Prophylactic ICD Survival Benefit Prediction: Review and Comparison between Main Scores.

Current guidelines advocate for the use of prophylactic implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) for all patients with symptomatic heart failure (HF) with low ejection fraction (EF). As many patients will never use their device and some are prone to device-related complications, scoring systems for delineating subgroups with differential ICD survival benefits are crucial to maximize ICD benefit and mitigate complications. This review summarizes the main scores, including MADIT trial-based Risk Stratification Score (MRSS) and Seattle Heart Failure Model (SHFM), which are based on randomized trials with a control group (HF medication only) and validated on large cohorts of 'real-world' HF patients. Recent studies using cardiac MRI (CMR) to predict ventricular arrhythmia (VA) are mentioned as well. The review shows that most scores could not delineate sustained VA incidence, but rather mortality without prior appropriate ICD therapies. Multiple scores could identify high-risk subgroups with extremely high probability of early mortality after ICD implant. On the other hand, low-risk subgroups were defined, in whom a high ratio of appropriate ICD therapy versus death without prior appropriate ICD therapy was found, suggesting significant ICD survival benefit. Moreover, MRSS and SHFM proved actual ICD survival benefit in low- and medium-risk subgroups when compared with control patients, and no benefit in high-risk subgroups, consisting of 16-20% of all ICD candidates. CMR reliably identified areas of myocardial scar and 'channels', significantly associated with VA. We conclude that as for today, multiple scoring models could delineate patient subgroups that would benefit differently from prophylactic ICD. Due to their modest-moderate predictability, these scores are still not ready to be implemented into clinical guidelines, but could aid decision regarding prophylactic ICD in borderline cases, as elderly patients and those with multiple co-morbidities. CMR is a promising technique which might help delineate patients with a low- versus high-risk for future VA, beyond EF alone. Lastly, genetic analysis could identify specific mutations in a non-negligible percent of patients, and a few of these mutations were found to predict an increased arrhythmic risk.

Vigorous Exercise in Patients With Congenital Long QT Syndrome: Results of the Prospective, Observational, Multinational LIVE-LQTS Study.

BACKGROUND: Whether vigorous exercise increases risk of ventricular arrhythmias for individuals diagnosed and treated for congenital long QT syndrome (LQTS) remains unknown. METHODS: The National Institutes of Health-funded LIVE-LQTS study (Lifestyle and Exercise in the Long QT Syndrome) prospectively enrolled individuals 8 to 60 years of age with phenotypic and/or genotypic LQTS from 37 sites in 5 countries from May 2015 to February 2019. Participants (or parents) answered physical activity and clinical events surveys every 6 months for 3 years with follow-up completed in February 2022. Vigorous exercise was defined as ≥6 metabolic equivalents for >60 hours per year. A blinded Clinical Events Committee adjudicated the composite end point of sudden death, sudden cardiac arrest, ventricular arrhythmia treated by an implantable cardioverter defibrillator, and likely arrhythmic syncope. A National Death Index search ascertained vital status for those with incomplete follow-up. A noninferiority hypothesis (boundary of 1.5) between vigorous exercisers and others was tested with multivariable Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Among the 1413 participants (13% <18 years of age, 35% 18-25 years of age, 67% female, 25% with implantable cardioverter defibrillators, 90% genotype positive, 49% with LQT1, 91% were treated with beta-blockers, left cardiac sympathetic denervation, and/or implantable cardioverter defibrillator), 52% participated in vigorous exercise (55% of these competitively). Thirty-seven individuals experienced the composite end point (including one sudden cardiac arrest and one sudden death in the nonvigorous group, one sudden cardiac arrest in the vigorous group) with overall event rates at 3 years of 2.6% in the vigorous and 2.7% in the nonvigorous exercise groups. The unadjusted hazard ratio for experience of events for the vigorous group compared with the nonvigorous group was 0.97 (90% CI, 0.57-1.67), with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.17 (90% CI, 0.67-2.04). The upper 95% one-sided confidence level extended beyond the 1.5 boundary. Neither vigorous or nonvigorous exercise was found to be superior in any group or subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Among individuals diagnosed with phenotypic and/or genotypic LQTS who were risk assessed and treated in experienced centers, LQTS-associated cardiac event rates were low and similar between those exercising vigorously and those not exercising vigorously. Consistent with the low event rate, CIs are wide, and noninferiority was not demonstrated. These data further inform shared decision-making discussions between patient and physician about exercise and competitive sports participation. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02549664.

Digoxin and Risk of Ventricular Tachyarrhythmia and Death in ICD Recipients.

BACKGROUND: Some studies have shown digoxin use to be associated with adverse outcomes, including increased mortality. There are limited data on whether digoxin use is associated with increased risk of ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF) in heart failure patients with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess whether digoxin use is associated with increased risk of VT/VF in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction with a primary prevention ICD in landmark clinical trials. METHODS: The study cohort consisted of patients with an ICD or cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator who were enrolled in 4 landmark MADIT trials (Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trials). We employed propensity score quintile stratification for treatment with digoxin as well as additional multivariable adjustment to assess the risk of digoxin vs no-digoxin therapy for the endpoints of first and recurrent VT/VF and all-cause mortality. The proportional hazards regression models for arrhythmia-specific endpoints incorporated adjustments for the competing risk of death. RESULTS: At baseline, 1,155 of 4,499 patients were on digoxin (26%). After propensity score quintile stratification, patients prescribed digoxin were shown to exhibit a statistically significant 48% increased risk of VT/VF (P < 0.001), 42% increased risk of the composite of VT/VF or death (P < 0.001), and a 37% increased risk of all-cause mortality (P = 0.006). Digoxin use was also associated with increased risk of appropriate ICD shocks (HR: 1.91; P < 0.001) and with increased burden of VT/VF events (HR: 1.46; P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggests that digoxin use is associated with ventricular tachyarrhythmia and death in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction patients with an ICD.

Association of device detected atrial and ventricular tachyarrhythmia with adverse events in patients with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator.

INTRODUCTION: Heart failure patients with a history of atrial fibrillation (AF) and ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF) are known to have worse outcomes. However, there are limited data on the temporal relationship between development of these arrhythmias and the risk of subsequent congestive heart failure (CHF) exacerbation and death. METHODS: The study cohort comprised 5511 patients implanted with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) in landmark clinical trials (MADIT-II, MADIT-RISK, MADIT-CRT, MADIT-RIT, and RAID) who were in sinus rhythm at enrollment. Multivariate cox analysis was performed to evaluate the time-dependent association between development of in-trial device detected AF and VT/VF with subsequent CHF exacerbation and death. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis showed that AF occurrence and VT/VF occurrence were both associated with a similar magnitude of risk for subsequent CHF exacerbation (HR = 1.73 and 1.87 respectively, p < .001 for both). In contrast, only in-trial VT/VF was associated with a significant > two-fold increase in the risk of subsequent mortality (HR = 2.13, p < .001) whereas AF occurrence was not associated with a significant mortality increase after adjustment for in-trial VT/VF (HR = 1.36, p = .096). CONCLUSION: Our findings from a large cohort of ICD recipients enrolled in landmark clinical trials show that device detected AF and VT/VF can be used to identify patients with increased risk for CHF exacerbation and mortality. These findings suggest a need for early intervention in CHF patients who develop device-detected atrial and ventricular tachyarrhythmias.

Safety of Sports for Patients with Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (SPORT S-ICD): study rationale and protocol.

Background: Recent studies suggest that participation in recreational and even competitive sports is generally safe for patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). However, these studies included only patients with implanted transvenous ICD (TV-ICD). Nowadays, subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) is a safe and effective alternative and is increasingly implanted in younger ICD candidates. Data on the safety of sport participation for patients with implanted S-ICD systems is urgently needed. Objectives: The goal of the study is to quantify the risks (or determine the safety) of sports participation for athletes with an S-ICD, which will guide shared decision making for athletes requiring an ICD and/or wishing to return to sports after implantation. Methods: The SPORT S-ICD (Sports for Patients with Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator) study is an international, multicenter, prospective, noninterventional, observational study, designed specifically to collect data on the safety of sports participation among patients with implanted S-ICD systems who regularly engage in sports activities. Results: A total of 450 patients will undergo baseline assessment including baseline characteristics, indication for S-ICD implantation, arrhythmic history, S-ICD data and programming, and data regarding sports activities. LATITUDE Home Monitoring information will be regularly transferred to the study coordinator for analysis. Conclusion: The results of the study will aid in shaping clinical decision making, and if the tested hypothesis will be proven, it will allow the safe continuation of sports for patients with an implanted S-ICD.

Prior history of atrial fibrillation and arrhythmic outcomes: Data from the WEARIT-II prospective registry.

INTRODUCTION: Wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) is utilized in patients with assumed but not yet confirmed risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD). Many of these patients also present with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, the rate of WCD-detected ventricular or atrial arrhythmia events in this specific high-risk cohort is not well understood. METHODS: In WEARIT-II, the cumulative probability of any sustained or nonsustained VT/VF (WCD-treated and nontreated), and atrial/supraventricular arrhythmias during WCD use was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method by prior AF, with comparisons by the log-rank test. The incidence of ventricular and atrial arrhythmia events were expressed as events per 100 patient-years, and were analyzed by prior AF using negative binomial regression. RESULTS: WEARIT-II enrolled 2000 patients, 557 (28%) of whom had AF before enrollment. Cumulative probability of any sustained or nonsustained WCD-detected VT/VF during WCD use was significantly higher among patients with a history of AF than without AF (6% vs. 3%, p = .001). Similarly, the recurrent rate of any sustained or nonsustained VT/VF was significantly higher in patients with prior AF versus no prior AF (131.5 events per 100 patient-years vs. 22.7 events per 100 patient-years, p = .001). Patients with prior AF also had a significantly higher burden of any WCD-detected atrial arrhythmias/SVT/inappropriate arrhythmias therapy (183.2 events per 100 patient-years vs. 74.8 events per 100 patient-years, p < .001). CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that patients with a history of AF wearing the WCD for risk assessment have a higher incidence of ventricular arrhythmias that may facilitate the decision making for ICD implantation.

Risk Prediction in Male Adolescents With Congenital Long QT Syndrome: Implications for Sex-Specific Risk Stratification in Potassium Channel-Mediated Long QT Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Sex-specific risk management may improve outcomes in congenital long QT syndrome (LQTS). We recently developed a prediction score for cardiac events (CEs) and life-threatening events (LTEs) in postadolescent women with LQTS. In the present study, we aimed to develop personalized risk estimates for the burden of CEs and LTEs in male adolescents with potassium channel-mediated LQTS. METHODS AND RESULTS: The prognostic model was derived from the LQTS Registry headquartered in Rochester, NY, comprising 611 LQT1 or LQT2 male adolescents from age 10 through 20 years, using the following variables: genotype/mutation location, QTc-specific thresholds, history of syncope, and ß-blocker therapy. Anderson-Gill modeling was performed for the end point of CE burden (total number of syncope, aborted cardiac arrest, and appropriate defibrillator shocks). The applicability of the CE prediction model was tested for the end point of the first LTE (excluding syncope and adding sudden cardiac death) using Cox modeling. A total of 270 CEs occurred during follow-up. The genotype-phenotype risk prediction model identified low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, comprising 74%, 14%, and 12% of the study population, respectively. Compared with the low-risk group, high-risk male subjects experienced a pronounced 5.2-fold increased risk of recurrent CEs (P<0.001), whereas intermediate-risk patients had a 2.1-fold (P=0.004) increased risk . At age 20 years, the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk adolescent male patients had on average 0.3, 0.6, and 1.4 CEs per person, respectively. Corresponding 10-year adjusted probabilities for a first LTE were 2%, 6%, and 8%. CONCLUSIONS: Personalized genotype-phenotype risk estimates can be used to guide sex-specific management in male adolescents with potassium channel-mediated LQTS.

Evaluation of MADIT-II Risk Stratification Score Among Nationwide Registry of Heart Failure Patients With Primary Prevention Implantable Cardiac Defibrillators or Resynchronization Therapy Devices.

The current guidelines advocate prophylactic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) for all patients with symptomatic heart failure (HF) with low left ventricular ejection fraction. Because many patients will never use their device, a score delineating subgroups with differential ICD benefit is crucial. We aimed to evaluate the MADIT-II-based Risk Stratification Score (MRSS) feasibility to delineate the ICD survival benefit in a nationwide registry of patients with HF with prophylactic ICDs. Accordingly, all Israeli patients with HF with prophylactic ICD/cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators were categorized into MRSS-based risk subgroups. The study end points included overall mortality, sustained ventricular arrhythmia (VA), and a competing risk of VA (potential preventable arrhythmic death, where ICD could benefit survival) versus nonarrhythmic death. Potential ICD survival benefit was estimated by the area between these cumulative incidence curves. In 2,177 patients with HF implanted prophylactic device, 189 patients (8.7%) had VA and 316 (14.5%) died during a median follow-up of 2.9 years. The MRSS risk subgroups were significantly associated with overall mortality (p <0.001) and weakly with VA (p = 0.3). The competing risk analysis of VA versus nonarrhythmic death revealed a significantly shorter duration (p <0.001) and smaller magnitude of ICD survival benefit with increased risk subgroups, yielding an estimated 76, 60, 38, and 0 life days gained from prophylactic ICD implant during a 5-year follow-up for the MRSS low-, intermediate-, high-, and very high-risk subgroups, respectively (p for trend <0.05). In conclusion, MRSS use in a nationwide registry of patients with ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy, revealed subgroups with differing ICD survival benefit, suggesting it could help evaluate prophylactic ICD survival benefit.

Sex-Related Differences in Ventricular Tachyarrhythmia Events in Patients With Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator and Prior Ventricular Tachyarrhythmias.

BACKGROUND: Data on the risk of ventricular tachycardia (VT), ventricular fibrillation (VF), and death by sex in patients with prior VT/VF are limited. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess sex-related differences in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD)-treated VT/VF events and death in patients implanted for secondary prevention or primary prevention ICD indications who experienced VT/VF before enrollment in the RAID (Ranolazine Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator) trial. METHODS: Sex-related differences in the first and recurrent VT/VF requiring antitachycardia pacing or ICD shock and death were evaluated in 714 patients. RESULTS: There were 124 women (17%) and 590 men observed during a mean follow-up of 26.81 ± 14.52 months. Compared to men, women were at a significantly lower risk of VT/VF/death (HR: 0.67; P = 0.029), VT/VF (HR: 0.68; P = 0.049), VT/VF treated with antitachycardia pacing (HR: 0.59; P = 0.019), and VT/VF treated with ICD shock (HR: 0.54; P = 0.035). The risk of recurrent VT/VF was also significantly lower in women (HR: 0.35; P < 0.001). HR for death was similar to the other endpoints (HR: 0.61; P = 0.162). In comparison to men, women presented with faster VT rates (196 ± 32 beats/min vs 177 ± 30 beats/min, respectively; P = 0.002), and faster shock-requiring VT/VF rates (258 ± 56 beats/min vs 227 ± 57 beats/min, respectively; P = 0.30). There was a significant interaction for the risk of VT/VF by race (P = 0.013) with White women having significantly lower risk than White men (HR: 0.36; P < 0.001), whereas Black women had a similar risk to Black men (HR: 1.06; P = 0.851). CONCLUSIONS: Women with a history of prior VT/VF experienced a lower risk recurrent VT/VF requiring ICD therapy when compared to men. Black Women had a risk similar to men, whereas the lower risk for VT/VF in women was observed primarily in White women. (Ranolazine Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Trial; NCT01215253).

Risk of Sudden Cardiac Death in Patients Undergoing Cancer Treatment.

The risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in patients with cancer receiving cancer therapies is not well defined. In this study we aimed to (1) evaluate the risk of SCD during the first 6 months of cancer treatment and (2) identify risk factors (RFs) for SCD in patients who underwent active cancer treatment. The study population comprised 8,356 patients who received any cancer treatment at the University of Rochester Medical Center from 2011 to 2020. The primary end point was the occurrence of SCD within 6 months of cancer treatment. SCD was defined by using the modified Hinkle-Thaler classification. The mean age at the time of cancer treatment was 64 ± 14 years and 49% were women. All-cause mortality occurred in 834 patients (10%), of whom 51 (6%) were identified as SCD. The cumulative probability of SCD at 6 months was 0.6%. Age <74 years (0.042), history of congestive heart failure (0.058) and lung cancer (0.004) were identified as independent RFs for SCD in the multivariate Cox regression models. The cumulative probability of SCD at 6 months from cancer treatment initiation was significantly higher in patients with ≥2 RFs (1.6%) than in patients with 0 or 1 RF (0.5%) (log-rank p <0.001). In conclusion, our findings suggest that active cancer treatment is associated with SCD risk that is more pronounced in younger patients (< 74 years), patients with cancer and a history of heart failure, and those who underwent treatment for lung cancer. Future studies should address appropriate modalities for prevention and protection in this high-risk population.

Effect of Carvedilol vs Metoprolol on Atrial and Ventricular Arrhythmias Among Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Recipients.

BACKGROUND: Both selective and nonselective beta-blockers are used to treat patients with heart failure (HF). However, the data on the association of beta-blocker type with risk of atrial arrhythmia and ventricular arrhythmia (VA) in HF patients with a primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) are limited. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the effect of metoprolol vs carvedilol on the risk of atrial tachyarrhythmia (ATA) and VA in HF patients with an ICD. METHODS: This study pooled primary prevention ICD recipients from 5 landmark ICD trials (MADIT-II, MADIT-CRT, MADIT-RIT, MADIT-RISK, and RAID). Fine and Gray multivariate regression models, stratified by study, were used to evaluate the risk of ATA, inappropriate ICD shocks, and fast VA (defined as ventricular tachycardia ≥200 beats/min or ventricular fibrillation) by beta-blocker type. RESULTS: Among 4,194 patients, 2,920 (70%) were prescribed carvedilol and 1,274 (30%) metoprolol. The cumulative incidence of ATA at 3.5 years was 11% in patients treated with carvedilol vs 15% in patients taking metoprolol (P = 0.003). Multivariate analysis showed that carvedilol treatment was associated with a 35% reduction in the risk of ATA (HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.53-0.81; P < 0.001) when compared to metoprolol, and with a corresponding 35% reduction in the risk of inappropriate ICD shocks (HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.47-0.89; P = 0.008). Carvedilol vs metoprolol was also associated with a 16% reduction in the risk of fast VA. However, these findings did not reach statistical significance (HR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.70-1.02; P = 0.085). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggests that HF patients with ICDs on carvedilol treatment experience a significantly lower risk of ATA and inappropriate ICD shocks when compared to treatment with metoprolol.

Primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillator in cardiac resynchronization therapy recipients with advanced chronic kidney disease.

Introduction: The implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is effective for the prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). The benefit of the ICD in patients with advanced CKD, remains elusive. Moreover, the benefit of the ICD in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) and HFrEF who are cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) recipients may be attenuated. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that patients with CKD who are CRT recipients may derive less benefit from the ICD due to the competing risk of dying prior to experiencing an arrhythmia. Methods: The study population included 1,015 patients receiving CRT with defibrillator (CRT-D) device for primary prevention of SCD who were enrolled in either (Multicenter Automated Defibrillator Implantation Trial) MADIT-CRT trial or the Ranolazine in High-Risk Patients with Implanted Cardioverter Defibrillator (RAID) trial. The cohort was divided into two groups based on the stage of CKD: those with Stage 1 to 3a KD, labeled as (S1-S3a)KD. The second group included patients with Stage 3b to stage 5 kidney disease, labeled as (S3b-S5)KD. The primary endpoint was any ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) (Any VT/VF). Results: The cumulative incidence of Any VT/VF was 23.5% in patients with (S1-S3a)KD and 12.6% in those with (S3b-S5)KD (p < 0.001) The incidence of Death without Any VT/VF was 6.6% in patients with (S1-S3a)KD and 21.6% in patients with (S3b-S5)KD (p < 0.001). A Fine and Gray multivariate competing risk regression model showed that Patients with (S3b-S5)KD had a 43% less risk of experiencing Any VT/VF when compared to those with (S1-S3a)KD (HR = 0.56, 95% CI [0.33-0.94] p = 0.03. After two years of follow up, there was almost a 5-fold increased risk of Death without Any VT/VF among patients with (S3b-S5)KD when compared to those with (S1-S3a)KD [HR = 4.63, 95% CI (2.46-8.72), p for interaction with time = 0.012]. Conclusion: Due to their lower incidence of arrhythmias and higher risk of dying prior to experiencing an arrhythmia, the benefit of the ICD may be attenuated in CRT recipients with advanced CKD. Future prospective trials should evaluate whether CRT without a defibrillator may be more appropriate for these patients.

Upgrade of right ventricular pacing to cardiac resynchronization therapy in heart failure: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: De novo implanted cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D) reduces the risk of morbidity and mortality in patients with left bundle branch block, heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, among HFrEF patients with right ventricular pacing (RVP), the efficacy of CRT-D upgrade is uncertain. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomized, controlled trial, 360 symptomatic (New York Heart Association Classes II-IVa) HFrEF patients with a pacemaker or implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD), high RVP burden ≥ 20%, and a wide paced QRS complex duration ≥ 150 ms were randomly assigned to receive CRT-D upgrade (n = 215) or ICD (n = 145) in a 3:2 ratio. The primary outcome was the composite of all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, or <15% reduction of left ventricular end-systolic volume assessed at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality or heart failure hospitalization. RESULTS: Over a median follow-up of 12.4 months, the primary outcome occurred in 58/179 (32.4%) in the CRT-D arm vs. 101/128 (78.9%) in the ICD arm (odds ratio 0.11; 95% confidence interval 0.06-0.19; P < .001). All-cause mortality or heart failure hospitalization occurred in 22/215 (10%) in the CRT-D arm vs. 46/145 (32%) in the ICD arm (hazard ratio 0.27; 95% confidence interval 0.16-0.47; P < .001). The incidence of procedure- or device-related complications was similar between the two arms [CRT-D group 25/211 (12.3%) vs. ICD group 11/142 (7.8%)]. CONCLUSIONS: In pacemaker or ICD patients with significant RVP burden and reduced ejection fraction, upgrade to CRT-D compared with ICD therapy reduced the combined risk of all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, or absence of reverse remodelling.

Genetic variant annotation scores in congenital long QT syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Congenital Long QT Syndrome (LQTS) is a hereditary arrhythmic disorder. We aimed to assess the performance of current genetic variant annotation scores among LQTS patients and their predictive impact. METHODS: We evaluated 2025 patients with unique mutations for LQT1-LQT3. A patient-specific score was calculated for each of four established genetic variant annotation algorithms: CADD, SIFT, REVEL, and PolyPhen-2. The scores were tested for the identification of LQTS and their predictive performance for cardiac events (CE) and life-threatening events (LTE) and then compared with the predictive performance of LQTS categorization based on mutation location/function. Score performance was tested using Harrell's C-index. RESULTS: A total of 917 subjects were classified as LQT1, 838 as LQT2, and 270 as LQT3. The identification of a pathogenic variant occurred in 99% with CADD, 92% with SIFT, 100% with REVEL, and 86% with PolyPhen-2. However, none of the genetic scores correlated with the risk of CE (Harrell's C-index: CADD = 0.50, SIFT = 0.51, REVEL = 0.50, and PolyPhen-2 = 0.52) or LTE (Harrell's C-index: CADD = 0.50, SIFT = 0.53, REVEL = 0.54, and PolyPhen-2 = 0.52). In contrast, high-risk mutation categorization based on location/function was a powerful independent predictor of CE (HR = 1.88; p < .001) and LTE (HR = 1.89, p < .001). CONCLUSION: In congenital LQTS patients, well-established algorithms (CADD, SIFT, REVEL, and PolyPhen-2) were able to identify the majority of the causal variants as pathogenic. However, the scores did not predict clinical outcomes. These results indicate that mutation location/functional assays are essential for accurate interpretation of the risk associated with LQTS mutations.

Effect of sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors on atrial tachy-arrhythmia burden in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices.

INTRODUCTION: Use of sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) was associated with a reduction in atrial fibrillation hospitalizations. Therefore, we aim to evaluate the effects of SGLT2i on atrial tachy-arrhythmias (ATA) in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). METHODS: All 13 888 consecutive patients implanted with a CIED in two tertiary medical centers were enrolled. Treatment with SGLT2i was assessed as a time dependent variable. The primary endpoint was the total number of ATA. Secondary endpoints included total number of ventricular tachy-arrhythmias (VTA), ATA and VTA, and death. All events were independently adjudicated blinded to the treatment. Multivariable propensity score modeling was performed. RESULTS: During a total follow-up of 24 442 patient years there were 62 725 ATA and 10 324 VTA events. Use of SGLT2i (N = 696) was independently associated with a significant 22% reduction in the risk of ATA (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.78 [95% confidence interval {CI} = 0.70-0.87]; p < .001); 22% reduction in the risk of ATA/VTA (HR = 0.78 [95% CI = 0.71-0.85]; p < .001); and with a 35% reduction in the risk of all-cause mortality (HR = 0.65 [95% CI = 0.45-0.92]; p = .015), but was not significantly associated with VTA risk (HR = 0.92 [95% CI = 0.80-1.06]; p = .26). SGLT2i were associated with a lower ATA burden in heart failure (HF) patients but not among diabetes patients (HF: HR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.58-0.80, p < .001 vs. Diabetes: HR = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.86-1.05, p = .29; p < .001 for interaction between SGLT2i indication and ATA burden). CONCLUSION: Our real world findings suggest that in CIED HF patients, those with SGLT2i had a pronounced reduction in ATA burden and all-cause mortality when compared with those not on SGLT2i.

Arrhythmia and Survival Outcomes Among Black Patients and White Patients With a Primary Prevention Defibrillator.

BACKGROUND: Black Americans have a higher risk of nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) than White Americans. We aimed to evaluate differences in the risk of tachyarrhythmias among patients with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). METHODS: The study population comprised 3895 ICD recipients in the United States enrolled in primary prevention ICD trials. Outcome measures included ventricular tachyarrhythmia (VTA), atrial tachyarrhythmia (ATA), ICD therapies, VTA burden (using Andersen-Gill recurrent event analysis), death, and the predicted benefit of the ICD. All events were adjudicated blindly. Outcomes were compared between self-reported Black patients versus White patients with cardiomyopathy (ischemic and NICM). RESULTS: Black patients were more likely to be female (35% versus 22%) and younger (57±12 versus 62±12 years) with a higher frequency of comorbidities. In NICM, Black patients had a higher rate of first VTA, fast VTA, ATA, and appropriate and inappropriate ICD therapy (VTA ≥170 bpm, 32% versus 20%; VTA ≥200 bpm, 22% versus 14%; ATA, 25% versus 12%; appropriate therapy, 30% versus 20%; and inappropriate therapy, 25% versus 11%; P<0.001 for all). Multivariable analysis showed that Black patients with NICM experienced a higher risk of all types of arrhythmia or ICD therapy (VTA ≥170 bpm, hazard ratio [HR] 1.71; VTA ≥200 bpm, HR 1.58; ATA, HR 1.87; appropriate therapy, HR 1.62; inappropriate therapy, HR 1.86; P≤0.01 for all), higher burden of tachyarrhythmias or therapies (VTA, HR 1.84; appropriate therapy, HR 1.84; P<0.001 for both), and a higher risk of death (HR 1.92; P=0.014). In contrast, in ischemic cardiomyopathy, the risk of all types of tachyarrhythmia, ICD therapy, or death was similar between Black patients and White patients. Both Black patients and White patients derived a significant and similar benefit from ICD implantation. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with NICM with an ICD for primary prevention, Black patients compared with White patients had a high risk and burden of VTA, ATA, and ICD therapies with a lower survival rate. Nevertheless, the overall benefit of the ICD was maintained and was similar to that of White patients.

Association Between Syncope Trigger Type and Risk of Subsequent Life-Threatening Events in Patients With Long QT Syndrome.

Importance: Syncope is the most powerful predictor for subsequent life-threatening events (LTEs) in patients with congenital long QT syndrome (LQTS). Whether distinct syncope triggers are associated with differential subsequent risk of LTEs is unknown. Objective: To evaluate the association between adrenergic (AD)- and nonadrenergic (non-AD)-triggered syncopal events and the risk of subsequent LTEs in patients with LQT types 1 to 3 (LQT1-3). Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included data from 5 international LQTS registries (Rochester, New York; the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota; Israel, the Netherlands, and Japan). The study population comprised 2938 patients with genetically confirmed LQT1, LQT2, or LQT3 stemming from a single LQTS-causative variant. Patients were enrolled from July 1979 to July 2021. Exposures: Syncope by AD and non-AD triggers. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the first occurrence of an LTE. Multivariate Cox regression was used to determine the association of AD- or non-AD-triggered syncope on the risk of subsequent LTE by genotype. Separate analysis was performed in patients with ß-blockers. Results: A total of 2938 patients were included (mean [SD] age at enrollment, 29 [7] years; 1645 [56%] female). In 1331 patients with LQT1, a first syncope occurred in 365 (27%) and was induced mostly with AD triggers (243 [67%]). Syncope preceded 43 subsequent LTEs (68%). Syncopal episodes associated with AD triggers were associated with the highest risk of subsequent LTE (hazard ratio [HR], 7.61; 95% CI, 4.18-14.20; P < .001), whereas the risk associated with syncopal events due to non-AD triggers was statistically nonsignificant (HR, 1.50; 95% CI, 0.21-4.77; P = .97). In 1106 patients with LQT2, a first syncope occurred in 283 (26%) and was associated with AD and non-AD triggers in 106 (37%) and 177 (63%), respectively. Syncope preceded 55 LTEs (56%). Both AD- and non-AD-triggered syncope were associated with a greater than 3-fold increased risk of subsequent LTE (HR, 3.07; 95% CI, 1.66-5.67; P ≤ .001 and HR, 3.45, 95% CI, 1.96-6.06; P ≤ .001, respectively). In contrast, in 501 patients with LQT3, LTE was preceded by a syncopal episode in 7 (12%). In patients with LQT1 and LQT2, treatment with ß-blockers following a syncopal event was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of subsequent LTEs. The rate of breakthrough events during treatment with ß-blockers was significantly higher among those treated with selective agents vs nonselective agents. Conclusion and Relevance: In this study, trigger-specific syncope in LQTS patients was associated with differential risk of subsequent LTE and response to ß-blocker therapy.

Design and characteristics of the prophylactic intra-operative ventricular arrhythmia ablation in high-risk LVAD candidates (PIVATAL) trial.

BACKGROUND: The use of a Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD) in patients with advanced heart failure refractory to optimal medical management has progressed steadily over the past two decades. Data have demonstrated reduced LVAD efficacy, worse clinical outcome, and higher mortality for patients who experience significant ventricular tachyarrhythmia (VTA). We hypothesize that a novel prophylactic intra-operative VTA ablation protocol at the time of LVAD implantation may reduce the recurrent VTA and adverse events postimplant. METHODS: We designed a prospective, multicenter, open-label, randomized-controlled clinical trial enrolling 100 patients who are LVAD candidates with a history of VTA in the previous 5 years. Enrolled patients will be randomized in a 1:1 fashion to intra-operative VTA ablation (n = 50) versus conventional medical management (n = 50) with LVAD implant. Arrhythmia outcomes data will be captured by an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) to monitor VTA events, with a uniform ICD programming protocol. Patients will be followed prospectively over a mean of 18 months (with a minimum of 9 months) after LVAD implantation to evaluate recurrent VTA, adverse events, and procedural outcomes. Secondary endpoints include right heart function/hemodynamics, healthcare utilization, and quality of life. CONCLUSION: The primary aim of this first-ever randomized trial is to assess the efficacy of intra-operative ablation during LVAD surgery in reducing VTA recurrence and improving clinical outcomes for patients with a history of VTA.