Outcomes of atrial fibrillation ablation in community hospitals with and without onsite cardiothoracic surgery availability.

BACKGROUND: Limited data exist on outcomes of atrial fibrillation (AF) catheter ablation based on hospital setting and, specifically, the availability of onsite cardiothoracic surgery (CTS). We aimed to describe the characteristics and outcomes of catheter ablation for AF performed at a facility with and without CTS. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of consecutive patients who underwent catheter ablation for AF at hospital with (CTS) and without cardiothoracic surgery (N-CTS) from January 2011 through December 2019. Clinical and procedural characteristics, complications, and 1-year outcomes, including clinical events and AF recurrence, were collected. RESULTS: There were 326 unique patients who underwent an index AF ablation procedure: 206 CTS patients and 120 N-CTS patients. There were no differences in overall cardiac complications (2.5% vs. 5.8%), including mapping catheter entrapment requiring open-heart surgery (0% vs. 0.5%), pericardial effusion requiring pericardiocentesis (0.8% vs. 0.5%), hemopericardium (1.7% vs. 0.5%), acute myocardial infarction (0% vs. 1.0%), and sinus node injury (0% versus 0.5%) (all P values > .05) between N-CTS and CTS patients. Likewise, overall noncardiac complications (20.7% vs. 19.8%, P = .85), including bleeding, cerebrovascular accident, and phrenic or vagus nerve injury, were similar between N-CTS and CTS hospitals. Also, 1-year cumulative Kaplan-Meier estimates of overall AF recurrence (11.6% vs. 16.4%; log-rank P = 0.21; HR 1.47; 95% CI, 0.79-2.74) were not statistically significant between N-CTS and CTS hospitals. CONCLUSION: Catheter ablation procedure is safe and effective regardless of onsite CTS presence, and there were no significant differences between the two hospital settings.

Arrhythmic prognosis according to left ventricular systolic dysfunction severity in cardiac sarcoidosis.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines present varying classes of recommendations for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) utilization in patients with cardiac sarcoidosis (CS) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <50%. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the ventricular arrhythmia risk in CS patients with ICDs and varying degrees of left ventricular systolic dysfunction. METHODS: The study included CS patients with an ICD and LVEF <50% at index evaluation. The primary outcome was survival free of sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT)/ventricular fibrillation (VF) after ICD implantation and was assessed comparatively for LVEF ≤35% vs 36%-49% and for primary vs secondary prevention ICD indication. RESULTS: The study included 61 patients (median age 57 years; 61% male) with LVEF 36%-49% (n = 23) or LVEF ≤35% (n = 38). An ICD was implanted for secondary prevention in 24% and 44% of the LVEF ≤35% and 36%-49% groups, respectively (P = .11). The primary outcome did not differ between the 2 groups in univariable analysis (LVEF ≤35% vs 36%-49%: hazard ratio [HR] 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39-1.82; P = .67). In multivariable analysis, secondary prevention ICD indication was the only significant predictor of incident sustained VT/VF (HR 2.86; 95% CI 1.23-6.67; P = .015). Mean sustained VT/VF event burden was higher in the secondary compared with the primary prevention ICD patients (0.47 vs 0.11 events per patient-year; P = .005) but did not differ significantly between LVEF ≤35% and 36%-49% patients. CONCLUSION: CS patients with ICD indications and LVEF 36%-49% carry similarly high arrhythmic risk as those with LVEF ≤35%. Patients with secondary prevention ICDs have the highest overall risk.

Racial disparities in trend, clinical characteristics and outcomes in Takotsubo syndrome.

INTRODUCTION: Takotsubo syndrome (TTS) is an acute transient nonischemic cardiomyopathy often characterized by its hallmark feature of left ventricular apical ballooning. The correlation between racial backgrounds and the prognosis of individuals with TTS remains poorly defined. Our study aimed to explore the influence of race on the trends, clinical presentations, and outcomes in patients diagnosed with TTS. METHODS: We queried the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database from 2016 to 2020 and identified hospitalizations with TTS. We compared the clinical features and outcomes across three different races - non-Hispanic White (NHW), non-Hispanic Black (NHB), and Hispanic population. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: 76,505 weighted hospitalizations for TTS were identified, of which 65,495 (85.6%) were non-Hispanic White, 5,830 (7.6%) were non-Hispanic Black, and 5,180 (6.8%) were Hispanics. After propensity-score matching, NHB patients had higher odds of acute kidney injury (OR: 1.49, 95% CI: 1.21-1.84, p < 0.001) and mechanical ventilation (OR: 1.33, 95% CI: 1.04-1.68, p = 0.02). Hispanic patients had a higher incidence of acute kidney injury requiring dialysis when compared to NHW patients (OR: 2.53, 95% CI: 1.11-5.77, p = 0.027). There was no significant difference in terms of in-hospital mortality between NHB and Hispanic patients when compared to NHW patients. Notably, Hispanic populations experienced a higher mortality rate during the COVID-19 period. CONCLUSION: Our study suggested significant differences in the outcomes of TTS across different racial groups. Hispanic populations experienced a higher mortality rate with TTS during the COVID-19 era. Further research should emphasize discovering the factors contributing to the observed disparities.

Temporary-Permanent Pacemakers in the Management of Conduction Abnormalities in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

Background: Injury to the cardiac conduction system requiring a permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation is a known adverse outcome of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Temporary-permanent pacemakers (TPPM) have been used as a bridge to PPM implantation in patients with systemic infection; however, there are only a few reports of its routine use in patients undergoing TAVR. This study aimed to assess the utility of routine use of TPPM in patients undergoing TAVR with a high risk of needing a PPM or those who develop high-grade conduction abnormalities during/after TAVR. Methods: Between April 2015 and December 2021, 978 patients underwent TAVR at our institution, of whom 111 patients had TPPM placed before or during/after TAVR during the study period. In total, 89 patients were included in the final analysis. Results: The median age was 78 years (IQR, 71-84 years); 52 (58.4%) patients with preexisting native conduction disease were considered high risk for advanced heart block and had TPPM placed before TAVR. In addition, 37 (41.6%) patients had TPPM placed during/after TAVR. Of the 89 patients who received TPPM, 51 (57.3%) were treated with a balloon-expandable valve and 38 (42.7%) with a self-expandable valve. Of the patients who underwent TPPM placement, only 49 (55.1%) required a PPM, and TPPM was removed in 40 (44.9%) patients. TPPM was in place for a median of 6 days (IQR, 2-11 days). Only 1 of the 89 patients (1.1%) who received a TPPM had lead dislodgment. No other complications were noted. Median length of stay was 3 days (IQR, 2-4 days). Conclusions: In patients with high-risk baseline conduction abnormalities before TAVR and those who develop new high-grade conduction abnormalities during/after TAVR, TPPM provides a feasible and safe method for pacing that could allow early ambulation, facilitate early discharge, and prevent unnecessary PPM implantations in some patients.

Mantle Cell Lymphoma With Cardiac Involvement Presenting as Complete Heart Block.

A 50-year-old woman presented with complete heart block on electrocardiogram. Echocardiogram revealed an intracardiac mass with extensive cardiac involvement. The patient was diagnosed with mantle cell lymphoma, confirmed via lymph node biopsy. Pacemaker implantation and chemotherapy were initiated, with subsequent improvement noted. This showcases an unusual manifestation of intracardiac metastasis with conduction system infiltration.

Direct Comparison of Methods to Differentiate Wide Complex Tachycardias: Novel Automated Algorithms Versus Manual ECG Interpretation Approaches.

BACKGROUND: Differentiating wide complex tachycardias (WCTs) into ventricular tachycardia (VT) and supraventricular wide tachycardia via 12-lead ECG interpretation is a crucial but difficult task. Automated algorithms show promise as alternatives to manual ECG interpretation, but direct comparison of their diagnostic performance has not been undertaken. METHODS: Two electrophysiologists applied 3 manual WCT differentiation approaches (ie, Brugada, Vereckei aVR, and VT score). Simultaneously, computerized data from paired WCT and baseline ECGs were processed by 5 automated WCT differentiation algorithms (WCT Formula, WCT Formula II, VT Prediction Model, Solo Model, and Paired Model). The diagnostic performance of automated algorithms was compared with manual ECG interpretation approaches. RESULTS: A total of 212 WCTs (111 VT and 101 supraventricular wide tachycardia) from 104 patients were analyzed. WCT Formula demonstrated superior accuracy (85.8%) and specificity (87.1%) compared with Brugada (75.2% and 57.4%, respectively) and Vereckei aVR (65.3% and 36.4%, respectively). WCT Formula II achieved higher accuracy (89.6%) and specificity (85.1%) against Brugada and Vereckei aVR. Performance metrics of the WCT Formula (accuracy 85.8%, sensitivity 84.7%, and specificity 87.1%) and WCT Formula II (accuracy 89.8%, sensitivity 89.6%, and specificity 85.1%) were similar to the VT score (accuracy 84.4%, sensitivity 93.8%, and specificity 74.2%). Paired Model was superior to Brugada in accuracy (89.6% versus 75.2%), specificity (97.0% versus 57.4%), and F1 score (0.89 versus 0.80). Paired Model surpassed Vereckei aVR in accuracy (89.6% versus 65.3%), specificity (97.0% versus 75.2%), and F1 score (0.89 versus 0.74). Paired Model demonstrated similar accuracy (89.6% versus 84.4%), inferior sensitivity (79.3% versus 93.8%), but superior specificity (97.0% versus 74.2%) to the VT score. Solo Model and VT Prediction Model accuracy (82.5% and 77.4%, respectively) was superior to the Vereckei aVR (65.3%) but similar to Brugada (75.2%) and the VT score (84.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Automated WCT differentiation algorithms demonstrated favorable diagnostic performance compared with traditional manual ECG interpretation approaches.

Association between COVID-19 vaccination and atrial arrhythmias in individuals with cardiac implantable electronic devices.

INTRODUCTION: The impact of mRNA-based coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) vaccines on atrial arrhythmias (AA) and ventricular arrhythmias incidence is unknown. METHODS: BIOTRONIK Home Monitoring data and Medicare Claims data were utilized to identify individuals implanted with a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) between 2010 and 2020 who received one or more doses of COVID-19 vaccine in 2021. The burden of AA (%) in the 3 months postvaccination was compared to those noted in the preceding 3 months using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Sub-analyses comparing the effects of the influenza vaccine against the COVID-19 vaccine were also evaluated for individuals who received the influenza vaccine in 2020. A 1:1 propensity score match comparison between COVID-19 vaccine and non-vaccinated patients was also performed. RESULTS: First and second doses of the COVID-19 vaccine were administered to 7757 and 6579 individuals with a CIED (age 76.2 ± 9.0 years, 49% males), respectively. While a small but statistically significant increase in the burden of AA was noted in the 3 months postvaccination compared to the preceding 3 months after the first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine (0.43 ± 9.04%, p = .028) a similar rise in AA was found following the influenza vaccine and for matched patients who did not receive the COVID-19 vaccine. No significant difference in device therapies was seen pre- and postvaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Though we report a small but significant increase in the number of CIED-detected AAs following vaccination for COVID-19 over a 3-month window, we believe these results correlate more with time and the progressive nature of AF rather than the vaccine itself. While these data should not dissuade from the use of these vaccines, increased vigilance and prompt treatment of AF is required for high-risk groups, specifically males over 70 years of age, following vaccination.

Intravascular Ultrasound during Endovascular Intervention for Peripheral Artery Disease, by Severity, Location, Device, and Procedure.

There is limited evidence for the role of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) in patients who underwent peripheral vascular intervention (PVI). We conducted retrospective cohort study utilizing the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project-Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality National Readmission database to delineate outcomes in IVUS-guided PVI versus non-IVUS-guided PVI. The present study utilized National Readmission database between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2019. We identified patients who underwent endovascular intervention for peripheral artery disease using relevant International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Procedural Coding System. The cohort was divided based on the use of IVUS during the procedure. The primary outcome was major amputation at 6 months after index hospitalization. Measured confounders were matched using propensity score inverse probability of treatment weighing method. We further performed a subgroup analysis based on disease severity, location of intervention, device, and procedure. A total of 434,901 hospitalizations were included in the present analysis. PVI with IVUS compared with no IVUS had similar risk of amputation at 6 months (195 of 8,939 [2.17%] vs 10,404 of 384,003 [2.71%]), hazard ratio 0.98, CI 0.77 to 1.25. Further, there was no difference in the rates of secondary outcomes. On subgroup analysis, amputation rates were significantly lower in patients with rest pain, in iliac intervention, or patients who underwent drug-eluting stent implantation with the use of IVUS compared with no IVUS. This nationwide observational study showed that there was no difference in major amputation rates with the use of IVUS in patients who underwent PVI. However, in subgroup of patients with rest pain, iliac intervention or drug-eluting stent implantation IVUS use was associated with significantly lower major amputation rates.

Outcomes of patients with cardiac amyloidosis undergoing percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion.

BACKGROUND: There is limited data on the safety and efficacy of left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) devices in patients with cardiac amyloidosis. We examined the outcomes of patients with cardiac amyloidosis undergoing LAAO device implantation in a nationally representative cohort of patients. METHODS: The National Readmissions Database (NRD) was analyzed from 2016 to 2019 to identify patients ≥ 18 years old with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing LAAO. Patients were divided into those with cardiac amyloidosis and those without cardiac amyloidosis. A multivariable logistic regression model was utilized to assess the independent association of cardiac amyloidosis with in-hospital, 30-day/90-day/180-day outcomes after adjusting for confounders. RESULTS: Our cohort included 54,900 LAAO implantation procedures, of which 220 (0.4%) had cardiac amyloidosis. Patients with cardiac amyloidosis had a lower proportion of women and a lower prevalence of comorbidities including anemia, obesity, diabetes, and peripheral vascular disorders but a higher prevalence of stroke, as compared to those without cardiac amyloidosis. On multivariable analysis, cardiac amyloidosis was associated with significantly higher odds of peri-procedural major adverse events (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.69; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.41-5.14; p<0.01) and neurological complications (aOR: 5.48; 95% CI: 2.47-12.8; p<0.01). There was no difference in the odds of other peri-procedural complications, in-hospital mortality, hospital resource utilization, and 30/90/180-day all-cause/bleeding/stroke-related readmissions between both groups. CONCLUSION: Patients with cardiac amyloidosis undergoing LAAO device implantation have an increased risk of peri-procedural complications without any difference in bleeding/stroke-related readmissions. These hypothesis-generating findings need validation in future prospective studies.

Early and extended erythropoietin monotherapy after hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy: a multicentre double-blind pilot randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the feasibility of early and extended erythropoietin monotherapy after hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy (HIE). DESIGN: Double-blind pilot randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Eight neonatal units in South Asia. PATIENTS: Neonates (≥36 weeks) with moderate or severe HIE admitted between 31 December 2022 and 3 May 2023. INTERVENTIONS: Erythropoietin (500 U/kg daily) or to the placebo (sham injections using a screen) within 6 hours of birth and continued for 9 days. MRI at 2 weeks of age. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Feasibility of randomisation, drug administration and assessment of brain injury using MRI. RESULTS: Of the 154 neonates screened, 56 were eligible; 6 declined consent and 50 were recruited; 43 (86%) were inborn. Mean (SD) age at first dose was 4.4 (1.2) hours in erythropoietin and 4.1 (1.0) hours in placebo. Overall mortality at hospital discharge occurred in 5 (19%) vs 11 (46%) (p=0.06), and 3 (13%) vs 9 (40.9%) (p=0.04) among those with moderate encephalopathy in the erythropoietin and placebo groups. Moderate or severe injury to basal ganglia, white matter and cortex occurred in 5 (25%) vs 5 (38.5%); 14 (70%) vs 11 (85%); and 6 (30%) vs 2 (15.4%) in the erythropoietin and placebo group, respectively. Sinus venous thrombosis was seen in two (10%) neonates in the erythropoietin group and none in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Brain injury and mortality after moderate or severe HIE are high in South Asia. Evaluation of erythropoietin monotherapy using MRI to examine treatment effects is feasible in these settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05395195.