Open-state structure and pore gating mechanism of the cardiac sodium channel.

The heartbeat is initiated by voltage-gated sodium channel NaV1.5, which opens rapidly and triggers the cardiac action potential; however, the structural basis for pore opening remains unknown. Here, we blocked fast inactivation with a mutation and captured the elusive open-state structure. The fast inactivation gate moves away from its receptor, allowing asymmetric opening of pore-lining S6 segments, which bend and rotate at their intracellular ends to dilate the activation gate to ∼10 Å diameter. Molecular dynamics analyses predict physiological rates of Na+ conductance. The open-state pore blocker propafenone binds in a high-affinity pose, and drug-access pathways are revealed through the open activation gate and fenestrations. Comparison with mutagenesis results provides a structural map of arrhythmia mutations that target the activation and fast inactivation gates. These results give atomic-level insights into molecular events that underlie generation of the action potential, open-state drug block, and fast inactivation of cardiac sodium channels, which initiate the heartbeat.

Impact of early vs. delayed atrial fibrillation catheter ablation on atrial arrhythmia recurrences.

BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation is an effective strategy in atrial fibrillation (AF). However, its timing in the course of management remains unclear. The aim of this study was to determine if an early vs. delayed AF ablation strategy is associated with differences in arrhythmia outcomes during 12-month follow-up. METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred patients with symptomatic AF referred to a tertiary centre for management were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either an early ablation strategy (within 1 month of recruitment) or a delayed ablation strategy (optimized medical therapy followed by catheter ablation at 12 months post recruitment). The primary endpoint was atrial arrhythmia free survival at 12 months post-ablation. Secondary outcomes included: (i) AF burden, (ii) AF burden by AF phenotype, and (iii) antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) use at 12 months. Overall, 89 patients completed the study protocol (Early vs. Delayed: 48 vs. 41). Mean age was 59 ± 12.9 years (29% women). Pulmonary vein isolation was achieved in 100% of patients. At 12 months, 56.3% of patients in the early ablation group were free from recurrent arrhythmia, compared with 58.6% in the delayed ablation group (HR 1.12, 95% CI 0.59-2.13, P = 0.7). All secondary outcomes showed no significant difference including median AF burden (Early vs. Delayed: 0% [IQR 3.2] vs. 0% [5], P = 0.66), median AF burden amongst paroxysmal AF patients (0% [IQR 1.1] vs. 0% [4.5], P = 0.78), or persistent AF patients (0% [IQR 22.8] vs. 0% [5.6], P = 0.45) or AAD use (33% vs. 37%, P = 0.8). CONCLUSION: Compared with an early ablation strategy, delaying AF ablation by 12 months for AAD management did not result in reduced ablation efficacy.

Effect of dronedarone vs. placebo on atrial fibrillation progression: a post hoc analysis from ATHENA trial.

AIMS: This post hoc analysis of the ATHENA trial (NCT00174785) assessed the effect of dronedarone on the estimated burden of atrial fibrillation (AF)/atrial flutter (AFL) progression to presumed permanent AF/AFL, and regression to sinus rhythm (SR), compared with placebo. METHODS AND RESULTS: The burden of AF/AFL was estimated by a modified Rosendaal method using available electrocardiograms (ECG). Cumulative incidence of permanent AF/AFL (defined as ≥6 months of AF/AFL until end of study) or permanent SR (defined as ≥6 months of SR until end of study) were calculated using Kaplan-Meier estimates. A log-rank test was used to assess statistical significance. Hazard ratios (HRs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using a Cox model, adjusted for treatment group. Of the 4439 patients included in this analysis, 2208 received dronedarone, and 2231 placebo. Baseline and clinical characteristics were well balanced between groups. Overall, 304 (13.8%) dronedarone-treated patients progressed to permanent AF/AFL compared with 455 (20.4%) treated with placebo (P < 0.0001). Compared with those receiving placebo, patients receiving dronedarone had a lower cumulative incidence of permanent AF/AFL (log-rank P < 0.001; HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.56-0.75), a higher cumulative incidence of permanent SR (log-rank P < 0.001; HR: 1.19; 95% CI: 1.09-1.29), and a lower estimated AF/AFL burden over time (P < 0.01 from Day 14 to Month 21). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that dronedarone could be a useful antiarrhythmic drug for early rhythm control due to less AF/AFL progression and more regression to SR vs. placebo, potentially reflecting reverse remodeling. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00174785.

Negative Inotropic Effects of Class I Antiarrhythmics on Guinea Pig Ventricular Myocardium: Correlation with L-Type Ca2+ Channel Blockade.

The negative inotropic effects of nine Vaughan Williams class I antiarrhythmic drugs were examined in guinea pig ventricular tissue preparations. The drugs decreased the contractile force of papillary muscles with different potencies: the potency order was propafenone > aprindine > cibenzoline > flecainide > ranolazine > disopyramide > pilsicainide > mexiletine > GS-458967. The potency of drugs correlated with the reported IC50 values to block the L-type Ca2+ channel rather than the Na+ channel. The effects of drugs were roughly the same when examined under a high extracellular K+ solution, which inactivates the Na+ channel. Furthermore, the attenuation of the extracellular Ca2+-induced positive inotropy was strong with propafenone, moderate with cibenzoline, and weak with pilsicainide. These results indicate that the negative inotropic effects of class I antiarrhythmic drugs can be largely explained by their blockade of the L-type Ca2+ channel.

What Is the Optimal Digoxin Level? Challenging Case of Fetal Atrial Flutter Treatment in a Monochorionic Diamniotic Twin.

Background: Atrial flutter is an infrequent yet potentially fatal arrhythmia. Digoxin is the preferred first-line treatment for fetal atrial flutter due to its efficacy and favorable safety profile. The optimal digoxin serum target level for neonatal atrial flutter management remains uncertain, with the standard target level ranging from 1.0 to 2.0 ng/mL due to potential toxicity concerns above this threshold. Case Presentation: We present a case of atrial flutter in a fetus within a monochorionic diamniotic (MCDA) twin pregnancy that was successfully managed using a higher-than-standard target level of digoxin. A 34-year-old nulliparous woman was referred to our institution at 31 + 3 weeks of gestation due to fetal distress in an MCDA twin pregnancy. Fetal echocardiography revealed a ventricular rate of 214 bpm in twin A, while twin B exhibited no abnormal findings. Conclusions: Our case highlights a distinct correlation between the serum digoxin level and its impact on atrial flutter. A higher target serum level of digoxin may be necessary to achieve sinus conversion due to the unique maternal and fetal circulatory characteristics in MCDA pregnancies.

The Dependence of the Electrophysiological Effects of Class III Antiarrhythmic Drug Refralon on the Frequency of Myocardium Activation.

We studied the frequency dependence of the effects of the novel Russian class III antiarrhythmic drug refralon on the duration of action potentials (AP) in rabbit ventricular myocardium. The absence of an inverse frequency dependence of AP prolongation was demonstrated: the effects of refralon at stimulation frequency of 1 Hz were stronger than at 0.1 Hz. The patch-clamp experiments with recording of rapid delayed rectifier potassium current IKr in a heterologous expression system showed that the blocking effect of refralon developed significantly faster at 2 Hz depolarization frequency than at 0.2 Hz. This feature of refralon distinguishes it among the majority of other class III drugs (sotalol, dofetilide, E-4031) and explains the relatively high safety of this drug together with its high efficacy.

Interventions Associated With Prospective Pharmacist Evaluation of Scheduled Admissions for Dofetilide Initiation.

Background: Initiation of dofetilide requires hospital admission because of its proarrhythmic risk. To reduce the risk of adverse events associated with dofetilide, our institution has a standard operating protocol for dofetilide initiation. Regardless, patients are sometimes admitted for dofetilide initiation with unaddressed pharmacotherapy concerns that may delay therapy initiation and/or increase the risk for adverse events. Objective: To characterize interventions associated with pharmacist evaluation of scheduled dofetilide admissions prior to hospitalization. Methods: Patients scheduled for dofetilide initiation were evaluated by a pharmacist prior to admission. Identified interventions were categorized into the following recommendations: (1) against the use of dofetilide; (2) dofetilide starting dose adjustment; (3) appropriate washout of previous antiarrhythmic drug; (4) transesophageal echocardiogram prior to dofetilide initiation; (5) discontinuation or dose adjustment of interacting drug; (6) electrolyte supplementation upon discharge; (7) other intervention. The primary outcome measure was the frequency and types of identified and accepted interventions. Results: Twenty-two patients were evaluated during the 9-month study period. Fourteen interventions were identified, 13 of which were accepted by an electrophysiology provider. The most common intervention was for recommendation of a transesophageal echocardiogram prior to initiating dofetilide because of inadequate oral anticoagulation (n = 6). Other accepted interventions were for discontinuation or dose adjustment of interacting drug (n = 3), dofetilide starting dose adjustment (n = 2), electrolyte supplementation upon discharge (n = 2), and remeasurement of interventricular septal wall thickness (n = 1). Conclusion: Pharmacist evaluation of scheduled dofetilide admissions prior to hospitalization can serve to identify and resolve pharmacotherapy concerns related to dofetilide use.

Ablation Versus Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Failure: Results From the CABANA Trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with heart failure and atrial fibrillation (AF), several clinical trials have reported improved outcomes, including freedom from AF recurrence, quality of life, and survival, with catheter ablation. This article describes the treatment-related outcomes of the AF patients with heart failure enrolled in the CABANA trial (Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation). METHODS: The CABANA trial randomized 2204 patients with AF who were ≥65 years old or <65 years old with ≥1 risk factor for stroke at 126 sites to ablation with pulmonary vein isolation or drug therapy including rate or rhythm control drugs. Of these, 778 (35%) had New York Heart Association class >II at baseline and form the subject of this article. The CABANA trial's primary end point was a composite of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. RESULTS: Of the 778 patients with heart failure enrolled in CABANA, 378 were assigned to ablation and 400 to drug therapy. Ejection fraction at baseline was available for 571 patients (73.0%), and 9.3% of these had an ejection fraction <40%, whereas 11.7% had ejection fractions between 40% and 50%. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the ablation arm had a 36% relative reduction in the primary composite end point (hazard ratio, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.41-0.99]) and a 43% relative reduction in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.33-0.96]) compared with drug therapy alone over a median follow-up of 48.5 months. AF recurrence was decreased with ablation (hazard ratio, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.42-0.74]). The adjusted mean difference for the AFEQT (Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality of Life) summary score averaged over the entire 60-month follow-up was 5.0 points, favoring the ablation arm (95% CI, 2.5-7.4 points), and the MAFSI (Mayo Atrial Fibrillation-Specific Symptom Inventory) frequency score difference was -2.0 points, favoring ablation (95% CI, -2.9 to -1.2). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with AF enrolled in the CABANA trial who had clinically diagnosed stable heart failure at trial entry, catheter ablation produced clinically important improvements in survival, freedom from AF recurrence, and quality of life relative to drug therapy. These results, obtained in a cohort most of whom had preserved left ventricular function, require independent trial verification. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00911508; Unique identifier: NCT0091150.

Economics and outcomes of sotalol in-patient dosing approaches in patients with atrial fibrillation.

INTRODUCTION: There exists variability in the administration of in-patient sotalol therapy for symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF). The impact of this variability on patient in-hospital and 30-day posthospitalization costs and outcomes is not known. Also, the cost impact of intravenous sotalol, which can accelerate drug loading to therapeutic levels, is unknown. METHODS: One hundred and thirty-three AF patients admitted for oral sotalol initiation at an Intermountain Healthcare Hospital from January 2017 to December 2018 were included. Patient and dosing characteristics were described descriptively and the impact of dosing schedule was correlated with daily hospital costs/clinical outcomes during the index hospitalization and for 30 days. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services reimbursement for 3-day sotalol initiation is $9263.51. Projections of cost savings were made considering a 1-day load using intravenous sotalol that costs $2500.00 to administer. RESULTS: The average age was 70.3 ± 12.3 years and 60.2% were male with comorbidities of hypertension (83%), diabetes (36%), and coronary artery disease (53%). The mean ejection fraction was 59.9 ± 7.8% and the median corrected QT interval was 453.7 ± 37.6 ms before sotalol dosing. No ventricular arrhythmias developed, but bradycardia (<60 bpm) was observed in 37.6% of patients. The average length of stay was 3.9 ± 4.6 (median: 2.2) days. Postdischarge outcomes and rehospitalization rates stratified by length of stay were similar. The cost per day was estimated at $2931.55 (1. $2931.55, 2. $5863.10, 3. $8794.65, 4. $11 726.20). CONCLUSIONS: In-patient oral sotalol dosing is markedly variable and results in the potential of both cost gain and loss to a hospital. In consideration of estimated costs, there is the potential for $871.55 cost savings compared to a 2-day oral load and $3803.10 compared to a 3-day oral load.

Efficacy and safety of dronedarone across age and sex subgroups: a post hoc analysis of the ATHENA study among patients with non-permanent atrial fibrillation/flutter.

AIMS: Age and sex may impact the efficacy of antiarrhythmic drugs on cardiovascular outcomes and arrhythmia recurrences in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We report on a post hoc analysis of the ATHENA study (NCT00174785), which examined cardiovascular outcomes in patients with non-permanent AF treated with dronedarone vs. placebo. METHODS AND RESULTS: Efficacy and safety of dronedarone were assessed in patients according to age and sex. Baseline characteristics were comparable across subgroups, except for cardiovascular comorbidities, which were more frequent with increasing age. Dronedarone significantly reduced the risk of cardiovascular hospitalization or death due to any cause among patients 65-74 [n = 1830; hazard ratio (HR) 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60-0.83; P < 0.0001] and ≥75 (n = 1925; HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65-0.88; P = 0.0002) years old and among males (n = 2459; HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.64-0.84; P < 0.00001) and females (n = 2169; HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.67-0.89; P = 0.0002); outcomes were similar for time to AF/AFL recurrence. Among patients aged <65 years (n = 873), cardiovascular hospitalization or death due to any cause with dronedarone vs. placebo was associated with an HR of 0.89 (95% CI 0.71-1.11; P = 0.3). The incidence of all treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and TEAEs leading to treatment discontinuation was comparable among males and females, and increased with increasing age. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the use of dronedarone for the improvement of clinical outcomes among patients aged ≥65 years and regardless of sex.

Influence of atrial fibrillation type on outcomes of ablation vs. drug therapy: results from CABANA.

AIMS: Influence of atrial fibrillation (AF) type on outcomes seen with catheter ablation vs. drug therapy is incompletely understood. This study assesses the impact of AF type on treatment outcomes in the Catheter Ablation vs. Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation Trial (CABANA). METHODS AND RESULTS: CABANA randomized 2204 patients ≥65 years old or <65 with at least one risk factor for stroke to catheter ablation or drug therapy. Of these, 946 (42.9%) had paroxysmal AF (PAF), 1042 (47.3%) had persistent AF (PersAF), and 215 (9.8%) had long-standing persistent AF (LSPAF) at baseline. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. Symptoms were measured with the Mayo AF-Specific Symptom Inventory (MAFSI), and quality of life was measured with the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality of Life (AFEQT). Comparisons are reported by intention to treat. Compared with drug therapy alone, catheter ablation produced a 19% relative risk reduction in the primary endpoint for PAF {adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 0.81 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.50, 1.30]}, and a 17% relative reduction for PersAF (aHR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.56, 1.22). For LSPAF, the ablation relative effect was a 7% reduction (aHR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.36, 2.44). Ablation was more effective than drug therapy at reducing first AF recurrence in all AF types: by 51% for PAF (aHR: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.39, 0.62), by 47% for PersAF (aHR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.43,0.65), and by 36% for LSPAF (aHR 0.64, 95% CI 0.41,1.00). Ablation was associated with greater improvement in symptoms, with the mean difference between groups in the MAFSI frequency score favouring ablation over 5 years of follow-up in all subgroups: PAF had a clinically significant -1.9-point difference (95% CI: -1.2 to -2.6); PersAF a -0.9 difference (95% CI: -0.2 to -1.6); LSPAF a clinically significant difference of -1.6 points (95% CI: -0.1 to -3.1). Ablation was also associated with greater improvement in quality of life in all subgroups, with the AFEQT overall score in PAF patients showing a clinically significant 5.3-point improvement (95% CI: 3.3 to 7.3) over drug therapy alone over 5 years of follow-up, PersAF a 1.7-point difference (95% CI: 0.0 to 3.7), and LSPAF a 3.1-point difference (95% CI: -1.6 to 7.8). CONCLUSION: Prognostic treatment effects of catheter ablation compared with drug therapy on the primary and major secondary clinical endpoints did not differ consequentially by AF subtype. With regard to decreases in AF recurrence and improving quality of life, ablation was more effective than drug therapy in all three AF type subgroups. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT00911508.

Cryoballoon ablation vs. antiarrhythmic drugs: first-line therapy for patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.

AIMS: Treatment guidelines for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) suggest that patients should be managed with an antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) before undergoing catheter ablation (CA). This study evaluated whether pulmonary vein isolation employing cryoballoon CA is superior to AAD therapy for the prevention of atrial arrhythmia (AA) recurrence in rhythm control naive patients with paroxysmal AF (PAF). METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 218 treatment naive patients with symptomatic PAF were randomized (1 : 1) to cryoballoon CA (Arctic Front Advance, Medtronic) or AAD (Class I or III) and followed for 12 months. The primary endpoint was ≥1 episode of recurrent AA (AF, atrial flutter, or atrial tachycardia) >30 s after a prespecified 90-day blanking period. Secondary endpoints included the rate of serious adverse events (SAEs) and recurrence of symptomatic palpitations (evaluated via patient diaries). Freedom from AA was achieved in 82.2% of subjects in the cryoballoon arm and 67.6% of subjects in the AAD arm (HR = 0.48, P = 0.01). There were no group differences in the time-to-first (HR = 0.76, P = 0.28) or overall incidence [incidence rate ratio (IRR)=0.79, P = 0.28] of SAEs. The incidence rate of symptomatic palpitations was lower in the cryoballoon (7.61 days/year) compared with the AAD arm (18.96 days/year; IRR = 0.40, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Cryoballoon CA was superior to AAD therapy, significantly reducing AA recurrence in treatment naive patients with PAF. Additionally, cryoballoon CA was associated with lower symptom recurrence and a similar rate of SAEs compared with AAD therapy.

Synergistic antiarrhythmic effect of inward rectifier current inhibition and pulmonary vein isolation in a 3D computer model for atrial fibrillation.

AIMS: Recent clinical studies showed that antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) treatment and pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) synergistically reduce atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrences after initially successful ablation. Among newly developed atrial-selective AADs, inhibitors of the G-protein-gated acetylcholine-activated inward rectifier current (IKACh) were shown to effectively suppress AF in an experimental model but have not yet been evaluated clinically. We tested in silico whether inhibition of inward rectifier current or its combination with PVI reduces AF inducibility. METHODS AND RESULTS: We simulated the effect of inward rectifier current blockade (IK blockade), PVI, and their combination on AF inducibility in a detailed three-dimensional model of the human atria with different degrees of fibrosis. IK blockade was simulated with a 30% reduction of its conductivity. Atrial fibrillation was initiated using incremental pacing applied at 20 different locations, in both atria. IK blockade effectively prevented AF induction in simulations without fibrosis as did PVI in simulations without fibrosis and with moderate fibrosis. Both interventions lost their efficacy in severe fibrosis. The combination of IK blockade and PVI prevented AF in simulations without fibrosis, with moderate fibrosis, and even with severe fibrosis. The combined therapy strongly decreased the number of fibrillation waves, due to a synergistic reduction of wavefront generation rate while the wavefront lifespan remained unchanged. CONCLUSION: Newly developed blockers of atrial-specific inward rectifier currents, such as IKAch, might prevent AF occurrences and when combined with PVI effectively supress AF recurrences in human.

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Efficiency and safety of using the modified protocol for the administration of the domestic class III antiarrhythmic drug for the relief of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation].

AIM: Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of the modified refralon administration protocol for the relief of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included 39 patients (19 men, mean age 6312.8 years). All patients, after excluding contraindications in the intensive care unit, were injected intravenously with refralon at an initial dose of 5 mg/kg. If AF was preserved and there were no contraindications, after 15 min, repeated administration was performed at a dose of 5 mg/kg (total dose of 10 mg/kg). After another 15 min, while maintaining AF and the absence of contraindications, the third injection of the drug was performed at a dose of 10 mg/kg (total dose of 20 mg/kg). In the absence of relief and the absence of contraindications, another injection of refralon at a dose of 10 mg/kg was performed after another 15 min (in this case, the maximum total dose of 30 mg/kg was reached). After each injected bolus and before the introduction of the next one, the ECG parameters and the general condition of the patient were assessed. The patient was monitored for 24 hours to exclude the arrhythmogenic effect and other possible adverse events. RESULTS: Restoration of sinus rhythm (SR) was noted in 37 patients out of 39 (95%). Of these, 19 people (48.7%) had SR recovery after the administration of a minimum dose of refralone of 5 mg/kg. The effectiveness of the total dose of 10 mg/kg was 76.9%, the dose of 20 mg/kg was 89.7%, and the dose of 30 mg/kg was 95%. Only two patients did not recover HR after administration of the maximum dose of refralon 30 mg/kg. Pathological prolongation of the QTc interval (500 ms) was recorded in 5% of patients. Not a single case of ventricular arrhythmogenic action (induction of Torsade de pointes) has been reported. Bradyarrhythmias (pauses, bradycardia) were registered in 13% of cases, were of a transient nature. CONCLUSION: Refralon has a high efficiency of relief (95%) of paroxysmal AF, while in almost half of cases (48.7%), SR recovery is achieved using the minimum dose of refralon 5 mg/kg. Despite the prolongation of the QTc500 ms recorded in 5% of cases, none of the patients developed Torsade de pointes after administration of the drug.

Dronedarone treatment following cardioversion in patients with atrial fibrillation/flutter: A post hoc analysis of the EURIDIS and ADONIS trials.

INTRODUCTION: The phase 3 EURIDIS and ADONIS studies evaluated dronedarone for atrial fibrillation (AF)/atrial flutter (AFL) recurrence in patients with nonpermanent AF. Here we assessed whether patient characteristics and/or treatment outcomes in these studies differed based on the need for cardioversion before randomization. METHODS: Time to adjudicated first AF/AFL recurrence, symptomatic recurrence, cardiovascular hospitalization/death, and AF hospitalization, and safety were assessed by cardioversion status. RESULTS: Of 1237 patients randomized (2:1 dronedarone:placebo), 364 required baseline cardioversion (dronedarone 243, placebo 121). Patients requiring cardioversion had a greater prevalence of cardiovascular comorbidities and shorter times to first AF/AFL recurrence compared with those not requiring cardioversion. Dronedarone was associated with longer median time to first AF/AFL recurrence vs placebo regardless of cardioversion status (cardioversion: 50 vs 15 days, hazard ratio [HR] 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-0.97; P = .02; non-cardioversion: 150 vs 77 days, HR 0.76; 95% CI, 0.64-0.90; P < .01). Dronedarone was similarly associated with prolonged median time to symptomatic recurrence vs placebo in the cardioversion (347 vs 87 days, HR 0.65; 95% CI, 0.49-0.87) and non-cardioversion (288 vs 120 days, HR 0.74; 95% CI, 0.62-0.90) populations. Risk of cardiovascular hospitalization/death and first AF hospitalization was lower with dronedarone vs placebo regardless of cardioversion status, but differences were not statistically significant. The safety of dronedarone was similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: Patients requiring baseline cardioversion represent a distinct population, having more underlying cardiovascular disease and experiencing a shorter time to AF/AFL recurrences. Dronedarone was associated with improved efficacy vs placebo regardless of cardioversion status.

Elimination of Benign Ventricular Premature Beats or Ventricular Tachycardia with Catheter Ablation versus Two Different Optimal Antiarrhythmic Drug Treatment Regimens (Sotalol or Verapamil/Flecainide).

BACKGROUND: Symptomatic idiopathic ventricular arrhythmias (VA), including premature beats (VPB) and nonsustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) are commonly encountered arrhythmias. Although these VA are usually benign, their treatment can be a challenge to primary and secondary health care providers. Mainstay treatment is comprised of antiarrhythmic drugs (AAD) and, in case of drug intolerance or failure, patients are referred for catheter ablation to tertiary health care centers. These patients require extensive medical attention and drug regimens usually have disappointing results. A direct comparison between the efficacy of the most potent AAD and primary catheter ablation in these patients is lacking. The ECTOPIA trial will evaluate the efficacy of 2 pharmacological strategies and 1 interventional approach to: suppress the VA burden, improve the quality of life (QoL), and safety. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesize that flecainide/verapamil combination and catheter ablation are both superior to sotalol in suppressing VA in patients with symptomatic idiopathic VA. STUDY DESIGN: The Elimination of Ventricular Premature Beats with Catheter Ablation versus Optimal Antiarrhythmic Drug Treatment (ECTOPIA) trial is a randomized, multicenter, prospective clinical trial to compare the efficacy of catheter ablation versus optimal AAD treatment with sotalol or flecainide/verapamil. One hundred eighty patients with frequent symptomatic VA in the absence of structural heart disease or underlying cardiac ischemia who are eligible for catheter ablation with an identifiable monomorphic VA origin with a burden ≥5% on 24-h ambulatory rhythm monitoring will be included. Patients will be randomized in a 1:1:1 fashion. The primary endpoint is defined as >80% reduction of the VA burden on 24-h ambulatory Holter monitoring. After reaching the primary endpoint, patients randomized to one of the 2 AAD arms will undergo a cross-over to the other AAD treatment arm to explore differences in drug efficacy and QoL in individual patients. Due to the use of different AAD (with and without ß-blocking characteristics) we will be able to explore the influence of alterations in sympathetic tone on VA burden reduction in different subgroups. Finally, this study will assess the safety of treatment with 2 different AAD and ablation of VA.

Cardiac electrophysiology consultative experience at the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has greatly altered the practice of cardiac electrophysiology around the world for the foreseeable future. Professional organizations have provided guidance for practitioners, but real-world examples of the consults and responsibilities cardiac electrophysiologists face during a surge of COVID-19 patients is lacking. METHODS: In this observational case series we report on 29 consecutive inpatient electrophysiology consultations at a major academic medical center in New York City, the epicenter of the pandemic in the United States, during a 2 week period from March 30-April 12, 2020, when 80% of hospital beds were occupied by COVID-19 patients, and the New York City metropolitan area accounted for 10% of COVID-19 cases worldwide. RESULTS: Reasons for consultation included: Atrial tachyarrhythmia (31%), cardiac implantable electronic device management (28%), bradycardia (14%), QTc prolongation (10%), ventricular arrhythmia (7%), post-transcatheter aortic valve replacement conduction abnormality (3.5%), ventricular pre-excitation (3.5%), and paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia (3.5%). Twenty-four patients (86%) were positive for COVID-19 by nasopharyngeal swab. All elective procedures were canceled, and only one urgent device implantation was performed. Thirteen patients (45%) required in-person evaluation and the remainder were managed remotely. CONCLUSION: Our experience shows that the application of a massive alteration in workflow and personnel forced by the pandemic allowed our team to efficiently address the intersection of COVID-19 with a range of electrophysiology issues. This experience will prove useful as guidance for emerging hot spots or areas affected by future waves of the pandemic.