists. Electrical, mechanical, structural, and autonomic remodeling processes have been implicated in the mechanisms of AF initiation, perpetuation, and progression. Prevention or reversal of these remodeling processes can halt the progression of the disease. Cardioversion is a powerful tool and rhythm control is a widely used strategy in the management of AF. However, important questions remain unanswered regarding not only if, but also when to perform cardioversion. There are observations from past trials and clinical situations that support attempting to restore sinus rhythm, but further prospective randomized clinical trials are needed. Optimal timing of cardioversion remains somewhat uncertain, but it appears to be some time after the first few hours and before the first few months: the earlier, the better, but not always, and maybe not immediately, and it has to be tailored to the clinical situation and its many variables. This review is intended to summarize the evidence supporting early intervention for the prevention of remodeling in patients with AF.

Moderate Sedation Reduces Lab Time Compared to General Anesthesia during Cryoballoon Ablation for AF Without Compromising Safety or Long-Term Efficacy.

BACKGROUND: Cryoballoon ablation (CBA) for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (pAF) can be performed under general anesthesia (GA) or moderate sedation (MS). Our objective was to compare the effectiveness, safety, procedure duration, and time spent in the electrophysiology (EP) laboratory for CBA performed under GA and MS. METHODS: Patients undergoing a first CBA for pAF were identified. Patients received either GA administered by an anesthesiologist or MS with midazolam and fentanyl administered by EP laboratory staff. Total time in laboratory (sum of procedure and nonprocedure time); fluoroscopy time; freedom from documented AF, atrial flutter, and atrial tachycardia (FFAF); acute pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) rate; and 30-day complication rate were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 55 patients received GA and 119 patients received MS. PVI success rate was 100% in GA and 98.1% in MS (P = 0.04). Total laboratory time was longer for GA (280.4 ± 54.1 minutes vs 245.5 ± 54.7 minutes; P < 0.001), related to longer nonprocedure time (92.2 ± 28.8 minutes GA vs 71.0 ± 30.0 minutes MS; P < 0.001), but not procedure time (188.3 ± 49.3 minutes GA vs 174.5 ± 50.2 minutes MS; P = 0.09). FFAF was not significantly different over a median follow-up duration of 0.9 (interquartile range 0.4-1.9) years (61.8% GA vs 63.0% MS; log-rank P = 0.90). There was no significant difference in complication rate. CONCLUSION: Compared to GA, MS during CBA for pAF was independently associated with shorter total EP laboratory time without compromising FFAF or complication rates.

Cryoballoon versus radiofrequency catheter ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation is an established treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF). Cryoballoon ablation (CBA) has emerged as an alternative to radiofrequency ablation (RFA). However, there are few data comparing these modalities for treatment of paroxysmal AF (pAF) in the U.S. POPULATION: The purpose of this study was to compare procedural times, safety, and efficacy of CBA against RFA. METHODS: A single-center prospective cohort study evaluated patients who underwent catheter ablation for pAF using CBA or RFA between January 1, 2010 and October 31, 2013. Patients with prior ablation and those without rhythm follow-up for at least 3 months were excluded. The primary end point was freedom from AF, atrial flutter, and atrial tachycardia (FFAF) >30 seconds after a 3-month blanking period without requirement for antiarrhythmic drugs. We also compared rates of successful pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), fluoroscopy and procedure times, and major complication rates. RESULTS: A total of 201 patients were included (CBA = 101, RFA = 100). The rate of successful PVI was 99.3% in CBA versus 97.4% in RFA (P = 0.08). Procedure times were shorter with CBA (192.9 ± 44.0 minutes vs 283.7 ± 78.0 minutes, P < 0.001) as well as total fluoroscopy times (46.0 ± 22.4 minutes vs 73.0 ± 30.1 minutes, P < 0.001). Overall complication rates were equivalent; however, fewer cardiac perforations occurred with CBA (0% vs 4%, P = 0.042). The 1-year FFAF rates were 60.3% for CBA and 61.1% for RFA (log rank P = 0.93). CONCLUSION: CBA was associated with equivalent 1-year FFAF rate as RFA for pAF. Procedure and fluoroscopy times were shorter for CBA and fewer cardiac perforations occurred.

Safety and feasibility of intravenous sotalol loading for the prevention of ventricular arrhythmias.

BACKGROUND: The use of intravenous (IV) sotalol loading following recent U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of a 1-day loading protocol has reduced the obligatory 3-day hospital stay for sotalol initiation when given orally. Several studies have recently demonstrated the safety and feasibility of IV loading for patients with atrial arrhythmias. However, there is a paucity of data on the feasibility and safety of IV sotalol loading for patients with ventricular arrhythmias. This study aims to assess the safety, feasibility, and length of stay (LOS) outcomes of IV sotalol loading for the prevention of ventricular arrhythmias. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of all patients undergoing IV sotalol loading and oral sotalol initiation for ventricular arrhythmias, or IV sotalol loading for atrial arrhythmias between August 2021 and December 2023 at Northwestern University. Baseline characteristics, success of sotalol initiation/loading, changes in heart rate (HR) and QT/QTc, safety, and LOS were compared between patients undergoing sotalol loading/initiation for ventricular arrhythmias (IV vs. PO) and between patients undergoing IV sotalol loading for ventricular arrhythmias vs. for atrial arrhythmias. RESULTS: A total of 28 patients underwent sotalol loading/initiation for ventricular arrhythmias (N = 15 IV and N = 13 PO) and 41 patients underwent IV sotalol loading for atrial arrhythmias. Baseline characteristics of congestive heart failure history and left ventricular ejection fraction were worse in the ventricular arrhythmias group. There was no significant difference in the successful completion of IV sotalol loading for ventricular arrhythmias compared to oral sotalol initiation for ventricular arrhythmias or IV sotalol loading for atrial arrhythmias (86.7% vs. 92.3% vs. 90.2%, p = 0.88). There was a significant increase in ΔQTc following IV sotalol infusion for ventricular arrhythmias compared to following PO sotalol initiation for ventricular arrhythmias (46.4 ± 29.2 ms vs. 8.9 ± 32.6 ms, p = 0.004) and following IV sotalol infusion for atrial arrhythmias (46.4 ± 29.2 ms vs. 24.0 ± 25.1 ms, p = 0.018). ΔHR following IV sotalol infusion for ventricular arrhythmias was similar to ΔHR following PO sotalol initiation for ventricular arrhythmias and ΔHR following IV sotalol infusion for atrial arrhythmias (- 7.5 ± 8.7 bpm vs. - 8.5 ± 13.9 bpm vs. - 8.3 ± 13.2 bpm, p = 0.87). There were no significant differences in discontinuation for QTc prolongation (6.7% vs. 1.7% vs. 2.4%, p = 0.64) and bradycardia (13.3% vs. 7.7% vs. 9.8%, p = 0.88) between IV sotalol loading for ventricular arrhythmias, PO sotalol initiation for ventricular arrhythmias, and IV sotalol loading for atrial arrhythmias. There were no instances of hypotension, life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias, heart failure, or death. Length of stay was significantly shorter for IV sotalol loading compared to PO sotalol initiation for ventricular arrhythmias (1.1 ± 0.36 days vs. 4.2 ± 1.0 days, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: IV sotalol loading appears feasible and safe for use in ventricular arrhythmias and results in a decreased length of stay. Despite increased comorbidities and greater increase in QTc interval following IV sotalol infusion in the ventricular arrhythmias group, there were no significant differences in successful completion of loading or adverse outcomes when compared to PO sotalol initiation for ventricular arrhythmias and IV loading for atrial arrhythmias.

Validation of the SCALE-CryoAF risk model to predict very late return of atrial fibrillation after cryoballoon ablation.

BACKGROUND: To date, few risk models have been validated to predict recurrent atrial fibrillation (AF) >1 year after ablation. The SCALE-CryoAF score was previously derived to predict very late return of AF (VLRAF) >1 year following cryoballoon ablation (CBA), with strong predictive ability. In this study, we aim to validate the SCALE-CryoAF score for VLRAF after CBA in a novel patient cohort. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained single-center database was performed. Inclusion criteria were pulmonary vein isolation using CBA 2017-2020. Exclusion criteria included prior ablation, <1-year follow-up, lack of pre-CBA echocardiogram, additional ablation lesion sets, and documented AF recurrence 90-365 days post-CBA. The area under the curve (AUC) of SCALE-CryoAF was compared to the derivation value and other established risk models. RESULTS: Among 469 CBA performed, 241 (61% male, 62.8 ±11.7 years old) cases were included in analysis. There were 37 (15.4%) patients who developed VLRAF. Patients with VLRAF had a higher SCALE-CryoAF score (VLRAF 5.4 ± 2.7; no VLRAF 3.1 ± 2.9; p<0.001). SCALE-CryoAF was linearly associated with VLRAF (y=14.35x-11.72, R2=0.99), and a score > 5 had a 32.7% risk of VLRAF. The SCALE-CryoAF risk model predicted VLRAF with an AUC of 0.74, which was similar to the derivation value (AUCderivation: 0.73) and statistically superior to MB-LATER, CHA2DS2-VASc, and CHADS2 scores. CONCLUSIONS: The current analysis validates the ability of SCALE-CryoAF to predict VLRAF after CBA in a novel patient cohort. Patients with a high SCALE-CryoAF score should be monitored closely for recurrent AF >1 year following CBA.

Risk of Adverse Outcomes Associated With Cardiac Sarcoidosis Diagnostic Schemes.

BACKGROUND: Multiple cardiac sarcoidosis (CS) diagnostic schemes have been published. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to evaluate the association of different CS diagnostic schemes with adverse outcomes. The diagnostic schemes evaluated were 1993, 2006, and 2017 Japanese criteria and the 2014 Heart Rhythm Society criteria. METHODS: Data were collected from the Cardiac Sarcoidosis Consortium, an international registry of CS patients. Outcome events were any of the following: all-cause mortality, left ventricular assist device placement, heart transplantation, and appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy. Logistic regression analysis evaluated the association of outcomes with each CS diagnostic scheme. RESULTS: A total of 587 subjects met the following criteria: 1993 Japanese (n = 310, 52.8%), 2006 Japanese (n = 312, 53.2%), 2014 Heart Rhythm Society (n = 480, 81.8%), and 2017 Japanese (n = 112, 19.1%). Patients who met the 1993 criteria were more likely to experience an event than patients who did not (n = 109 of 310, 35.2% vs n = 59 of 277, 21.3%; OR: 2.00; 95% CI: 1.38-2.90; P < 0.001). Similarly, patients who met the 2006 criteria were more likely to have an event than patients who did not (n = 116 of 312, 37.2% vs n = 52 of 275, 18.9%; OR: 2.54; 95% CI: 1.74-3.71; P < 0.001). There was no statistically significant association between the occurrence of an event and whether a patient met the 2014 or the 2017 criteria (OR: 1.39; 95% CI: 0.85-2.27; P = 0.18 or OR: 1.51; 95% CI: 0.97-2.33; P = 0.067, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: CS patients who met the 1993 and the 2006 criteria had higher odds of adverse clinical outcomes. Future research is needed to prospectively evaluate existing diagnostic schemes and develop new risk models for this complex disease.

QT-RR hysteresis is caused by differential autonomic states during exercise and recovery.

QT-RR hysteresis is characterized by longer QT intervals at a given RR interval while heart rates are increasing during exercise and shorter QT intervals at the same RR interval while heart rates are decreasing during recovery. It has been attributed to a lagging QT response to different directional changes in RR interval during exercise and recovery. Twenty control subjects (8 males, age 51 ± 6 yr), 16 subjects with type 2 diabetes (12 males, age 56 ± 8 yr), 71 subjects with coronary artery disease (CAD) and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (≥50%) (51 males, age 59 ± 12 yr), and 17 CAD subjects with depressed LVEF (<50%) (13 males, age 57 ± 10 yr) underwent two 16-min exercise tests followed by recovery. In session 2, parasympathetic blockade with atropine (0.04 mg/kg) was achieved at end exercise. QT-RR hysteresis was quantified as: 1) the area bounded by the QT-RR relationships for exercise and recovery in the range of the minimum RR interval at peak exercise to the minimum RR interval + 100 ms and 2) the difference in QT interval duration between exercise and recovery at the minimum RR interval achieved during peak exercise plus 50 ms (ΔQT). The effect of parasympathetic blockade was assessed by substituting the QT-RR relationship after parasympathetic blockade. QT-RR hysteresis was positive in all groups at baseline and reversed by parasympathetic blockade (P < 0.01). We conclude that QT-RR hysteresis is not caused by different directional changes in RR interval during exercise and recovery. Instead, it is predominantly mediated by differential autonomic nervous system effects as the heart rate increases during exercise vs. as it decreases during recovery.