18F-FDG PET/CT and radiolabeled leukocyte SPECT/CT imaging for the evaluation of cardiovascular infection in the multimodality context: ASNC Imaging Indications (ASNC I2) Series Expert Consensus Recommendations from ASNC, AATS, ACC, AHA, ASE, EANM, HRS, IDSA, SCCT, SNMMI, and STS.

This document on cardiovascular infection, including infective endocarditis, is the first in the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology Imaging Indications (ASNC I2) series to assess the role of radionuclide imaging in the multimodality context for the evaluation of complex systemic diseases with multi-societal involvement including pertinent disciplines. A rigorous modified Delphi approach was used to determine consensus clinical indications, diagnostic criteria, and an algorithmic approach to diagnosis of cardiovascular infection including infective endocarditis. Cardiovascular infection incidence is increasing and is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Current strategies based on clinical criteria and an initial echocardiographic imaging approach are effective but often insufficient in complicated cardiovascular infection. Radionuclide imaging with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and single photon emission computed tomography/CT leukocyte scintigraphy can enhance the evaluation of suspected cardiovascular infection by increasing diagnostic accuracy, identifying extracardiac involvement, and assessing cardiac implanted device pockets, leads, and all portions of ventricular assist devices. This advanced imaging can aid in key medical and surgical considerations. Consensus diagnostic features include focal/multi-focal or diffuse heterogenous intense 18F-FDG uptake on valvular and prosthetic material, perivalvular areas, device pockets and leads, and ventricular assist device hardware persisting on non-attenuation corrected images. There are numerous clinical indications with a larger role in prosthetic valves, and cardiac devices particularly with possible infective endocarditis or in the setting of prior equivocal or non-diagnostic imaging. Illustrative cases incorporating these consensus recommendations provide additional clarification. Future research is necessary to refine application of these advanced imaging tools for surgical planning, to identify treatment response, and more.

Adaptive versus conventional cardiac resynchronisation therapy in patients with heart failure (AdaptResponse): a global, prospective, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Continuous automatic optimisation of cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT), stimulating only the left ventricle to fuse with intrinsic right bundle conduction (synchronised left ventricular stimulation), might offer better outcomes than conventional CRT in patients with heart failure, left bundle branch block, and normal atrioventricular conduction. This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes of adaptive CRT versus conventional CRT in patients with heart failure with intact atrioventricular conduction and left bundle branch block. METHODS: This global, prospective, randomised controlled trial was done in 227 hospitals in 27 countries across Asia, Australia, Europe, and North America. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with class 2-4 heart failure, an ejection fraction of 35% or less, left bundle branch block with QRS duration of 140 ms or more (male patients) or 130 ms or more (female patients), and a baseline PR interval 200 ms or less. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via block permutation to adaptive CRT (an algorithm providing synchronised left ventricular stimulation) or conventional biventricular CRT using a device programmer. All patients received device programming but were masked until procedures were completed. Site staff were not masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death or intervention for heart failure decompensation and was assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety events were collected and reported in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02205359, and is closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between Aug 5, 2014, and Jan 31, 2019, of 3797 patients enrolled, 3617 (95·3%) were randomly assigned (1810 to adaptive CRT and 1807 to conventional CRT). The futility boundary was crossed at the third interim analysis on June 23, 2022, when the decision was made to stop the trial early. 1568 (43·4%) of 3617 patients were female and 2049 (56·6%) were male. Median follow-up was 59·0 months (IQR 45-72). A primary outcome event occurred in 430 of 1810 patients (Kaplan-Meier occurrence rate 23·5% [95% CI 21·3-25·5] at 60 months) in the adaptive CRT group and in 470 of 1807 patients (25·7% [23·5-27·8] at 60 months) in the conventional CRT group (hazard ratio 0·89, 95% CI 0·78-1·01; p=0·077). System-related adverse events were reported in 452 (25·0%) of 1810 patients in the adaptive CRT group and 440 (24·3%) of 1807 patients in the conventional CRT group. INTERPRETATION: Compared with conventional CRT, adaptive CRT did not significantly reduce the incidence of all-cause death or intervention for heart failure decompensation in the included population of patients with heart failure, left bundle branch block, and intact AV conduction. Death and heart failure decompensation rates were low with both CRT therapies, suggesting a greater response to CRT occurred in this population than in patients in previous trials. FUNDING: Medtronic.

Comparison of outcomes and required tools between transvenous extraction of pacemaker and implantable cardioverter defibrillator leads: Insight from single high-volume center experience.

INTRODUCTION: Reports of comparison with procedural outcomes for implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and pacemaker (PM) transvenous lead extraction (TLE) are old and limited. We sought to compare the safety, efficacy, and procedural properties of ICD and PM TLE and assess the impact of lead age. METHODS: The study cohort included all consecutive patients with ICD and PM TLE in the Cleveland Clinic Prospective TLE Registry between 2013 and 2022. Extraction success, complications, and failure employed the definitions described in the HRS 2017 TLE guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 885 ICD leads, a median implant duration of 8 (5-11) years in 810 patients, and 1352 PM leads of 7 (3-13) years in 807 patients were included. Procedural success rates in ICD patients were superior to those of PM in >20 years leads but similar in ≤20 years leads. In the PM group, the complete success rate of TLE decreased significantly according to the increase of lead age, but not in the ICD group. ICD TLE required more extraction tools compared with PM TLE but cases with older leads required non-laser sheath extraction tools in both groups. The most common injury site in major complication cases differed between ICD and PM TLE, although major complication rates showed no difference in both groups (2.7% vs. 1.6%, p = .12). CONCLUSION: The procedural success rate by TLE is greater for ICD patients than PM patients with leads >20 years old but requires more extraction tools. Common vascular complication sites and the impact of lead age on procedural outcomes and required tools differed between ICD and PM TLE.

18F-FDG PET/CT and radiolabeled leukocyte SPECT/CT imaging for the evaluation of cardiovascular infection in the multimodality context: ASNC Imaging Indications (ASNC I2) Series Expert Consensus Recommendations from ASNC, AATS, ACC, AHA, ASE, EANM, HRS, IDSA, SCCT, SNMMI, and STS.

This document on cardiovascular infection, including infective endocarditis, is the first in the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology Imaging Indications (ASNC I2) series to assess the role of radionuclide imaging in the multimodality context for the evaluation of complex systemic diseases with multi-societal involvement including pertinent disciplines. A rigorous modified Delphi approach was used to determine consensus clinical indications, diagnostic criteria, and an algorithmic approach to diagnosis of cardiovascular infection including infective endocarditis. Cardiovascular infection incidence is increasing and is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Current strategies based on clinical criteria and an initial echocardiographic imaging approach are effective but often insufficient in complicated cardiovascular infection. Radionuclide imaging with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (CT) and single photon emission computed tomography/CT leukocyte scintigraphy can enhance the evaluation of suspected cardiovascular infection by increasing diagnostic accuracy, identifying extracardiac involvement, and assessing cardiac implanted device pockets, leads, and all portions of ventricular assist devices. This advanced imaging can aid in key medical and surgical considerations. Consensus diagnostic features include focal/multi-focal or diffuse heterogenous intense 18F-FDG uptake on valvular and prosthetic material, perivalvular areas, device pockets and leads, and ventricular assist device hardware persisting on non-attenuation corrected images. There are numerous clinical indications with a larger role in prosthetic valves, and cardiac devices particularly with possible infective endocarditis or in the setting of prior equivocal or non-diagnostic imaging. Illustrative cases incorporating these consensus recommendations provide additional clarification. Future research is necessary to refine application of these advanced imaging tools for surgical planning, to identify treatment response, and more.

Competing risks of monomorphic vs. non-monomorphic ventricular arrhythmias in primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients: Global Electrical Heterogeneity and Clinical Outcomes (GEHCO) study.

AIMS: Ablation of monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (MMVT) has been shown to reduce shock frequency and improve survival. We aimed to compare cause-specific risk factors for MMVT and polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (PVT)/ventricular fibrillation (VF) and to develop predictive models. METHODS AND RESULTS: The multicentre retrospective cohort study included 2668 patients (age 63.1 ± 13.0 years; 23% female; 78% white; 43% non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy; left ventricular ejection fraction 28.2 ± 11.1%). Cox models were adjusted for demographic characteristics, heart failure severity and treatment, device programming, and electrocardiogram metrics. Global electrical heterogeneity was measured by spatial QRS-T angle (QRSTa), spatial ventricular gradient elevation (SVGel), azimuth, magnitude (SVGmag), and sum absolute QRST integral (SAIQRST). We compared the out-of-sample performance of the lasso and elastic net for Cox proportional hazards and the Fine-Gray competing risk model. During a median follow-up of 4 years, 359 patients experienced their first sustained MMVT with appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy, and 129 patients had their first PVT/VF with appropriate ICD shock. The risk of MMVT was associated with wider QRSTa [hazard ratio (HR) 1.16; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-1.34], larger SVGel (HR 1.17; 95% CI 1.05-1.30), and smaller SVGmag (HR 0.74; 95% CI 0.63-0.86) and SAIQRST (HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.71-0.99). The best-performing 3-year competing risk Fine-Gray model for MMVT [time-dependent area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC(t)AUC) 0.728; 95% CI 0.668-0.788] identified high-risk (> 50%) patients with 75% sensitivity and 65% specificity, and PVT/VF prediction model had ROC(t)AUC 0.915 (95% CI 0.868-0.962), both satisfactory calibration. CONCLUSION: We developed and validated models to predict the competing risks of MMVT or PVT/VF that could inform procedural planning and future randomized controlled trials of prophylactic ventricular tachycardia ablation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL:www.clinicaltrials.gov Unique identifier:NCT03210883.

New atrial arrhythmia occurrence in single chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillator patients: A real-world investigation.

INTRODUCTION: A current limitation of single chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) is the lack of an atrial lead to reliably detect atrial fibrillation (AF) episodes. A novel ventricular based atrial fibrillation (VBAF) detection algorithm was created for single chamber ICDs to assess R-R variability for detection of AF. METHODS: Patients implanted with Visia AF™ ICDs were prospectively enrolled in the Medtronic Product Surveillance Registry from December 15, 2015 to January 23, 2019 and followed with at least 30 days of monitoring with the algorithm. Time to device-detected daily burden of AF ≥ 6 min, ≥6 h, and ≥23 h were reported. Clinical actions after device-detected AF were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 291 patients were enrolled with a mean follow-up of 22.5 ± 7.9 months. Of these, 212 (73%) had no prior history of AF at device implant. However, 38% of these individuals had AF detected with the VBAF algorithm with daily burden of ≥6 min within two years of implant. In these 80 patients with newly detected AF by their ICD, 23 (29%) had a confirmed clinical diagnosis of AF by their provider. Of patients with a clinical diagnosis of AF, nine (39%) were newly placed on anticoagulation, including five of five (100%) patients having a burden >23 h. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous AF monitoring with the new VBAF algorithm permits early identification and actionable treatment for patients with undiagnosed AF that may improve patient outcomes.

Initial heart rate score predicts new-onset atrial tachyarrhythmias in pacemaker patients.

AIMS: Heart rate score (HRSc), the per cent of atrial paced and sensed event in the largest 10 b.p.m. rate histogram bin of a pacemaker, predicts survival in patients with cardiac devices. No correlation between HRSc and development of atrial fibrillation (AF) has been reported. In this study, we evaluated the relationship between pacemaker post-implantation HRSc and the incidence of newly developed atrial tachyarrhythmias (ATAs). METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with dual-chamber pacemakers, implanted 2013-17, with the LATITUDE remote monitoring data with ≥600 000 beats of histogram data collected at baseline were included (N = 34 543). Heart rate score was determined from the initial 3-month post-implantation histogram data. Patients were excluded if they had ATAs, defined as atrial high-rate episodes >5 min or >1% of right atrial beats >170 b.p.m. during the initial 3 months post-implantation. New ATAs, after the baseline period, were defined by each of the following: >1, >10, or >25% of atrial beats >170 b.p.m. or atrial tachycardia response (ATR) events >24 h. Patients were followed a median of 2.8 (1.0-4.0) years. The incidence of ATAs increased in proportion to HRSc (log-rank P-value <0.001), and the initial HRSc ≥70% was associated with increased ATAs by all definitions. Patients with initial HRSc ≥70% were older, had a higher percentage of right atrium pacing (%RA pacing), had a lower percentage of right ventricular pacing (%RV pacing), and were more likely programmed with rate-response vs. subjects with HRSc <70%. Initial HRSc (hazard ratio: 1.07, 95% confidence interval: 1.05-1.09; P < 0.0001) independently predicted ATAs after adjusting for age, gender, %RV pacing, and rate-response programming. The %RA pacing and initial HRSc were correlated. CONCLUSION: Heart rate score independently predicts any subsequent duration of ATAs in pacemaker patients.

Extraction outcomes of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads vary by manufacturer and model family.

AIMS: Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) leads is considered challenging. The structure of each ICD leads is variable between manufacturer and model families. The net impact of lead family on the safety and effectiveness of TLE is poorly characterized. We assessed the safety and efficacy of ICD TLE and the impact of manufacturer ICD model family on the outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study cohort included all consecutive patients with ICD who underwent TLE between 2013 and 2022 and are enrolled in the Cleveland Clinic Prospective TLE Registry. A total of 885 ICD leads (median implant duration 8 years) in 810 patients were included. Complete ICD TLE success was achieved in 97.2% of the leads (n = 860) and in 98.0% of the patients (n = 794). Major complications occurred in 22 patients (2.7%). Complete procedural success rate varied by manufacturer and lead family; Medtronic 98.9%, Abbott 95.9%, Boston Scientific 95.0%, Biotronik 91.2%, P = 0.03, and Linox family leads had the lowest, 89.7% P = 0.02. Multivariable predictors of incomplete ICD lead removal included ICD lead age > 10 years and Linox family lead. Multivariable predictors of major complications included ICD lead age > 15 years and longer lead extraction time, and predictors of all-cause mortality within 30 days included lead extraction for infection, end-stage renal disease, and higher New York Heart Association functional class. CONCLUSION: Complete and safe ICD lead removal rate by TLE is extremely high but varied by manufacturer and lead family. Linox family lead and >10 years lead age were independent predictors of incomplete lead removal.

Antibacterial Envelope to Prevent Cardiac Implantable Device Infection.

BACKGROUND: Infections after placement of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. There is limited evidence on prophylactic strategies, other than the use of preoperative antibiotics, to prevent such infections. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, controlled clinical trial to assess the safety and efficacy of an absorbable, antibiotic-eluting envelope in reducing the incidence of infection associated with CIED implantations. Patients who were undergoing a CIED pocket revision, generator replacement, or system upgrade or an initial implantation of a cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive the envelope or not. Standard-of-care strategies to prevent infection were used in all patients. The primary end point was infection resulting in system extraction or revision, long-term antibiotic therapy with infection recurrence, or death, within 12 months after the CIED implantation procedure. The secondary end point for safety was procedure-related or system-related complications within 12 months. RESULTS: A total of 6983 patients underwent randomization: 3495 to the envelope group and 3488 to the control group. The primary end point occurred in 25 patients in the envelope group and 42 patients in the control group (12-month Kaplan-Meier estimated event rate, 0.7% and 1.2%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36 to 0.98; P = 0.04). The safety end point occurred in 201 patients in the envelope group and 236 patients in the control group (12-month Kaplan-Meier estimated event rate, 6.0% and 6.9%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.06; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The mean (±SD) duration of follow-up was 20.7±8.5 months. Major CIED-related infections through the entire follow-up period occurred in 32 patients in the envelope group and 51 patients in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive use of an antibacterial envelope resulted in a significantly lower incidence of major CIED infections than standard-of-care infection-prevention strategies alone, without a higher incidence of complications. (Funded by Medtronic; WRAP-IT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02277990.).

Influence of "high" defibrillation thresholds on patient survival and impact of system modification.

OBJECTIVE: To test whether a high defibrillation threshold (DFT) marks patients with poor outcomes which are improved when DFT is decreased by system modification (subcutaneous coil implant; SM). BACKGROUND: The electrical substrate generating fast ventricular arrhythmias may generate poor outcomes among patients treated with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs), even when arrhythmias are treated successfully. Since patients with high DFTs have increased mortality, we contrasted survival among patients with high DFT treated with and without SM. METHODS: We studied consecutive patients undergoing ICD implantation and DFT testing at Cleveland Clinic over a 14-year period. High DFT was defined as successful defibrillation by shock strength >25 J or ≤10 J of maximal device output. Mortality was recorded using the Social Security Death Index. Survival was compared among those high DFT patients receiving SM versus the remainder. RESULTS: Out of 6353 patients tested, 191 (3%) had high DFT (32.1 ± 3.7 J) versus 13.9 ± 4.9 J in the remainder ("acceptable DFT," p < .001). One hundred twenty-one high DFT patients (63%; 33.3 ± 3.4 J) underwent SM, which significantly decreased DFT (24.8 ± 5.9 J; p < .001). Seventy patients (37%; 30.3 ± 3.3 J) did not undergo SM. During follow-up, 38% (2363/6162; 7.8 yrs) patients with acceptable DFT died versus 48% high DFT patients (91/191; 5.6 yrs.; p < .001). Concomitantly, 48% patients with SM (58/121) died, as compared to 47% patients (33/70) without SM (p = .91); median follow-up 4.9 yrs). CONCLUSION: Patients with high DFT have a higher mortality than those with acceptable DFT. The additional subcutaneous coil implant decreases DFT to an acceptable range but does not appear to improve survival. The electrical substrate underlying high DFT appears to determine survival.

Dofetilide Dose Reductions and Discontinuation in Obese Compared with Nonobese Patients.

ABSTRACT: Dofetilide is an antiarrhythmic agent and primarily eliminated renally. Initial dosing is determined by creatinine clearance, calculated by total body weight in the Cockcroft-Gault equation. To date, there is no evidence comparing the dosing of dofetilide in obese versus nonobese patients. We conducted a retrospective review of 217 adults admitted for dofetilide loading to evaluate the tolerability of dofetilide in obese versus nonobese patients. The rate of dose adjustments, including dose reductions and discontinuations, was compared between obese versus nonobese patients in unadjusted and adjusted analyses. Electrocardiograms were collected throughout the loading period, and calculation of QT intervals was performed. Obese patients did not have a significantly higher frequency of dose adjustments compared with nonobese patients (51.5% vs. 44.8%, P = 0.33). Using total body weight to determine starting doses was associated with great odds of dose adjustments compared with ideal body weight (OR 3.69, P = 0.002) and adjusted body weight (OR 4.46, P = 0.02). Men required significantly fewer dose adjustments compared with women on multivariate analysis (OR 0.53, P = 0.03). Obesity is not associated with an increase in the rate of dose adjustments. Total body weight should be used with caution to calculate initial doses of dofetilide in women because it may lead to a higher rate of dose adjustments compared with ideal body weight. Additional studies are needed to confirm the optimal method for selecting starting doses of dofetilide in women, particularly those with a body mass index of ≥30.

Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Therapy in Heart Failure.

The population of patients with heart failure continues to grow, which introduced significant challenges in clinical practice related to the management of cardiac arrhythmia and advanced heart failure syndromes. Device therapy has increasingly become essential in the management of life-threatening arrhythmia and clinical heart failure in this population. This review will discuss the use of cardiac implantable electronic devices in heart failure with primary focus on sudden cardiac death prevention and cardiac resynchronization, including published evidence and evolving technologies.

Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of an Absorbable Antibacterial Envelope for Use in Patients at Increased Risk of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infection in Germany, Italy, and England.

OBJECTIVES: To model the cost-effectiveness of the TYRX Absorbable Antibacterial Envelope when used in patients at increased risk of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection in the context of 3 European healthcare systems: Germany, Italy, and England. METHODS: A decision tree model with a lifetime horizon was populated using data from the Worldwide Randomized Antibiotic Envelope Infection Prevention Trial, a large multicenter randomized controlled trial. Use of the antibacterial envelope adjunctive to standard of care was compared to standard of care infection prevention alone. Patients in the model were divided into subgroups based on presence of factors known to increase infection risk. RESULTS: The antibacterial envelope had the most favorable cost-effectiveness profile when patients had previously experienced CIED infection, had a history of immunosuppressive therapy, or had a Prevention of Arrhythmia Device Infection Trial (PADIT) score indicating high risk of infection (scores ≥6) at cost-effectiveness thresholds of €50 000 in Germany (assumed in the absence of an official threshold), €40 000 in Italy, and £30 000 in England. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that the antibacterial envelope was likely to be cost-effective in patients with other risk factors (including replacement of high power CIEDs, generator replacement with lead modification, and PADIT scores indicating intermediate risk of infection) when used with some device types and in some countries. CONCLUSIONS: The absorbable antibacterial envelope was associated with cost-effectiveness ratios below European benchmarks in selected patients at increased risk of infection, suggesting the envelope provides value for European healthcare systems by reducing CIED infections.

Antibiotic eluting envelopes: evidence, technology, and defining high-risk populations.

Cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIED) are effective and important components of modern cardiovascular care. Despite the dramatic improvements in the functionality and reliability of these devices, over time patients are at risk for developing several morbidities, the most feared of which are local and systemic infections. Despite significant financial investment and aggressive therapy with hospitalization, intravenous antibiotics, and transvenous lead extraction, the outcomes include a 1-year mortality rate as high as 25%. This risk of infection has increased over time, likely due to the increased complexity of the surgical interventions required to insert and replace these devices. The only way to reduce this morbidity and mortality is to prevent these infections, and other than preoperative antibiotics, there were little data supporting effective therapy until the WRAP-IT trial provided randomized data showing that pocket infections can be reduced by 60% at 12 months and major CIED infections reduced by 40% at 1 year with the use of the absorbable antibiotic eluting envelope in patient CIED procedures at high risk of infection. Not all CIED procedures are at high risk of infection and justify the use of the envelope, but cost-effectiveness data support the use of the antibiotic envelope particularly in patients with defibrillator replacements, revisions, and upgrades, such as to a resynchronization device and in patients with prior CIED infection, history of immunocompromise, two or more prior procedures, or a history of renal dysfunction.

Infections associated with cardiac electronic implantable devices: economic perspectives and impact of the TYRX™ antibacterial envelope.

The occurrence of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) infections and related adverse outcomes have an important financial impact on the healthcare system, with hospitalization length of stay (2-3 weeks on average) being the largest cost driver, including the cost of device system extraction and device replacement accounting for more than half of total costs. In the recent literature, the economic profile of the TYRX™ absorbable antibacterial envelope was analysed taking into account both randomized and non-randomized trial data. Economic analysis found that the envelope is associated with cost-effectiveness ratios below USA and European benchmarks in selected patients at increased risk of infection. Therefore, the TYRX™ envelope, by effectively reducing CIED infections, provides value according to the criteria of affordability currently adopted by USA and European healthcare systems.

Predictors of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Artifact on Cardiac MRI: The Utility of a Device Related Score.

PURPOSE: Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) image quality can be degraded by artifact in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED). We aimed to establish a clinical risk score, so patient selection for diagnostic CMR could be optimised. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, CMRs performed for clinical use in subjects with CIED from January 2016 to May 2019 were reviewed. Subject anthropometry, CIED generator/lead specifications and pre-scan chest X-ray (CXR) measurements were collected. Generator-related artifact size was measured on axial steady state free precession images. Interpretability of late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) imaging was performed based on a three-grade visual score attributed to each of 17 myocardial segments. RESULTS: Fifty-seven (57) patients (59±16 years, 74% male) fitted the inclusion criteria. Artifact precluded left ventricle (LV) evaluation (≥5 segments) in 17 (30%). Artifact was more common with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, related to generator volume, mass, height, width, thickness, and area, along with right ventricular (RV) lead length and diameter (all p<0.05). Artifact was associated with distance from generator to LV apex, generator to RV lead tip and shortest distance from generator to heart on CXR (all p<0.05). On multivariable regression modelling, RV lead diameter (OR 5.861, 95% CI 1.866-18.407, p=0.002) and distance from generator to LV apex (OR 0.693, 95% CI 0.511-0.940, p=0.019) were independent predictors of artifact. Multivariable predictors were used to develop Device Related CMR Artifact Prediction Score (DR-CAPS), where all patients with DR-CAPS=0 had fully interpretable LGE imaging. CONCLUSION: Simple, readily available measures, such as lead characteristics and pre-scan CXR measures, can stratify patients via an artifact prediction score to optimise selection for diagnostic CMR.

Predictors of long-term outcomes greater than 10 years after cardiac resynchronization therapy implantation.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is indicated in patients with medically refractory heart failure and wide QRS duration. While much is known about predictors of left ventricular (LV) remodeling after CRT implantation and short-term mortality, limited data exist on long-term outcomes after CRT placement. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all patients undergoing CRT implantation at our center between 2003 and 2008 and examined mortality using institutional electronic records, social security death index, and online obituary search. We included only patients with preimplant echoes with LV ejection fraction (LVEF) 35% or below. Variable selection was performed using stepwise regression and models were compared using goodness-of-fit criteria. A final model was validated with the bootstrap regression method. RESULTS: Out of the 877 CRT patients undergoing implantation during this time, 287 (32.7%) survived longer than 10 years. Significant (P < .05) predictors of survival in our multivariate model were age, left ventricular diastolic diameter, sex, presence of nonischemic vs ischemic cardiomyopathy, QRS duration, atrial fibrillation, BNP levels, and creatinine levels at the time of CRT implantation. A model using the odds ratios from these variables had a receiver operating curve with an area under the curve score of 0.816 (standard error, 0.019) at predicting survival or freedom from LVAD or heart transplant for longer than 10 years after CRT implantation. The specificity for factors 3 or above and 5 or above was 68% and 77%, respectively. CONCLUSION: A large proportion of patients are still alive 10 years after CRT implantation. Variables at the time of CRT implant can help provide prognostic information to patients and electrophysiologists to determine the long-term benefit and survival of patients after CRT implantation.

Baseline Right Ventricular Dysfunction Predicts Worse Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Implantation.

INTRODUCTION: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has been shown to improve survival in patients with systolic heart failure, wide QRS duration, and left-bundle-branch-block. However, CRT outcomes stratified by right ventricular (RV) function at implant have not been well studied. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients at Cleveland Clinic who underwent CRT implantation (n = 777) from 2003 to 2011 with a diagnosis of heart failure, echocardiography with both pre-CRT left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35% and available post-CRT echocardiography at 6 months post-implant. CRT response was defined as LVEF improvement ≥5%. Patients were separated into 2 groups: normal or mild RV dysfunction (n = 570) labeled Normal RV; moderate to severe dysfunction (n = 207) labeled RV DYSFXN based on qualitative echocardiography assessment. Survival was calculated as time from CRT implant to death, left ventricular assist device implant, or heart transplant. RESULTS: CRT response was significantly higher in patients with Normal RV (67%) compared with patients with RV DYSFXN (56%; P = .006). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that CRT patients with Normal RV had significantly greater survival compared with patients with RV DYSFXN (P < .001). In multivariable Cox regression accounting for a priori covariates, RV DYSFXN was associated with worse survival (HR 1.41 [95% CI: 1.14-1.75], P = .002) and lower CRT response (HR 0.66 [95% CI: 0.44-0.97], P = .03). CONCLUSION: Baseline RV dysfunction at CRT implant is an important predictor of worsened left ventricular remodeling and survival in CRT patients.

Rapid ventricular pacing during transcatheter valve procedures using an internal device and programmer: A demonstration of feasibility.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a protocol for using a pre-existing, permanent pacemaker or defibrillator device for rapid ventricular pacing during transcatheter valve procedures and demonstrate feasibility. BACKGROUND: Placement of a passive fixation, temporary pacemaker wire is considered routine during most transcatheter valve procedures to facilitate controlled or rapid ventricular pacing at the time of balloon expansion or valve deployment. Many patients presenting for such procedures have a pre-existing, permanent pacemaker or defibrillator device which could be used for the same function, obviating the need for temporary pacemaker wire placement. METHODS: We developed a strategy for rapid pacing from the pre-existing device using a programmer during transcatheter valve procedures in consecutive patients over a 3-month period. Complications and clinical outcomes were recorded. RESULTS: There were 135 transcatheter valve procedures performed during the study. Of these, 28 (20.7%) had pre-existing devices (17 transcatheter aortic valve replacement, 3 aortic valve-in-valve, 2 mitral valve-in-valve, and 6 balloon aortic valvuloplasty). All patients underwent rapid ventricular pacing using a commercially available device programmer. There were no adverse events related to device pacing and no patients required placement of a temporary pacemaker wire during the procedure. At 30-days follow-up, there were no deaths, one major vascular complication related to arterial access, and one patient with renal failure requiring dialysis. CONCLUSION: Pacing from a commercially available device programmer is safe, feasible, and may reduce both procedural cost and complications such as cardiac tamponade by avoiding placement of a temporary pacemaker lead during transcatheter valve procedures.

Proarrhythmic effects from competitive atrial pacing and potential programming solutions.

BACKGROUND: Programmed long AV delays and intrinsic long first degree AV block may increase risk for competitive atrial pacing (CAP) in devices without CAP avoidance algorithms. METHODS: Patients identified with CAP-induced mode switch episodes were followed clinically from September 2013 to August 2019. Attempts to avoid CAP included shortening of postventricular atrial refractory period (PVARP) or postventricular atrial blanking period (PVAB), or change to AAI or DDI modes. After observing associations with sensor-driven pacing, rate response was inactivated in a subset. RESULTS: Among 23 patients identified with CAP (22 St Jude Medical [Abbott]; one Boston Scientific Corporation devices), atrial fibrillation (AF) was induced in 12 (52%), lasting 10 seconds to 28 hours and 32 minutes. In one patient with an ICD CAP-induced AF with rapid ventricular rates that triggered a shock, inducing ventricular fibrillation, syncope, and another shock. Changing AV delays and shortening of PVARP failed to resolve CAP. After noting that all had CAP during sensor-driven pacing, rate response was inactivated in seven, resolving further device-induced AF in the three of seven that had prior CAP-induced AF. In two patients with intact AV conduction, AAI(R) pacing resolved further documentation of CAP. CONCLUSIONS: CAP predominantly occurs during sensor-driven atrial pacing that competes with intrinsic atrial events falling in PVARP. Inactivation of the activity sensor or change to atrial-based pacing modes (AAI/R) appears to effectively prevent induction of device-induced atrial proarrhythmia. Ultimately, a corrective algorithm is needed to avoid CAP-induced proarrhythmia.