Flecainide Versus Procainamide in Electrophysiological Study in Patients With Syncope and Wide QRS Duration.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare the differences between procainamide and flecainide to stress the His-Purkinje system during electrophysiological study (EPS) in patients with syncope and bundle branch block (BBB). BACKGROUND: Patients with syncope and BBB are at risk of developing atrioventricular block. EPS is recommended including class I drug challenge to unmask His-Purkinje disease in cases with baseline normal His-ventricular interval. There is little data on differences between different class I drugs. METHODS: This was a prospective study of all consecutive patients undergoing EPS for syncope and BBB at a single center (January 1, 2012 to June 30, 2017). Of those patients with negative baseline EPS, 2 cohorts were compared: group A (historical cohort: procainamide) and group B (flecainide). RESULTS: During the study, 271 patients (age 73.9 ± 12.1 years, 64.9% male, QRS duration: 139.4 ± 13.9 ms) underwent EPS. In 166, baseline EPS was negative and class I drug challenge was performed (90 procainamide, 76 flecainide). The final value and percentage increase in the His-ventricular interval (76 ± 16 ms vs. 64 ± 10 ms and 22.5 ± 6.2% vs. 11.8 ± 5.3%; p < 0.001) and diagnostic yield (14.5% vs. 7.8%, p = 0.04) were higher with flecainide. No differences were found in baseline characteristics. During follow-up (25.8 ± 6.3 months), 39 patients (24.8%) with negative EPS (19.2% with flecainide vs. 30.1% with procainamide: relative risk: 5.1; 95% confidence interval: 2.6 to 10.2; p < 0. 001) received a pacemaker. CONCLUSIONS: Flecainide has a higher diagnostic yield than does procainamide in patients with BBB, syncope, and negative baseline EPS due to a greater increase of the His-ventricular interval. Additionally, there is a lesser need for pacemaker implantation in patients in whom the class I drug test using flecainide was negative.

Syncope, conduction disturbance, and negative electrophysiological test: Predictive factors and risk score to predict pacemaker implantation during follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Patients with syncope and bundle branch block (BBB) are at risk for atrioventricular block (AVB). Electrophysiological study (EPS) can help in identifying patients at higher risk for AVB, but the false-negative rate is remarkable. Few data on the predictors of the need for pacemaker implantation during follow-up have been reported. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to analyze the rate of patients who need pacemaker implantation after negative EPS and predictive factors. METHODS: A single-center prospective study of 159 consecutive patients (73.9 ± 12.1 years; male 64.9%) with syncope and BBB (January 2012-December 2016) and negative EPS was conducted. An implantable loop recorder was implanted. RESULTS: After 27.9 ± 10.8 months of follow-up, 39 patients (24.8%) underwent pacemaker implantation because of bradyarrhythmia. In the univariate analysis, bifascicular (right BBB + left fascicular block) block, bifascicular block + long PR interval, conduction disturbance different from isolated right BBB, HV ≥60 ms, and HV ≥70 ms after class I drug challenge were predictors of pacemaker implantation. In the multivariate analysis, only bifascicular block (hazard ratio 2.5; 95% confidence interval 1.4-4.8; P = .04) and HV interval ≥60 ms (hazard ratio 3.5; 95% confidence interval 1.8-6.2; P <.001) were statistically significant. A risk score according to the multivariate model identified 3 levels of pacemaker implantation rate (13.5%, 32.7%, and 66.7%; P <.001). No death or severe trauma related to bradyarrhythmia occurred. CONCLUSION: The strategy of an implantable loop recorder in patients with syncope and BBB is safe after negative EPS, but some patients might need pacemaker implantation during follow-up. A risk score based on HV ≥60 ms and bifascicular block can be useful in identifying patients at risk for advanced AVB after negative EPS.

Predictors of Acute Failure Ablation of Intra-atrial Re-entrant Tachycardia in Patients With Congenital Heart Disease: Cardiac Disease, Atypical Flutter, and Previous Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Intra-atrial re-entrant tachycardia (IART) in patients with congenital heart disease (CHD) increases morbidity and mortality. Radiofrequency catheter ablation has evolved as the first-line treatment. The aim of this study was to analyze the acute success and to identify predictors of failed IART radiofrequency catheter ablation in CHD. METHODS AND RESULTS: The observational study included all consecutive patients with CHD who underwent a first ablation procedure for IART at a single center from January 2009 to December 2015 (94 patients, 39.4% female, age: 36.55±14.9 years). In the first procedure, 114 IART were ablated (acute success: 74.6%; 1.21±0.41 IART per patient) with an acute success of 74.5%. Cavotricuspid isthmus-related IART was the only arrhythmia in 51%; non-cavotricuspid isthmus-related IART was the only mechanism in 27.7% and 21.3% of the patients had both types of IART. Predictors of acute radiofrequency catheter ablation failure were as follows: nonrelated cavotricuspid isthmus IART (odds ratio 7.3; confidence interval [CI], 1.9-17.9; P=0.04), previous atrial fibrillation (odds ratio 6.1; CI, 1.3-18.4; P=0.02), transposition of great arteries (odds ratio, 4.9; CI, 1.4-17.2; P=0.01) and systemic ventricle dilation (odds ratio 4.8; CI, 1.1-21.7; P=0.04) with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.83±0.056 (CI, 0.74-0.93, P=0.001). After a mean follow-up longer than 3.5 years, 78.3% of the patients were in sinus rhythm (33.1% of the patients required more than 1 radiofrequency catheter ablation procedure). CONCLUSIONS: Although ablation in CHD is a challenging procedure, acute success of 75% can be achieved in moderate-highly complex CHD patients in a referral center. Predictors of failed ablation are IART different from cavotricuspid isthmus, previous atrial fibrillation, and markers of complex CHD (transposition of great arteries, systemic ventricle dilation).

Intra-atrial re-entrant tachycardia in patients with congenital heart disease: factors associated with disease severity.

Aim: Intra-atrial re-entrant tachycardia (IART) is a common complication in patients with congenital heart disease (CHD) and is related to increased morbidity and mortality. Few reports have been published about factors associated to IART severity. The aim of this study is to analyse factors associated to severe clinical presentation of IART. Methods and Results: Observational study of all consecutive CHD patients who underwent a first IART ablation from January 2009 to December 2015 (94 patients, 39.4% female, and age: 36.55 ± 14.9 years). Severe clinical presentation was defined as heart failure, syncope, shock, electromechanical dissociation (EMD), or aborted sudden death. The majority of patients had moderately or highly complex cardiac defect (90.4%). Types of IART included cavotricuspid isthmus(CTI) dependent in 51% (48), non-CTI-related in 22.3% (20), and both types in 27.7% (26). In 38 patients (40.4%), a severe event occurred and in 16 (17%), the symptoms included shock, syncope, sudden death, or EMD. In 21 (22.3%), severe symptoms were the first manifestation of IART. In multivariate analysis, transposition of the great arteries (TGA) with right systemic ventricle (OR 5.32, 95% C.I. 1.6-7.02, P = 0.0005) and severe dilation of the venous atrium (VsA) (OR 4.17; 95% CI 1.4-8.12, P = 0.0009) were factors independently associated with severity. Conclusion: In our series of 94 CHD patients with a high proportion of moderately to highly complex cardiac defects, severe consequences of IART were frequent. Transposition of the great arteries with systemic right ventricle and severe dilation of VsA were independently associated to severity. Early invasive procedures should be considered for these high-risk patients.

Differences in the yield of the implantable loop recorder between secondary and tertiary centers.

BACKGROUND: The implantable loop recorder (ILR) is a useful tool for diagnosis of syncope or palpitations. Its easy use and safety have extended its use to secondary hospitals (those without an Electrophysiology Lab). The aim of the study was to compare results between secondary and tertiary hospitals. METHODS: National prospective and multicenter registry of patients with an ILR inserted for clinical reasons. Data were collected in an online database. The follow-up ended when the first diagnostic clinical event occurred, or 1 year after implantation. Data were analyzed according to the center of reference; hospitals with Electrophysiology Lab were considered Tertiary Hospitals, while those hospitals without a lab were considered Secondary Hospitals. RESULTS: Seven hundred and forty-three patients (413 [55.6%] men; 65 ± 16 year-old): 655 (88.2%) from Tertiary Centers (TC) and 88 (11.8%) from Secondary Centers (SC). No differences in clinical characteristics between both groups were found. The electrophysiologic study and the tilt table test were conducted more frequently in Tertiary Centers. Follow-up was conducted for 680 (91.5%) patients: 91% in TC and 94% in SC. There was a higher rate of final diagnosis among SC patients (55.4% vs. 30.8%; p < 0.001). Tertiary Hospital patients showed a trend towards a higher rate of neurally mediated events (20% vs. 4%), while bradyarrhythmias were more frequent in SC (74% vs. 60%; p = 0.055). The rate of deaths and adverse events was similar in both populations. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with an ILR in SC and TC have differences in terms of the use of complementary tests, but not in clinical characteristics. There was a higher rate of diagnosis in Secondary Hospital patients.