Effect of Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillators in Nonischemic Heart Failure According to Background Medical Therapy: Extended Follow-up of the DANISH Trial.

BACKGROUND: The Heart Failure Collaboratory (HFC) score integrates types and dosages of guideline-directed pharmacotherapies for heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We examined the effects of cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation according to the modified HFC (mHFC) score in 1116 patients with nonischemic HFrEF from the Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of ICDs in Patients with Nonischemic Systolic HF on Mortality (DANISH). METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients were assigned scores for renin-angiotensin-system inhibitors, beta-blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (0, no use; 1, < 50% of maximum dosage; 2, ≥ 50% of maximum dosage). The maximum score was 6, corresponding to ≥ 50% of maximum dosage for all therapies. The median baseline mHFC score was 4, and the median follow-up was 9.5 years. Compared with an mHFC score of 3-4, an mHFC score of 1-2 was associated with a higher rate of all-cause death (mHFC = 1-2: adjusted HR 1.67 [95% CI, 1.23-2.28]; mHFC = 3-4, reference; mHFC = 5-6: adjusted HR 1.07 [95% CI, 0.87-1.31]). ICD implantation did not reduce all-cause death compared with control (reference) (HR 0.89 [95% CI, 0.74-1.08]), regardless of mHFC score (mHFC = 1-2: HR 0.98 [95% CI, 0.56-1.71]; mHFC = 3-4: HR 0.89 [95% CI,0.66-1.20]; mHFC = 5-6: HR 0.85 [95% CI, 0.64-1.12]; Pinteraction, 0.65). Similarly, ICD implantation did not reduce cardiovascular death (HR 0.87 [95% CI, 0.70-1.09]), regardless of mHFC score (Pinteraction, 0.59). The ICD group had a lower rate of sudden cardiovascular death (HR, 0.60 [95% CI,0.40-0.92]); this association was not modified by mHFC score (Pinteraction, 0.35). CONCLUSIONS: Lower mHFC scores were associated with higher rates of all-cause death. ICD implantation did not result in an overall survival benefit in patients with nonischemic HFrEF, regardless of mHFC score.

Periodic Repolarization Dynamics Identifies ICD Responders in Nonischemic Cardiomyopathy: A DANISH Substudy.

BACKGROUND: Identification of patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy who may benefit from prophylactic implantation of a cardioverter-defibrillator. We hypothesized that periodic repolarization dynamics (PRD), a marker of repolarization instability associated with sympathetic activity, could be used to identify patients who will benefit from prophylactic implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of DANISH (Danish ICD Study in Patients With Dilated Cardiomyopathy), in which patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35%, and elevated NT-proBNP (N-terminal probrain natriuretic peptides) were randomized to ICD implantation or control group. Patients were included in the PRD substudy if they had a 24-hour Holter monitor recording at baseline with technically acceptable ECG signals during the night hours (00:00-06:00). PRD was assessed using wavelet analysis according to previously validated methods. The primary end point was all-cause mortality. Cox regression models were adjusted for age, sex, NT-proBNP, estimated glomerular filtration rate, LVEF, atrial fibrillation, ventricular pacing, diabetes, cardiac resynchronization therapy, and mean heart rate. We proposed PRD ≥10 deg2 as an exploratory cut-off value for ICD implantation. RESULTS: A total of 748 of the 1116 patients in DANISH qualified for the PRD substudy. During a mean follow-up period of 5.1±2.0 years, 82 of 385 patients died in the ICD group and 85 of 363 patients died in the control group (P=0.40). In Cox regression analysis, PRD was independently associated with mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.28 [95% CI, 1.09-1.50] per SD increase; P=0.003). PRD was significantly associated with mortality in the control group (HR, 1.51 [95% CI, 1.25-1.81]; P<0.001) but not in the ICD group (HR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.83-1.54]; P=0.71). There was a significant interaction between PRD and the effect of ICD implantation on mortality (P=0.008), with patients with higher PRD having greater benefit in terms of mortality reduction. ICD implantation was associated with an absolute mortality reduction of 17.5% in the 280 patients with PRD ≥10 deg2 (HR, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.34-0.84]; P=0.006; number needed to treat=6), but not in the 468 patients with PRD <10 deg2 (HR, 1.17 [95% CI, 0.77-1.78]; P=0.46; P for interaction=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Increased PRD identified patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy in whom prophylactic ICD implantation led to significant mortality reduction.

Long-Term Follow-Up of DANISH (The Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of ICDs in Patients With Nonischemic Systolic Heart Failure on Mortality).

BACKGROUND: DANISH (The Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators [ICDs] in Patients With Nonischemic Systolic Heart Failure on Mortality) found that primary-prevention ICD implantation was not associated with an overall survival benefit in patients with nonischemic systolic heart failure during a median follow-up of 5.6 years, although there was a beneficial effect on all-cause mortality in patients ≤70 years. This study presents an additional 4 years of follow-up data from DANISH. METHODS: In DANISH, 556 patients with nonischemic systolic heart failure were randomized to receive an ICD and 560 to receive usual clinical care and followed until June 30, 2016. In this long-term follow-up study, patients were followed until May 18, 2020. Analyses were conducted for the overall population and according to age (≤70 and >70 years). RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 9.5 years (25th-75th percentile, 7.9-10.9 years), 208/556 patients (37%) in the ICD group and 226/560 patients (40%) in the control group died. Compared with the control group, the ICD group did not have significantly lower all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.89, [95% CI, 0.74-1.08]; P = 0.24). In patients ≤70 years (n = 829), all-cause mortality was lower in the ICD group than the control group (117/389 [30%] versus 158/440 [36%]; HR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.61-0.99]; P = 0.04), whereas in patients >70 years (n = 287), all-cause mortality was not significantly different between the ICD and control group (91/167 [54%] versus 68/120 [57%]; HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.67-1.28]; P = 0.75). Cardiovascular death showed similar trends (overall, 147/556 [26%] versus 164/560 [29%]; HR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.70-1.09]; P = 0.20; ≤70 years, 87/389 [22%] versus 122/440 [28%]; HR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.57-0.98]; P = 0.04; >70 years, 60/167 [36%] versus 42/120 [35%]; HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.65-1.45]; P = 0.91). The ICD group had a significantly lower incidence of sudden cardiovascular death in the overall population (35/556 [6%] versus 57/560 [10%]; HR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.40-0.92]; P = 0.02) and in patients ≤70 years (19/389 [5%] versus 49/440 [11%]; HR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.24-0.71]; P = 0.0008), but not in patients >70 years (16/167 [10%] versus 8/120 [7%]; HR, 1.34 [95% CI, 0.56-3.19]; P = 0.39). CONCLUSIONS: During a median follow-up of 9.5 years, ICD implantation did not provide an overall survival benefit in patients with nonischemic systolic heart failure. In patients ≤70 years, ICD implantation was associated with a lower incidence of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular death, and sudden cardiovascular death. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT00542945.

Right Ventricular Free Wall Strain and Effect of Defibrillator Implantation in Patients With Nonischemic Systolic Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Patients with nonischemic systolic heart failure have an increased risk of malignant ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiovascular death. Because the risk is less pronounced than for patients with ischemic cause of heart failure more discriminating tools are needed to identify patients most likely to benefit from implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation. Right ventricular (RV) dysfunction is associated with a worse prognosis, but whether RV free wall strain (RV-FWS) measured with echocardiography can identify the patients most likely to benefit from ICD implantation is not known. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this extended follow-up analysis of the Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of ICDs in Patients with Non-ischemic Systolic Heart Failure on Mortality (DANISH) trial, RV-FWS was measured with echocardiography in 445 patients before randomization. RV dysfunction was defined as an RV-FWS of greater than -20%. The primary end point was all-cause mortality. The median RV-FWS was -18% (quartiles -23% to -14%), and RV dysfunction was measured in 255 patients (57%). During a median follow-up of 5.7 years, 170 patients (38%) died. There was a statistically significant interaction between RV dysfunction and the effect of ICD implantation (P = .003), also after adjusting for known cardiovascular risk factors (P = .01). ICD implantation significantly decreased all-cause mortality in patients with RV dysfunction (hazard ratio 0.54, 95% confidence interval 0.36-0.80, P = .002), but not in patients with normal RV function (hazard ratio 1.34, 95% confidence interval 0.84-2.12, P = .22). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with nonischemic systolic heart failure, RV dysfunction on echocardiography was associated with a greater effect of ICD implantation and could be used to select patients with benefit from ICD treatment.

Reduced inferior wall longitudinal strain is associated with malignant arrhythmias in non-ischemic heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Reduced systolic myocardial function in the inferior region of the left ventricle has been suggested to be associated with malignant arrhythmias. We tested this hypothesis in patients with non-ischemic heart failure. METHODS: Patients with non-ischemic heart failure (left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] < 35%) were evaluated by 2D-speckle-tracking echocardiography. The regional longitudinal strain was calculated for each of the six left ventricular walls. The reduced regional function was defined as strain below the median. The outcome was a composite of sudden cardiac death, admission with sustained ventricular arrhythmia, resuscitated cardiac arrest, and appropriate therapy from a primary prophylactic implantable cardioverter defibrillator. Time-to-first-event analysis was performed using a Cox model. RESULTS: From two centers, 401 patients were included (median age: 63 years, 72% male) with a median LVEF of 25% (interquartile range [IQR] 20;30), and a median inferior wall strain of -9.0% (-12.5; -5.4). During a median follow-up of 4.0 years, 52 outcomes occurred. After multivariate adjustment for clinical and electrocardiographic parameters, inferior wall strain was independently associated with the outcome (HR 2.50 [1.35; 4.62], p = .003). No independent association was found between the composite outcome and reduced strain in any of the other left ventricular walls, Global Longitudinal Strain (HR 1.66 [0.93; 2.98], p = .09), or LVEF (HR 1.33 [0.75; 2.33], p = .33). CONCLUSIONS: Below median strain in the left ventricular inferior region was independently associated with a 2.5-fold increase in the risk of malignant arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death in patients with non-ischemic heart failure.

Effect of Empagliflozin on Worsening Heart Failure Events in Patients With Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction: EMPEROR-Preserved Trial.

BACKGROUND: Empagliflozin reduces the risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, but additional data are needed about its effect on inpatient and outpatient heart failure events. METHODS: We randomly assigned 5988 patients with class II through IV heart failure with an ejection fraction of >40% to double-blind treatment with placebo or empagliflozin (10 mg once daily), in addition to usual therapy, for a median of 26 months. We prospectively collected information on inpatient and outpatient events reflecting worsening heart failure and prespecified their analysis in individual and composite end points. RESULTS: Empagliflozin reduced the combined risk of cardiovascular death, hospitalization for heart failure, or an emergency or urgent heart failure visit requiring intravenous treatment (432 versus 546 patients [empagliflozin versus placebo, respectively]; hazard ratio, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.67-0.87]; P<0.0001). This benefit reached statistical significance at 18 days after randomization. Empagliflozin reduced the total number of heart failure hospitalizations that required intensive care (hazard ratio, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.52-0.96]; P=0.028) and the total number of all hospitalizations that required a vasopressor or positive inotropic drug (hazard ratio, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.55-0.97]; P=0.033). Compared with patients in the placebo group, fewer patients in the empagliflozin group reported outpatient intensification of diuretics (482 versus 610; hazard ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.67-0.86]; P<0.0001), and patients assigned to empagliflozin were 20% to 50% more likely to have a better New York Heart Association functional class, with significant effects at 12 weeks that were maintained for at least 2 years. The benefit on total heart failure hospitalizations was similar in patients with an ejection fraction of >40% to <50% and 50% to <60%, but was attenuated at higher ejection fractions. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, empagliflozin produced a meaningful, early, and sustained reduction in the risk and severity of a broad range of inpatient and outpatient worsening heart failure events. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03057977.

Effect of Empagliflozin on the Clinical Stability of Patients With Heart Failure and a Reduced Ejection Fraction: The EMPEROR-Reduced Trial.

BACKGROUND: Empagliflozin reduces the risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure in patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction, with or without diabetes, but additional data are needed about the effect of the drug on inpatient and outpatient events that reflect worsening heart failure. METHODS: We randomly assigned 3730 patients with class II to IV heart failure with an ejection fraction of ≤40% to double-blind treatment with placebo or empagliflozin (10 mg once daily), in addition to recommended treatments for heart failure, for a median of 16 months. We prospectively collected information on inpatient and outpatient events reflecting worsening heart failure and prespecified their analysis in individual and composite end points. RESULTS: Empagliflozin reduced the combined risk of death, hospitalization for heart failure or an emergent/urgent heart failure visit requiring intravenous treatment (415 versus 519 patients; empagliflozin versus placebo, respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 0.76; 95% CI, 0.67-0.87; P<0.0001). This benefit reached statistical significance at 12 days after randomization. Empagliflozin reduced the total number of heart failure hospitalizations that required intensive care (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.50-0.90; P=0.008) and that required a vasopressor or positive inotropic drug or mechanical or surgical intervention (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.47-0.87; P=0.005). As compared with placebo, fewer patients in the empagliflozin group reported intensification of diuretics (297 versus 414 [HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.56-0.78; P<0.0001]). Additionally, patients assigned to empagliflozin were 20% to 40% more likely to experience an improvement in New York Heart Association functional class and were 20% to 40% less likely to experience worsening of New York Heart Association functional class, with statistically significant effects that were apparent 28 days after randomization and maintained during long-term follow-up. The risk of any inpatient or outpatient worsening heart failure event in the placebo group was high (48.1 per 100 patient-years of follow-up), and it was reduced by empagliflozin (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.63-0.78; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction, empagliflozin reduced the risk and total number of inpatient and outpatient worsening heart failure events, with benefits seen early after initiation of treatment and sustained for the duration of double-blind therapy. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03057977.

Comparison of the Anterior Septal Line and Mitral Isthmus Line for Perimitral Atrial Flutter Ablation Using Robotic Magnetic Navigation.

BACKGROUND: Perimitral atrial flutter (PMAFL) is one of the most common macro-reentrant left atrial tachycardias. Mitral isthmus (MI) linear ablation is a common strategy for the treatment of PMAFLs, and anterior septum (AS) linear ablation has emerged as a novel ablation approach. We aimed at assessing the effectiveness of AS linear ablation using robotic magnetic navigation for PMAFL ablation. METHODS: In this retrospective study, a total of 36 consecutive patients presented with AFL as the unique arrhythmia or accompanied with atrial fibrillation (AF) who underwent catheter ablation were enrolled. Patients were classified into two groups according to the different ablation strategies, the MI line group (10 patients) and the AS line group (26 patients). RESULTS: The clinical baseline characteristics of patients in the two groups were nearly identical. There were no significant differences in procedure time (148.7 ± 46.1 vs. 123.2 ± 30.1 min, P=0.058) or radiofrequency ablation time (25.9 ± 11.4 vs. 23.5 ± 12.6 min) between the two groups. Fluoroscopy time was longer in the MI line group (8.0 ± 4.4 vs. 5.1 ± 2.7 min, P=0.024), and the acute success rate was higher in the AS line group versus the MI line group (96.2% vs. 70%, P=0.025). The long-term freedom from arrhythmia survival rate was higher in the AS line group (73%) than in the MI line group (40%) after a mean follow-up time of 37.4 months with a 3-month blanking period (P=0.049). CONCLUSIONS: AS linear ablation is an effective and safe strategy for PMAFL ablation using robotic magnetic navigation.

Atrial fibrillation is a marker of increased mortality risk in nonischemic heart failure-Results from the DANISH trial.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) in heart failure (HF) patients has been associated with a worse outcome. Similarly, excessive supraventricular ectopic activity (ESVEA) has been linked to development of AF, stroke, and death. This study aimed to investigate AF and ESVEA's association with outcomes and effect of prophylactic implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation in nonischemic HF patients. METHODS: A total of 850 patients with nonischemic HF, left ventricle ejection fraction ≤35%, and elevated N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptides underwent 24 hours Holter recording. The presence of AF (≥30 seconds) and ESVEA (≥30 supraventricular ectopic complexes (SVEC) per hour or run of SVEC ≥20 beats) were registered. Outcomes were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular death (CVD), and sudden cardiac death (SCD). RESULTS: AF was identified in 188 patients (22%) and ESVEA in 84 patients (10%). After 4 years and 11 months of follow-up, a total of 193 patients (23%) had died. AF was associated with all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 1.44; confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.99; P = .03) and CVD (HR 1.59; CI 1.07-2.36; P = .02). ESVEA was associated with all-cause mortality (HR 1.73; CI 1.16-2.57; P = .0073) and CVD (HR 1.76; CI 1.06-2.92; P = .03). Neither AF nor ESVEA was associated with SCD. ICD implantation was not associated with an improved prognosis for neither AF (P value for interaction = .17), nor ESVEA (P value for interaction = .68). CONCLUSIONS: Both AF and ESVEA were associated with worsened prognosis in nonischemic HF. However, ICD implantation was not associated with an improved prognosis for either group.

Prevalence and prognostic association of ventricular arrhythmia in non-ischaemic heart failure patients: results from the DANISH trial.

AIMS: Improved risk stratification to identify non-ischaemic heart failure patients who will benefit from primary prophylactic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is needed. We examined the potential of ventricular arrhythmia to identify patients who could benefit from an ICD. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 850 non-ischaemic systolic heart failure patients with left ventricle ≤35% and elevated N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptides had a 24-h Holter monitor recording performed. We examined present non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT), defined as ≥3 consecutive premature ventricular contractions (PVCs) with a rate of ≥100/min, and number of PVCs per hour stratified into low (<30) and high burden (≥30) groups. Outcome measures were overall mortality, sudden cardiac death (SCD), and cardiovascular death (CVD). In total, 193 patients died, 49 from SCD and 125 from CVD. Non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (365 patients) was significantly associated with increased all-cause mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 1.47; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07-2.03; P = 0.02] and to CVD (HR 1.89; CI 1.25-2.87; P = 0.003). High burden PVC (352 patients) was associated with increased all-cause mortality (HR1.38; CI 1.00-1.90; P = 0.046) and with CVD (HR 1.78; CI 1.19-2.66; P = 0.005). There was no statistically significant association with SCD for neither NSVT nor PVC. In interaction analyses, neither NSVT (P = 0.56) nor high burden of PVC (P = 0.97) was associated with survival benefit from ICD implantation. CONCLUSION: Ventricular arrhythmia in non-ischaemic heart failure patients was associated with a worse prognosis but could not be used to stratify patients to ICD implantation.

Cardiac arrhythmias in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019: A retrospective population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may be associated with cardiac arrhythmias in hospitalized patients, but data from the ICU setting are limited. We aimed to describe the epidemiology of cardiac arrhythmias in ICU patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort study including all ICU patients with an airway sample positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome corona-virus 2 from March 1st to June 1st in the Capital Region of Denmark (1.8 million inhabitants). We registered cardiac arrhythmias in ICU, potential risk factors, interventions used in ICU and outcomes. RESULTS: From the seven ICUs we included 155 patients with COVID-19. The incidence of cardiac arrhythmias in the ICU was 57/155 (37%, 95% confidence interval 30-45), and 39/57 (68%) of these patients had this as new-onset arrhythmia. Previous history of tachyarrhythmias and higher disease severity at ICU admission were associated with cardiac arrhythmias in the adjusted analysis. Fifty-four of the 57 (95%) patients had supraventricular origin of the arrhythmia, 39/57 (68%) received at least one intervention against arrhythmia (eg amiodarone, IV fluid or magnesium) and 38/57 (67%) had recurrent episodes of arrhythmia in ICU. Patients with arrhythmias in ICU had higher 60-day mortality (63%) as compared to those without arrhythmias (39%). CONCLUSION: New-onset supraventricular arrhythmias were frequent in ICU patients with COVID-19 and were related to previous history of tachyarrhythmias and severity of the acute disease. The mortality was high in these patients despite the frequent use of interventions against arrhythmias.

Myocardial fibrosis and the effect of primary prophylactic defibrillator implantation in patients with non-ischemic systolic heart failure-DANISH-MRI.

AIMS: Patients with non-ischemic systolic heart failure have an increased risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD). Myocardial fibrosis, detected as late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) with cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR), has been shown to predict all-cause mortality. We hypothesized that LGE can identify patients with non-ischemic heart failure who will benefit from ICD implantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this prospective observational sub-study of the Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of ICDs in Patients with Nonischemic Systolic Heart Failure on Mortality (DANISH), 252 patients underwent CMR. LGE was quantified by the full width/half maximum method. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. LGE could be adequately assessed in 236 patients, median age was 61 years and median duration of heart failure was 14 months; there were 108 patients (46%) randomized to ICD. Median follow-up time was 5.3 years. Median left ventricular ejection fraction on CMR was 35%. In all, 50 patients died. LGE was present in 113 patients (48%). The presence of LGE was an independent predictor of all-cause mortality (HR 1.82; 95% CI 1.002-3.29; P = .049) after adjusting for known cardiovascular risk factors. ICD implantation did not impact all-cause mortality, for either patients with LGE (HR 1.18; 95% CI 0.59-2.38; P = .63), or for patients without LGE (HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.39-2.53; P = .99), (P for interaction =0.79). CONCLUSION: In patients with non-ischemic systolic heart failure, LGE predicted all-cause mortality. However, in this cohort, LGE did not identify a group of patients who survived longer by receiving an ICD.

Which patients with atrial fibrillation undergo an ablation procedure today in Europe? A report from the ESC-EHRA-EORP Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Long-Term and Atrial Fibrillation General Pilot Registries.

AIMS: Rhythm control management in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) may be unequal across Europe. The aim of this study was to investigate how selective the patient cohort referred for AF ablation is, as compared to the general AF population in Europe, and to describe the governing mechanisms for such selection. METHODS AND RESULTS: Descriptive comparative statistical analyses of the baseline characteristics were performed between the cohorts of Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Long-Term (ESC EORP AFA-LT) registry, designed to provide a picture of contemporary real-world AF ablation, and the AF population from the AF-General (ESC EORP AF-Gen) pilot registry. Data collection was performed using a web-based system. In the AFA and in the Atrial Fibrillation General (AFG) pilot registries, 3593 and 3049 patients were enrolled, respectively. Patients who underwent AF ablation were younger, more commonly male, and had significantly less comorbidities. Atrial Fibrillation Ablation patients often presented without comorbidities, resulting in a lower risk of stroke (CHA2DS2-VASc ≥5: 2.9% vs. 24.5%, all P < 0.001) and bleeding (HAS-BLED ≥2: 8.5% vs. 40.5%, P < 0.001) but with European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) scores >1 and more prevalent AF-related symptoms such as palpitations, fatigue, and weakness (all P < 0.001) as compared to the general AF patients. Atrial Fibrillation Ablation patients were significantly more often male, had higher left ventricular ejection fraction (59.5% vs. 52.4%) and smaller left atrial size on echocardiogram (P < 0.001 each). CONCLUSION: The comparison of the patient cohorts in the AFA and AFG registries showed that AF ablation in European clinical practice is mostly performed in relatively young, symptomatic and relatively healthy patients.

Defibrillator Implantation in Patients with Nonischemic Systolic Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) in patients with symptomatic systolic heart failure caused by coronary artery disease has been well documented. However, the evidence for a benefit of prophylactic ICDs in patients with systolic heart failure that is not due to coronary artery disease has been based primarily on subgroup analyses. The management of heart failure has improved since the landmark ICD trials, and many patients now receive cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). METHODS: In a randomized, controlled trial, 556 patients with symptomatic systolic heart failure (left ventricular ejection fraction, ≤35%) not caused by coronary artery disease were assigned to receive an ICD, and 560 patients were assigned to receive usual clinical care (control group). In both groups, 58% of the patients received CRT. The primary outcome of the trial was death from any cause. The secondary outcomes were sudden cardiac death and cardiovascular death. RESULTS: After a median follow-up period of 67.6 months, the primary outcome had occurred in 120 patients (21.6%) in the ICD group and in 131 patients (23.4%) in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68 to 1.12; P=0.28). Sudden cardiac death occurred in 24 patients (4.3%) in the ICD group and in 46 patients (8.2%) in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.82; P=0.005). Device infection occurred in 27 patients (4.9%) in the ICD group and in 20 patients (3.6%) in the control group (P=0.29). CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, prophylactic ICD implantation in patients with symptomatic systolic heart failure not caused by coronary artery disease was not associated with a significantly lower long-term rate of death from any cause than was usual clinical care. (Funded by Medtronic and others; DANISH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00542945 .).

Effects of dofetilide and ranolazine on atrial fibrillatory rate in a horse model of acutely induced atrial fibrillation.

INTRODUCTION: The atrial fibrillatory rate is a potential biomarker in the study of antiarrhythmic drug effects on atrial fibrillation (AF). The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether dose-dependent changes in the atrial fibrillatory rate can be monitored on surface electrocardiography (ECG) following treatment with dofetilide, ranolazine, and a combination of the two in an acute model of AF in horses. METHODS AND RESULTS: Eight horses were subjected to pacing-induced AF on 4 separate days. Saline (control), dofetilide, ranolazine, or a combination of dofetilide and ranolazine was administered in four incremental doses. Atrial fibrillatory activity was extracted from surface ECGs using spatiotemporal QRST cancellation. The mean atrial fibrillatory rate before drug infusion was 297 ± 27 fpm. Dofetilide reduced the atrial fibrillatory rate following the infusion of low doses (0.89 µg/kg, P < 0.05) and within 5 minutes preceding cardioversion (P < 0.05). Cardioversion with ranolazine was preceded by a reduction in the atrial fibrillatory rate in the last minute (P < 0.05). The combination of drugs reduced the atrial fibrillatory rate in a similar manner to dofetilide used alone. A trend toward a lower atrial fibrillatory rate before drug infusion was found among horses cardioverting on low doses of the drugs. CONCLUSION: The atrial fibrillatory rate derived from surface ECGs showed a difference in the mode of action on AF between dofetilide and ranolazine. Dofetilide reduced the atrial fibrillatory rate, whereas ranolazine displayed a cardioverting mechanism that was distinct from a slowing of the fibrillatory process.

QT as a predictor of recurrence after atrial fibrillation ablation and the impact of amiodarone: results from the placebo-controlled AMIO-CAT trial.

AIMS: Prolonged corrected QT interval (QTc) might be associated with arrhythmia recurrence after atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. The effect of short-term amiodarone in this setting remains unknown. This study seeks to quantify short-term amiodarone's impact on QTc, and to investigate QTc and amiodarone treatment as predictors of recurrence of arrhythmia after ablation. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Short-term AMIOdarone treatment after CATheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AMIO-CAT) trial randomized patients to 8 weeks of oral amiodarone or placebo following AF ablation. Scheduled and symptom-driven 12-lead electrocardiography and 3-day Holter-monitorings were performed. The endpoint was atrial fibrillation, atrial flutter or atrial tachycardia (AF/AT) lasting >30 s. The cut-off for prolonged QTc was 450 ms for men and 460 ms for women. A total of 212 patients were included, of which 108 were randomized to amiodarone and 104 to placebo. From baseline to 1 month QTc in the amiodarone group increased by 27 (±30) ms, while at 6 months QTc had normalized. After 3-months of blanking, new AF/AT recurrence was detected in 63% of patients with prolonged QTc vs. 41% of patients with normal QTc at baseline, and in multivariate Cox regression, prolonged QTc was associated with AF/AT recurrence [hazard ratio (HR) 2.19, P = 0.023]. Among patients with baseline QTc below median, amiodarone treatment decreased the rate of AF/AT recurrences (HR 0.43, P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Amiodarone increased QTc with 27 ms compared to placebo, and this effect decreased rapidly after drug discontinuation. Prolonged QTc at baseline independently predicted AF/AT recurrence, and baseline QTc identified patients who would possibly benefit from short-term amiodarone following ablation.

The effect of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in patients with diabetes and non-ischaemic systolic heart failure.

AIMS: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation reduce the risk of sudden cardiac death, but not all-cause death in patients with non-ischaemic systolic heart failure (HF). Whether co-existence of diabetes affects ICD treatment effects is unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined the effect of ICD implantation on risk of all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and sudden cardiac death (SCD) according to diabetes status at baseline in the Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of ICDs in Patients with Non-ischaemic Systolic Heart Failure on Mortality (DANISH) trial. Outcomes were analysed by use of cumulative incidence curves and Cox regressions models. Of the 1116 patients enrolled, 211 (19%) had diabetes at baseline. Patients with diabetes were more obese, had worse kidney function and more were in New York Heart Association Class III/IV. The risk of device infections and other complications in the ICD group was similar among patients with and without diabetes (6.1% vs. 4.6% P = 0.54). Irrespective of treatment group, diabetes was associated with higher risk of all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and SCD. The treatment effect of ICD in patients with diabetes vs. patients without diabetes was hazard ratio (HR) = 0.92 (0.57-1.50) vs. HR = 0.85 (0.63-1.13); Pinteraction = 0.60 for all-cause mortality, HR = 0.99 (0.58-1.70) vs. HR = 0.70 (0.48-1.01); Pinteraction = 0.25 for cardiovascular death, and HR = 0.81 (0.35-1.88) vs. HR = 0.40 (0.22-0.76); Pinteraction = 0.16 for sudden cardiac death. CONCLUSION: Among patients with non-ischaemic systolic HF, diabetes was associated with higher incidence of all-cause mortality, primarily driven by cardiovascular mortality including SCD. Treatment effect of ICD therapy was not significantly modified by diabetes which might be due to lack of power.

The impact of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation on health-related quality of life in the DANISH trial.

AIM: The Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators (ICD) in Patients with Non-ischaemic Systolic Heart Failure (HF) on Mortality (DANISH) found no overall effect on all-cause mortality. The effect of ICD implantation on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) remains to be established as previous trials have demonstrated conflicting results. We investigated the impact of ICD implantation on HRQoL in patients with non-ischaemic systolic HF, a prespecified secondary endpoint in DANISH. METHODS AND RESULTS: In DANISH, a total of 1116 patients with non-ischaemic systolic HF were randomly assigned (1:1) to ICD implantation or usual clinical care (control). Patients completed disease-specific HRQoL as assessed by Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ; 0-105, high indicating worse). Changes in HRQoL 8 months after randomization were assessed with a mixed-effects model. At randomization, MLHFQ was completed by 935 (84%) patients (n = 472 in the ICD group and n = 463 in the control group) and was reassessed in 274 (58%) and 292 (63%) patients, respectively after 8 months for the primary analysis. Patients in the ICD group vs. the control group had similar improvements in MLHFQ after 8 months [least square mean -7.0 vs. -4.2 (P = 0.13)]. A clinically relevant improvement (decrease ≥5) in the MLHFQ overall score at 8 months was observed in 151 patients in the ICD group and 148 patients in the control group [55% vs. 51%, respectively (P = 0.25)]. CONCLUSION: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation in patients with non-ischaemic systolic HF did not significantly alter HRQoL compared with patients randomized to usual clinical care.