Real-world assessment of multipolar and point-by-point mapping for premature ventricular contraction ablation.

AIMS: We aimed to assess the acute and midterm efficacy of premature ventricular contraction (PVC) ablation guided by multielectrode and point-by-point (PbP) mapping. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is a retrospective, international multicentre study of consecutive patients referred for PVC ablation in 10 hospital centres from January 2017 to December 2021. Based on the mapping approach, two cohorts were identified: the 'Multipolar group', where a dedicated high-density mapping catheter was employed, and the 'PbP group', where mapping was performed with the ablation catheter. Procedural endpoints, safety, and acute (procedural) and midterm efficacies were assessed. Of the 698 patients included in this study, 592 received activation mapping [46% males, median age of 55 (41-65) years]-248 patients in the Multipolar group and 344 patients in the PbP group. A higher number of activation points [432 (217-843) vs. 95 (42-185), P < 0.001], reduced mapping time (40 ± 38 vs. 61 ± 50 min, P < 0.001), and shorter procedure time (124 ± 60 vs. 143 ± 63 min, P < 0.001) were reported in the Multipolar group. Both groups had high acute success rates (84.7% with Multipolar mapping vs. 81.3% with PbP mapping, P = 0.63), as well as midterm efficacy (83.4% vs. 77.4%, P = 0.08), with no significant differences in the risk of adverse events (6.0% vs. 3.5%, P = 0.24). However, for left-sided PVC ablation specifically, there was a higher midterm efficacy in the Multipolar group (80.7% vs. 69.5%, P = 0.04), with multipolar mapping being an independent predictor of success [adjusted OR = 2.231 (95% CI, 1.476-5.108), P = 0.02]. CONCLUSION: The acute and midterm efficacies of PVC ablation are high with both multipolar and PbP mapping, although the former allows for quicker procedures and may potentially improve the outcomes of left-sided PVC ablation.

Assessment of the need of a waiting period after pulmonary vein isolation with the ablation index software.

PURPOSE: Since the widespread availability of contact-force sensing catheters, the need for a waiting period after pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) has not been reassessed. We aim to evaluate whether a waiting period is still necessary after PVI guided by the ablation Index (AI). METHODS: Prospective, multicenter, randomized study of consecutive patients referred for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation from May 2019 to February 2020. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to PVI with versus without a waiting period of 20 min. Acute pulmonary vein (PV) reconnection after adenosine challenge was the primary endpoint. A per-protocol analysis was designed to determine whether a strategy of dismissing the waiting period after PVI was noninferior to waiting for 20 min for identifying acute PV reconnection. PVI was guided by tailored AI values and an interlesion distance ≤6 mm. RESULTS: During the enrollment period, 167 patients (56% males, mean age of 57 ± 14 years) fulfilled the study inclusion criteria - 84 patients (308 PV) in the waiting period group (Group A) and 83 patients (314 PV) in the group without a waiting period (Group B). Acute PV reconnection was identified in 3.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7%-5.9%) of PVs in the study group B compared to 2.9% (95% CI, 1.0%-4.8%) of PVs in the Group A (p = .002 for non-inferiority). At 1-year follow-up, there was no significant difference in arrhythmia recurrence between groups (9.5% in Group A vs. 9.6% in Group B, hazard ratio: 1.03 [95% CI, 0.39-2.73], p = .98). CONCLUSION: In paroxysmal AF patients submitted to ablation, a tailored PVI guided by the AI rendered a 20-min waiting period unnecessary.

Extended early meets late for assessment of conduction block along an ablation line.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to investigate the usefulness of the extended early meets late (EEML) feature of the HD Coloring software for confirmation of bidirectional block along an ablation line. METHODS: A single-center prospective observational study of consecutive patients with atypical atrial flutter or persistent atrial fibrillation submitted to catheter ablation including linear lesions from January 2019 to June 2020, with confirmation of bidirectional block across ablation lines assessed with the feature EEML and a multipolar catheter was conducted. Patients were divided into two groups - those with versus those without bidirectional block - and different EEML thresholds were analyzed to assess which one had the better sensitivity and specificity to predict block. RESULTS: During the 24-month enrollment period, a total of 94 patients were included (50% males, mean age of 64 ± 10 years, 60% with structural heart disease) - 55 patients with versus 39 patients without confirmed a bidirectional block. Activation maps were performed during atrial pacing, with a median number of 1340 (interquartile range 1135-2060) points acquired in 11 ± 3 min, and a mean mapped cycle length of 287 ± 51 ms. The EEML feature was highly useful in detecting bidirectional block along ablation lines, with a 25% threshold value showing the highest discriminative performance (area under the curve of 0.93), 95% sensitivity and 92% specificity in predicting block. CONCLUSIONS: The EEML feature of the HD Coloring software is a useful addition to the CARTO mapping system for assessment of block across an ablation line. The threshold value of 25% is the most accurate.

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in the elderly: rationale and specific age-related considerations.

Despite the increasingly high rate of implantation of cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) in elderly patients, data supporting their clinical and cost-effectiveness in this age stratum are ambiguous and contradictory. We comprehensively reviewed the state-of-the-art data regarding the applicability, safety, clinical- and cost-effectiveness of the ICD in elderly patients, and analysed which patients in this age stratum are more likely to get a survival benefit from this therapy. Although peri-procedural risk may be slightly higher in the elderly, this procedure is still relatively safe in this age group. In terms of correcting potentially life-threatening arrhythmias, the effectiveness of ICD therapy is comparable in older and younger individuals. However, the assumption of persistent ICD benefit in the elderly population is questionable, as any advantage of the device on arrhythmic death may be largely attenuated by a higher total non-arrhythmic mortality. While septuagenarians and octogenarians have higher annual all-cause mortality rates, ICD therapy may remain effective in highly selected patients at high risk of arrhythmic death and with minimum comorbidities despite advanced age. ICD intervention among the elderly, as a group, may not be cost-effective, but the procedure may reach cost-effectiveness in those expected to live >5-7 years after implantation. Biological age rather than chronological age per se should be the decisive factor in making a decision on ICD selection for survival benefit.

Improving risk stratification in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction with combined assessment of GRACE and CRUSADE risk scores.

BACKGROUND: Risk assessment is fundamental in the management of acute coronary syndromes (ACS), enabling estimation of prognosis. AIMS: To evaluate whether the combined use of GRACE and CRUSADE risk stratification schemes in patients with myocardial infarction outperforms each of the scores individually in terms of mortality and haemorrhagic risk prediction. METHODS: Observational retrospective single-centre cohort study including 566 consecutive patients admitted for non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. The CRUSADE model increased GRACE discriminatory performance in predicting all-cause mortality, ascertained by Cox regression, demonstrating CRUSADE independent and additive predictive value, which was sustained throughout follow-up. The cohort was divided into four different subgroups: G1 (GRACE<141; CRUSADE<41); G2 (GRACE<141; CRUSADE≥41); G3 (GRACE≥141; CRUSADE<41); G4 (GRACE≥141; CRUSADE≥41). RESULTS: Outcomes and variables estimating clinical severity, such as admission Killip-Kimbal class and left ventricular systolic dysfunction, deteriorated progressively throughout the subgroups (G1 to G4). Survival analysis differentiated three risk strata (G1, lowest risk; G2 and G3, intermediate risk; G4, highest risk). The GRACE+CRUSADE model revealed higher prognostic performance (area under the curve [AUC] 0.76) than GRACE alone (AUC 0.70) for mortality prediction, further confirmed by the integrated discrimination improvement index. Moreover, GRACE+CRUSADE combined risk assessment seemed to be valuable in delineating bleeding risk in this setting, identifying G4 as a very high-risk subgroup (hazard ratio 3.5; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Combined risk stratification with GRACE and CRUSADE scores can improve the individual discriminatory power of GRACE and CRUSADE models in the prediction of all-cause mortality and bleeding. This combined assessment is a practical approach that is potentially advantageous in treatment decision-making.

The role of echocardiography in thromboembolic risk assessment of patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.

Echocardiography is a widely used and versatile technique that can provide comprehensive information concerning thromboembolic risk in patients with atrial fibrillation. The authors review the potential contributions of echocardiography to thromboembolic risk stratification and to decreasing the thromboembolic risk associated with procedures such as cardioversion and ablation. Unsolved questions and new possibilities that have arisen from the development of strain and strain rate imaging are also discussed.

Cardiovascular risk assessment of pulmonary embolism with the GRACE risk score.

Despite the existence of several risk scores, the accurate prediction of the prognosis in pulmonary embolism (PE) remains a challenge. The Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) risk score has a high diagnostic performance for adverse outcomes in acute coronary syndrome. We aimed to assess the applicability and extend the use of the GRACE risk score to PE. A case-control study of 206 consecutive patients admitted with PE was performed. The GRACE, Geneva, Simplified Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index, Shock Index, and European Society of Cardiology risk scores were tested for the prediction of the primary end point: all-cause 30-day mortality. Comparisons between GRACE and the other risk scores were performed using receiver operating characteristic area under the curve and the integrated discrimination improvement index. All-cause 30-day mortality was observed in 18.9% of the patients. Unlike the other classifications, no adverse outcomes were observed in patients classified as low risk using the GRACE risk score (100% negative predictive value for GRACE risk score ≤113). The GRACE score showed greater discriminative performance than the Geneva score (area under the curve 0.623, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53 to 0.71), Shock Index (area under the curve 0.639, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.73), European Society of Cardiology (area under the curve 0.662, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.76), and Simplified Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (area under the curve 0.705, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.80), although statistical significance was not reached. The integrated discrimination improvement index suggested a more appropriate risk classification with the GRACE score. In conclusion, our results have demonstrated that the GRACE risk score can accurately predict 30-day mortality in patients admitted for acute PE. Compared to previously proposed PE prediction rules, the GRACE risk score presented improved overall risk classification.

ACHTUNG-Rule: a new and improved model for prognostic assessment in myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: THROMBOLYSIS IN MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION (TIMI), PLATELET GLYCOPROTEIN IIB/IIIA IN UNSTABLE ANGINA: Receptor Suppression Using Integrilin (PURSUIT) and Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) scores have been developed for risk stratification in myocardial infarction (MI). The latter is the most validated score, yet active research is ongoing for improving prognostication in MI. AIM: Derivation and validation of a new model for intrahospital, post-discharge and combined/total all-cause mortality prediction - ACHTUNG-Rule - and comparison with the GRACE algorithm. METHODS: 1091 patients admitted for MI (age 68.4 ± 13.5, 63.2% males, 41.8% acute MI with ST-segment elevation (STEMI)) and followed for 19.7 ± 6.4 months were assigned to a derivation sample. 400 patients admitted at a later date at our institution (age 68.3 ± 13.4, 62.7% males, 38.8% STEMI) and followed for a period of 7.2 ± 4.0 months were assigned to a validation sample. Three versions of the ACHTUNG-Rule were developed for the prediction of intrahospital, post-discharge and combined (intrahospital plus post-discharge) all-cause mortality prediction. All models were evaluated for their predictive performance using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, calibration through the Hosmer-Lemeshow test and predictive utility within each individual patient through the Brier score. Comparison through ROC curve analysis and measures of risk reclassification - net reclassification improvement index (NRI) or Integrated Discrimination Improvement (IDI) - was performed between the ACHTUNG versions for intrahospital, post-discharge and combined mortality prediction and the equivalent GRACE score versions for intrahospital (GRACE-IH), post-discharge (GRACE-6PD) and post-admission 6-month mortality (GRACE-6). RESULTS: Assessment of calibration and overall performance of the ACHTUNG-Rule demonstrated a good fit (p value for the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test of 0.258, 0.101 and 0.550 for ACHTUNG-IH, ACHTUNG-T and ACHTUNG-R, respectively) and high discriminatory power in the validation cohort for all the primary endpoints (intrahospital mortality: AUC ACHTUNG-IH 0.886 ± 0.035 vs. AUC GRACE-IH 0.906 ± 0.026; post-discharge mortality: AUC ACHTUNG-R 0.827 ± 0.036 vs. AUC GRACE-6PD 0.811 ± 0.034; combined/total mortality: AUC ACHTUNG-T 0.831 ± 0.028 vs. AUC GRACE-6 0.815 ± 0.033). Furthermore, all versions of the ACHTUNG-Rule accurately reclassified a significant number of patients in different, more appropriate, risk categories (NRI ACHTUNG-IH 17.1%, p (2-sided) = 0.0021; NRI ACHTUNG-R 22.0%, p = 0.0002; NRI ACHTUNG-T 18.6%, p = 0.0012). The prognostic performance of the ACHTUNG-Rule was similar in both derivation and validation samples. CONCLUSIONS: All versions of the ACHTUNG-Rule have shown excellent discriminative power and good calibration for predicting intrahospital, post-discharge and combined in-hospital plus post-discharge mortality. The ACHTUNG version for intrahospital mortality prediction was not inferior to its equivalent GRACE model, and ACHTUNG versions for post-discharge and combined/total mortality demonstrated apparent superiority. External validation in wider, independent, preferably multicentre, registries is warranted before its potential clinical implementation.