Statement from the Asia Summit: Current state of arrhythmia care in Asia.

On May 27, 2022, the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society and the Heart Rhythm Society convened a meeting of leaders from different professional societies of healthcare providers committed to arrhythmia care from the Asia Pacific region. The overriding goals of the meeting were to discuss clinical and health policy issues that face each country for providing care for patients with electrophysiologic issues, share experiences and best practices, and discuss potential future solutions. Participants were asked to address a series of questions in preparation for the meeting. The format of the meeting was a series of individual country reports presented by the leaders from each of the professional societies followed by open discussion. The recorded presentations from the Asia Summit can be accessed at https://www.heartrhythm365.org/URL/asiasummit-22. Three major themes arose from the discussion. First, the major clinical problems faced by different countries vary. Although atrial fibrillation is common throughout the region, the most important issues also include more general issues such as hypertension, rheumatic heart disease, tobacco abuse, and management of potentially life-threatening problems such as sudden cardiac arrest or profound bradycardia. Second, there is significant variability in the access to advanced arrhythmia care throughout the region due to differences in workforce availability, resources, drug availability, and national health policies. Third, collaboration in the area already occurs between individual countries, but no systematic regional method for working together is present.

Same-day discharge for atrial fibrillation ablation: outcomes and impact of ablation modality.

AIMS: Same-day discharge is increasingly common after catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF). However, the impact of same-day discharge on healthcare utilization after ablation and whether this differs by ablation modality remains uncertain. We examined the safety, efficacy, and subsequent healthcare utilization of a same-day discharge protocol for AF ablation, including radiofrequency (RF) and cryoballoon ablation, in a contemporary cohort. METHODS AND RESULTS: All consecutive patients for whom full healthcare utilization data were available at two centres and who underwent AF ablation from 2018 to 2019 were included. Same-day discharge was the default strategy for all patients. The efficacy and safety outcomes were proportions of same-day discharge and readmission/emergency room (ER) visits, and post-discharge complications, respectively. Of the 421 patients who underwent AF ablation (mean 63.3 ± 10.2 years, 33% female), 90.5% (381/421) achieved same-day discharge with no difference between RF and cryoballoon ablation (89.8 vs. 95.1%, adjusted P = 0.327). Readmission ≤30 days occurred in 4.8%, with ER visits ≤30 days seen in 26.1% with no difference between ablation modalities (P = 0.634). Patients admitted overnight were more likely to present to the ER (40.0 vs. 24.7% with same-day discharge, P = 0.036). The overall post-discharge complication rate was low at 4/421 (1.0%), with no difference between ablation modality (P = 0.324) and admission/same-day discharge (P = 0.485). CONCLUSION: Same-day discharge can be achieved in a majority of patients undergoing RF or cryoballoon ablation for AF. Healthcare utilization, particularly ER visits, remains high after AF ablation, regardless of ablation modality or same-day discharge.

Incremental value of the signal-averaged ECG for diagnosing arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy.

BACKGROUND: Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) is currently diagnosed using a combination of clinical features, imaging, electrocardiography, and genetic investigations. An abnormal signal-averaged electrocardiogram (SAECG) is defined as a minor diagnostic criterion by the 2010 Task Force Criteria, but doubts remain about the value of this investigation. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the utility of the SAECG in diagnosing ARVC using the Canadian Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy Registry, a population representative registry of probands with ARVC and relatives, less influenced by referral bias. METHODS: Probands with ARVC and family members from the Canadian Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy Registry underwent phenotype review. SAECG parameters were compared individually and in combination between those with varying degrees of ARVC severity and healthy controls (family members of probands with ARVC and unexplained sudden death, free of evidence of cardiac disease). RESULTS: A total of 196 patients with ARVC and 205 controls were included (mean age 44 ± 15 years; 186 of 401 men [46%]). SAECG abnormalities were seen in 83 of 205 controls (40%), 33 of 68 patients with ARVC and mild disease (51%), and 31 of 42 with severe disease (74%). The SAECG associated strongly with imaging abnormalities (major: odds ratio 3.0, 95% confidence interval 1.3-6.9; minor: odds ratio 3.5, 95% confidence interval 0.7-16.5) but not with other aspects of phenotype. Patients carrying pathogenic variants but with minimal phenotype had similar SAECGs to healthy controls (filtered QRS duration 111.2 ± 11.2 ms vs 111 ± 7.6 ms, P = .93; duration of low amplitude signals < 40 µV 32.3 ± 8.9 ms vs 34.2 ± 7.2 ms, P = .32; root mean square of the terminal 40 ms of the filtered QRS complex 43.1 ± 25.2 ms vs 38.2 ± 20.2 ms, P = .38). CONCLUSION: The SAECG appears to be a surrogate marker for structural abnormalities seen on imaging in those with ARVC. Great caution is required in interpreting SAECG findings in those without other corroborating evidence of an ARVC phenotype.

Arrhythmic risk prediction in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy: external validation of the arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy risk calculator.

AIMS: Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) causes ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) and sudden cardiac death (SCD). In 2019, a risk prediction model that estimates the 5-year risk of incident VAs in ARVC was developed (ARVCrisk.com). This study aimed to externally validate this prediction model in a large international multicentre cohort and to compare its performance with the risk factor approach recommended for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) use by published guidelines and expert consensus. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a retrospective cohort of 429 individuals from 29 centres in North America and Europe, 103 (24%) experienced sustained VA during a median follow-up of 5.02 (2.05-7.90) years following diagnosis of ARVC. External validation yielded good discrimination [C-index of 0.70 (95% confidence interval-CI 0.65-0.75)] and calibration slope of 1.01 (95% CI 0.99-1.03). Compared with the three published consensus-based decision algorithms for ICD use in ARVC (Heart Rhythm Society consensus on arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy, International Task Force consensus statement on the treatment of ARVC, and American Heart Association guidelines for VA and SCD), the risk calculator performed better with a superior net clinical benefit below risk threshold of 35%. CONCLUSION: Using a large independent cohort of patients, this study shows that the ARVC risk model provides good prognostic information and outperforms other published decision algorithms for ICD use. These findings support the use of the model to facilitate shared decision making regarding ICD implantation in the primary prevention of SCD in ARVC.

Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy.

Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) encompasses a group of conditions characterized by right ventricular fibrofatty infiltration, with a predominant arrhythmic presentation. First described in the late 1970s and early 1980s, it is now frequently recognized to have biventricular involvement. The prevalence is ∼1:2,000 to 1:5,000, depending on geographic location, and it has a slight male predominance. The diagnosis of ARVC is determined on the basis of fulfillment of task force criteria incorporating electrophysiological parameters, cardiac imaging findings, genetic factors, and histopathologic features. Risk stratification of patients with ARVC aims to identify those who are at increased risk of sudden cardiac death or sustained ventricular tachycardia. Factors including age, sex, electrophysiological features, and cardiac imaging investigations all contribute to risk stratification. The current management of ARVC includes exercise restriction, ß-blocker therapy, consideration for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator insertion, and catheter ablation. This review summarizes our current understanding of ARVC and provides clinicians with a practical approach to diagnosis and management.

A new prediction model for ventricular arrhythmias in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy.

AIMS: Arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy (ARVC) is characterized by ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) and sudden cardiac death (SCD). We aimed to develop a model for individualized prediction of incident VA/SCD in ARVC patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Five hundred and twenty-eight patients with a definite diagnosis and no history of sustained VAs/SCD at baseline, aged 38.2 ± 15.5 years, 44.7% male, were enrolled from five registries in North America and Europe. Over 4.83 (interquartile range 2.44-9.33) years of follow-up, 146 (27.7%) experienced sustained VA, defined as SCD, aborted SCD, sustained ventricular tachycardia, or appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy. A prediction model estimating annual VA risk was developed using Cox regression with internal validation. Eight potential predictors were pre-specified: age, sex, cardiac syncope in the prior 6 months, non-sustained ventricular tachycardia, number of premature ventricular complexes in 24 h, number of leads with T-wave inversion, and right and left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEFs). All except LVEF were retained in the final model. The model accurately distinguished patients with and without events, with an optimism-corrected C-index of 0.77 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73-0.81] and minimal over-optimism [calibration slope of 0.93 (95% CI 0.92-0.95)]. By decision curve analysis, the clinical benefit of the model was superior to a current consensus-based ICD placement algorithm with a 20.3% reduction of ICD placements with the same proportion of protected patients (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Using the largest cohort of patients with ARVC and no prior VA, a prediction model using readily available clinical parameters was devised to estimate VA risk and guide decisions regarding primary prevention ICDs (www.arvcrisk.com).

Predictors of perforation during lead extraction: Results of the Canadian Lead ExtrAction Risk (CLEAR) study.

BACKGROUND: Transvenous lead extraction can have serious adverse events, such as cardiac or vascular perforation. Risk factors have not been well characterized. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to identify factors associated with perforation and death, and to characterize lead extraction in a large contemporary population. METHODS: We performed a retrospective multicenter study examining patients undergoing lead extraction at 8 Canadian institutions from 1996 through 2016. Demographic and clinical data were used to identify variables associated with perforation and mortality using logistic regression modeling. RESULTS: A total of 2325 consecutive patients (age 61.9 ±16.5 years) underwent extraction of 4527 leads. Perforation rate was 2.7% (63/2325) and 30-day mortality was 1.6% (38/2325), with mortality of 0.4% due to perforation (10/2325). Variables associated with perforation included no previous cardiac surgery (odds ratio [OR] 3.33; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.54-7.19; P = .002), female sex (OR 3.27; 95% CI 1.91-5.60; P <.001); left ventricular ejection fraction ≥40% (OR 2.81; 95% CI 1.28-6.14; P = .010); lead age >8 years (OR 2.64; 95% CI 1.52-4.60; P <.001); ≥2 leads extracted (OR 2.49; 95% CI 1.23-5.04; P = .011); and diabetes (OR 2.12; 95% CI 1.16-3.86; P = .014). Variables associated with death included infection as indication for extraction (OR 3.85; 95% CI 1.38-10.73; P = .010); anemia (OR 3.14; 95% CI 1.38-6.61; P = .003), and patient age (OR 1.04; 95% CI 1.01-1.07; P = .012). CONCLUSION: Risk factors associated with perforation in lead extraction include no history of cardiac surgery, female sex, preserved left ventricular ejection fraction, lead age >8 years, ≥2 leads extracted, and diabetes.

Midodrine for the Prevention of Vasovagal Syncope : A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Recurrent vasovagal syncope is common, responds poorly to treatment, and causes physical trauma and poor quality of life. Midodrine prevents hypotension and syncope during tilt tests in patients with vasovagal syncope. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether midodrine can prevent vasovagal syncope in usual clinical conditions. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01456481). SETTING: 25 university hospitals in Canada, the United States, Mexico, and the United Kingdom. PATIENTS: Patients with recurrent vasovagal syncope and no serious comorbid conditions. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to placebo or midodrine and followed for 12 months. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients with at least 1 syncope episode during follow-up. RESULTS: The study included 133 patients who had had a median of 6 syncope episodes in the prior year (median age, 32 years; 73% female). Compared with patients receiving placebo, fewer patients receiving midodrine had at least 1 syncope episode (28 of 66 [42%] vs. 41 of 67 [61%]). The relative risk was 0.69 (95% CI, 0.49 to 0.97; P = 0.035). The absolute risk reduction was 19 percentage points (CI, 2 to 36 percentage points), and the number needed to treat to prevent 1 patient from having syncope was 5.3 (CI, 2.8 to 47.6). The time to first syncope was longer with midodrine (hazard ratio, 0.59 [CI, 0.37 to 0.96]; P = 0.035; log-rank P = 0.031). Adverse effects were similar in both groups. LIMITATION: Small study size, young and healthy patients, relatively short observation period, and high proportion of patients from 1 center. CONCLUSION: Midodrine can reduce the recurrence of syncope in healthy, younger patients with a high syncope burden. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: The Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

Caffeinated energy drinks in the Canadian context: health risk assessment with a focus on cardiovascular effects.

In Canada, caffeinated energy drinks (CEDs) currently sold under Temporary Marketing Authorizations must meet strict eligibility criteria. These criteria, which include compositional and labelling requirements, were developed based on the outcome of a health risk assessment conducted by Health Canada (HC) in 2013. HC updated its assessment by reviewing new information with the focus on potential cardiovascular effects associated with the consumption of CEDs available for sale in Canada. Due to limited data on CED consumption among Canadians to derive accurate exposure information, the composition of a typical CED was characterized to assess the potential effects of single ingredients and synergistic interactions between ingredients on the cardiovascular system. Surveillance data on potential adverse effects related to CED consumption was also analyzed. After extensive review, HC's updated assessment confirms the current risk management approach for CEDs is health protective for Canadian consumers, including the potential for cardiovascular effects. The available evidence supports that moderate consumption (up to 500 mL per day) of a typical CED authorized for sale in Canada is safe for the general population of healthy adults and adolescents. It also re-confirms that vulnerable sub-populations (i.e., children, pregnant and/or breastfeeding women, and caffeine-sensitive individuals) should not consume CEDs. Novelty: Consumption up to 500 mL per day of a typical CED is not associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular effects. Children, pregnant and/or breastfeeding women, and caffeine-sensitive individuals should not consume CEDs.

Sudden Cardiac Death Prediction in Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy: A Multinational Collaboration.

BACKGROUND: Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) is associated with ventricular arrhythmias (VA) and sudden cardiac death (SCD). A model was recently developed to predict incident sustained VA in patients with ARVC. However, since this outcome may overestimate the risk for SCD, we aimed to specifically predict life-threatening VA (LTVA) as a closer surrogate for SCD. METHODS: We assembled a retrospective cohort of definite ARVC cases from 15 centers in North America and Europe. Association of 8 prespecified clinical predictors with LTVA (SCD, aborted SCD, sustained, or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator treated ventricular tachycardia >250 beats per minute) in follow-up was assessed by Cox regression with backward selection. Candidate variables included age, sex, prior sustained VA (≥30s, hemodynamically unstable, or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator treated ventricular tachycardia; or aborted SCD), syncope, 24-hour premature ventricular complexes count, the number of anterior and inferior leads with T-wave inversion, left and right ventricular ejection fraction. The resulting model was internally validated using bootstrapping. RESULTS: A total of 864 patients with definite ARVC (40±16 years; 53% male) were included. Over 5.75 years (interquartile range, 2.77-10.58) of follow-up, 93 (10.8%) patients experienced LTVA including 15 with SCD/aborted SCD (1.7%). Of the 8 prespecified clinical predictors, only 4 (younger age, male sex, premature ventricular complex count, and number of leads with T-wave inversion) were associated with LTVA. Notably, prior sustained VA did not predict subsequent LTVA (P=0.850). A model including only these 4 predictors had an optimism-corrected C-index of 0.74 (95% CI, 0.69-0.80) and calibration slope of 0.95 (95% CI, 0.94-0.98) indicating minimal over-optimism. CONCLUSIONS: LTVA events in patients with ARVC can be predicted by a novel simple prediction model using only 4 clinical predictors. Prior sustained VA and the extent of functional heart disease are not associated with subsequent LTVA events.

Atrial arrhythmias and thromboembolic complications in adults post Fontan surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with Fontan surgery experience late complications in adulthood. We studied the factors associated with the development and maintenance of atrial arrhythmias and thromboembolic complications in an adult population with univentricuar physiology post Fontan surgery. METHODS: Single centre retrospective cohort study of patients ≥18 years of age with Fontan circulation followed at our quaternary care centre for more than 1 year were included. Univariate and multivariate regression models were used where applicable to ascertain clinically significant associations between risk factors and complications. RESULTS: 93 patients were included (age 30.2±8.8 years, 58% men). 28 (30%) had atriopulmonary Fontan connection, 35 (37.6%) had lateral tunnel Fontan and 29 (31.1%) had extracardiac Fontan pathway. After a mean of 7.27±5.1 years, atrial arrhythmia was noted in 37 patients (39.8%), of which 13 developed had atrial fibrillation (14%). The presence of atrial arrhythmia was associated with the number of prior cardiac surgeries/procedures, increasing age and prior atriopulmonary Fontan operation. Thromboembolic events were present in 31 patients (33%); among them 14 had stroke (45%), 3 had transient ischaemic attack (9.7%), 7 had pulmonary embolism (22.6%) and 5 had atrial thrombus with imaging (16.1%). The presence of thromboembolic events was only associated with age and the presence of cirrhosis in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Atrial arrhythmias are common in adults with Fontan circulation at an early age, and are associated with prior surgical history and increasing age. Traditional risk factors may not be associated with atrial arrhythmia or thromboembolism in this cohort.

Guidance for Rebooting Electrophysiology Through the COVID-19 Pandemic From the Heart Rhythm Society and the American Heart Association Electrocardiography and Arrhythmias Committee of the Council on Clinical Cardiology: Endorsed by the American College of Cardiology.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has presented substantial challenges to patient care and impacted health care delivery, including cardiac electrophysiology practice throughout the globe. Based upon the undetermined course and regional variability of the pandemic, there is uncertainty as to how and when to resume and deliver electrophysiology services for arrhythmia patients. This joint document from representatives of the Heart Rhythm Society, American Heart Association, and American College of Cardiology seeks to provide guidance for clinicians and institutions reestablishing safe electrophysiological care. To achieve this aim, we address regional and local COVID-19 disease status, the role of viral screening and serologic testing, return-to-work considerations for exposed or infected health care workers, risk stratification and management strategies based on COVID-19 disease burden, institutional preparedness for resumption of elective procedures, patient preparation and communication, prioritization of procedures, and development of outpatient and periprocedural care pathways.

2019 HRS expert consensus statement on evaluation, risk stratification, and management of arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy: Executive summary.

Arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy (ACM) is an arrhythmogenic disorder of the myocardium not secondary to ischemic, hypertensive, or valvular heart disease. ACM incorporates a broad spectrum of genetic, systemic, infectious, and inflammatory disorders. This designation includes, but is not limited to, arrhythmogenic right/left ventricular cardiomyopathy, cardiac amyloidosis, sarcoidosis, Chagas disease, and left ventricular noncompaction. The ACM phenotype overlaps with other cardiomyopathies, particularly dilated cardiomyopathy with arrhythmia presentation that may be associated with ventricular dilatation and/or impaired systolic function. This expert consensus statement provides the clinician with guidance on evaluation and management of ACM and includes clinically relevant information on genetics and disease mechanisms. PICO questions were utilized to evaluate contemporary evidence and provide clinical guidance related to exercise in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy. Recommendations were developed and approved by an expert writing group, after a systematic literature search with evidence tables, and discussion of their own clinical experience, to present the current knowledge in the field. Each recommendation is presented using the Class of Recommendation and Level of Evidence system formulated by the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association and is accompanied by references and explanatory text to provide essential context. The ongoing recognition of the genetic basis of ACM provides the opportunity to examine the diverse triggers and potential common pathway for the development of disease and arrhythmia.

Effect of Direct Oral Anticoagulants, Warfarin, and Antiplatelet Agents on Risk of Device Pocket Hematoma: Combined Analysis of BRUISE CONTROL 1 and 2.

BACKGROUND: Oral anticoagulant use is common among patients undergoing pacemaker or defibrillator surgery. BRUISE CONTROL (Bridge or Continue Coumadin for Device Surgery Randomized Controlled Trial; NCT00800137) demonstrated that perioperative warfarin continuation reduced clinically significant hematomas (CSH) by 80% compared with heparin bridging (3.5% versus 16%). BRUISE-CONTROL-2 (NCT01675076) observed a similarly low risk of CSH when comparing continued versus interrupted direct oral anticoagulant (2.1% in both groups). Using patient level data from both trials, the current study aims to: (1) evaluate the effect of concomitant antiplatelet therapy on CSH, and (2) understand the relative risk of CSH in patients treated with direct oral anticoagulant versus continued warfarin. METHODS: We analyzed 1343 patients included in BRUISE-CONTROL-1 and BRUISE-CONTROL-2. The primary outcome for both trials was CSH. There were 408 patients identified as having continued either a single or dual antiplatelet agent at the time of device surgery. RESULTS: Antiplatelet use (versus nonuse) was associated with CSH in 9.8% versus 4.3% of patients (P<0.001), and remained a strong independent predictor after multivariable adjustment (odds ratio, 1.965; 95% CI, 1.202-3.213; P=0.0071). In multivariable analysis, adjusting for antiplatelet use, there was no significant difference in CSH observed between direct oral anticoagulant use compared with continued warfarin (odds ratio, 0.858; 95% CI, 0.375-1.963; P=0.717). CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant antiplatelet therapy doubled the risk of CSH during device surgery. No difference in CSH was found between direct oral anticoagulant versus continued warfarin. In anticoagulated patients undergoing elective or semi-urgent device surgery, the patient specific benefit/risk of holding an antiplatelet should be carefully considered. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: NCT00800137, NCT01675076.