Mechanisms, prevalence and management of cardiac arrhythmias in cancer patients: a comprehensive review.

Recently, prognosis and survival of cancer patients has improved due to progression and refinement of cancer therapies; however, cardiovascular sequelae in this population augmented and now represent the second cause of death in oncological patients. Initially, the main issue was represented by heart failure and coronary artery disease, but a growing body of evidence has now shed light on the increased arrhythmic risk of this population, atrial fibrillation being the most frequently encountered. Awareness of arrhythmic complications of cancer and its treatments may help oncologists and cardiologists to develop targeted approaches for the management of arrhythmias in this population. In this review, we provide an updated overview of the mechanisms triggering cardiac arrhythmias in cancer patients, their prevalence and management.

Ultra-high-resolution assessment of lesion extension after cryoballoon ablation for pulmonary vein isolation.

Introduction: Unrecognized incomplete pulmonary vein (PV) isolation during the index procedure, can be a major cause of clinical recurrences of atrial fibrillation (AF) after cryoballoon (CB) ablation. We aimed to characterize the extension of the lesions produced by CB ablation and to assess the value of using an ultra-high resolution electroanatomic mapping (UHDM) system to detect incomplete CB lesions. Materials and methods: Twenty-nine consecutive patients from the CHARISMA registry undergoing AF ablation at four Italian centers were prospectively evaluated. The Rhythmia™ mapping system and the Orion™ (Boston Scientific) mapping catheter were used to systematically map the left atrium and PVs before and after cryoablation. Results: A total of 116 PVs were targeted and isolated. Quantitative assessment of the lesions revealed a significant reduction of the antral surface area of the PV, resulting in an ablated area of 5.7 ± 0.7 cm2 and 5.1 ± 0.8 cm2 for the left PV pair and right PV pair, respectively (p = 0.0068). The mean posterior wall (PW) area was 22.9 ± 2 cm2 and, following PV isolation, 44.8 ± 6% of the PW area was ablated. After CB ablation, complete isolation of each PV was documented by the POLARMap™ catheter in all patients. By contrast, confirmatory UHDM and the Lumipoint™ tool unveiled PV signals in 1 out of 114 of the PVs (0.9%). Over 30-day follow-up, no major procedure-related adverse events were reported. After a mean follow-up of 333 days, 89.7% of patients were free from arrhythmia recurrence. Conclusion: The lesion extension achieved by the new CB ablation system involved the PV antrum, with less than 50% of the PW remaining untouched. The new system, with short tip and circular mapping catheter, failed to achieve PV isolation in only 0.9% of all PVs treated. Clinical trial registration: [http://clinicaltrials.gov/], identifier [NCT03793998].

Assessment of patients presenting with life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias and suspected myocarditis: The key role of endomyocardial biopsy.

BACKGROUND: Life-threatening ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VAs) represent a significant cause of death in myocarditis. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to identify predictors of sustained VAs in patients with myocarditis and ventricular phenotype diagnosed by workflow including endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) guided by 3D electroanatomic mapping (3D-EAM). METHODS: We prospectively enrolled patients with suspected myocarditis and VAs, undergoing cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, coronary angiography, 3D-EAM, and EMB guided by 3D-EAM. At follow-up, sustained VAs were detected by device interrogation and 24-hour electrocardiographic Holter monitoring. RESULTS: We enrolled 54 consecutive patients (mean age 41 ± 14 years; 32(59%) men) with normal ventricular function; left ventricular and right ventricular (RV) late gadolinium enhancement was present, respectively, in 21 (46%) and 6 (13%) of the 46 patients who underwent cardiac magnetic resonance. In 31 patients, the histological diagnosis was myocarditis, while in 14 patients, focal replacement myocardial fibrosis (FRMF); in 9 patients, specimens were inadequate (diagnostic yield of EMB 83%). 3D-EAM showed a larger endocardial scar area for both ventricles in myocarditis than in FRMF (RV bipolar mean scar area 22 ± 16 cm2 vs 3 ± 2 cm2; P = .02; left ventricular bipolar mean scar area 13 ± 5 cm2 vs 4 ± 2 cm2; P = .02, respectively). At a follow-up of 21 months, freedom from sustained VAs was 58% in myocarditis and 92% in FRMF (log-rank, P = .008). Histological diagnosis of myocarditis and RV endocardial scar were independent predictors of sustained VAs (P = .02 for both). CONCLUSION: Our data highlight the need for 3D-EAM-guided EMB in apparently healthy young patients with suspected myocarditis and VAs.

Heart failure hospitalizations and costs in ICD/CRT-D recipients following replacement or upgrade: the DECODE registry.

AIMS: The aim of this study is to report heart failure hospitalization (HFH) rates and associated costs within 12 months following implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD)/cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator (CRT-D) device replacement or upgrade from ICD to CRT-D. METHODS AND RESULTS: The DEtect long-term COmplications after icD rEplacement (DECODE) was a prospective, single-arm, multicentre cohort study that explored complications in ICD/CRT-D recipients. All clinical and survival data at 12 months were prospectively analysed. For each adjudicated HFH, admission and discharge dates and ICD-9-CM diagnosis and procedure codes were recorded. The reimbursement for each HFH was calculated for each diagnosis-related group code. Between 2013 and 2015, 983 patients (mean age 71 years, male 76%, mean left ventricular ejection fraction 35%, and New York Heart Association Class I/II 75.6%) were enrolled. Patients underwent device replacement (900; 91.6%, 446 ICD/454 CRT-D) or ICD upgrade to CRT-D (83; 8.4%). Post-replacement hospitalizations occurred in 220 patients, with the primary discharge diagnosis identifying cardiovascular causes in 175 patients (80%). Fifty-five (5.6%) patients experienced at least one HFH. Overall, 91 HFH events occurred (9.6% event rate, 95% confidence interval: 7.7-11.7) in 70 patients; 66 (6.7%) patients died, 40 (60.6%) of cardiovascular causes. The HFH rate was significantly higher following upgrades, and the occurrence of HFH was associated with an 11-fold increased mortality risk (95% confidence interval: 5.9-20.5, P < 0.0001). Medical diagnosis-related group accounted for 91.2% of HFH; the mean cost per HFH was €5662 ± 9497, and the mean cost per patient was €9369 ± 12 687. On multivariate analysis, predictors of HFH were atrial fibrillation, chronic kidney disease, and all-cause hospitalization within 30 days prior to the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: In the DECODE registry, HFH and mortality rates in the year following ICD/CRT-D replacement or upgrade were low. In this particular subset, underlying cardiac disease was the main driver of HFH, mortality, and higher healthcare expenditures.

Long-Term Arrhythmic Risk Assessment in Biopsy-Proven Myocarditis.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess long-term arrhythmic risk in patients with myocarditis who received an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). BACKGROUND: The arrhythmic risk of patients with myocarditis overtime remains poorly known. METHODS: The study enrolled 56 patients with biopsy-proven myocarditis who received an ICD for either primary (57%) or secondary prevention (43%) according to current guidelines. Clinical characteristics, biopsy findings, electrophysiological data from endocardial 3-dimensional electroanatomic voltage mapping, and device interrogation data were analyzed to detect arrhythmic events overtime. Coronary angiography excluded significant coronary artery disease in all patients. RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of 74 ± 60 months (median 65 months), 25 (45%) patients had major ventricular arrhythmias treated by ICD intervention (76% being terminated by ICD shock and 24% by antitachyarrhythmia burst pacing). At multivariable analysis, the presence of sustained ventricular tachycardia on admission (hazard ratio: 13.0; 95% confidence interval: 2.0 to 35.0; p = 0.032) and the extension of the areas of low potentials at the bipolar endocardial mapping (hazard ratio: 1.19; 95% confidence interval: 1.04 to 1.37; p = 0.013) were the only independent predictors of appropriate ICD interventions. A cutoff value of 10% of abnormal bipolar area at electroanatomical ventricular mapping discriminated patients with appropriate ICD interventions with a sensitivity of 89% and a specificity of 85%. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrates that the prevalence of life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias in patients with myocarditis receiving an ICD according to current guidelines is high and the arrhythmic risk persists late overtime. Electroanatomical ventricular mapping may be a useful tool to identify patients at greater arrhythmic risk.

Rate versus rhythm control in the management of patients with atrial fibrillation.

The management of patients with atrial fibrillation involves three main areas: anticoagulation, rate control and rhythm control. Importantly, these are not mutually exclusive of each other. Anticoagulation is necessary for patients who are at a high risk of stroke; for example, those who are older than 75 years, or those who have hypertension, severe left ventricular dysfunction, previous cerebrovascular events, or diabetes. It is now clear that patients who are at a high risk of stroke require long-term anticoagulation with warfarin regardless of whether a rate-control or rhythm-control strategy is chosen. One possible exception might be patients who are apparently cured with catheter ablation. Several published trials comparing rate-control and rhythm-control strategies for the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation have shown no difference in mortality between these approaches. The patients enrolled in these studies were typically over 65 years of age. Data comparing rate and rhythm strategies in patients who are younger than 60 years of age are limited. For more elderly patients, it seems reasonable to consider rate control as a primary treatment option and to reserve rhythm control for those who do not respond to rate control. For younger patients, we prefer to start with a rhythm-control approach and to reserve rate-control approaches for patients in whom antiarrhythmic drugs, ablation, or both, do not ameliorate the symptoms.