Systematic review and meta-analysis on the impact on outcomes of device algorithms for minimizing right ventricular pacing.

BACKGROUND: Physiological activation of the heart using algorithms to minimize right ventricular pacing (RVPm) may be an effective strategy to reduce adverse events in patients requiring anti-bradycardia therapies. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate current evidence on clinical outcomes for patients treated with RVPm algorithms compared to dual chamber pacing (DDD). METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a systematic search of the PubMed database. The predefined endpoints were the occurrence of persistent/permanent atrial fibrillation (PerAF), cardiovascular (CV) hospitalization, all-cause death, and adverse symptoms. We also aimed to explore the differential effects of algorithms in studies enrolling a high percentage of atrioventricular block (AVB) patients. Eight studies (7229 patients) were included in the analysis. Compared to DDD-pacing, patients using RVPm algorithms showed a lower risk of PerAF (Odds Ratio [OR] 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57-0.97) and CV hospitalization (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.61-0.97). No significant difference was found for all-cause death (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.78-1.30) or adverse symptoms (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.81-1.29). No significant interaction was found between the use of the RVPm strategy and studies enrolling a high percentage of AVB patients. The pooled mean RVP percentage for RVPm algorithms was 7.96% (95% CI 3.13-20.25), as compared with 45.11% (95% CI 26.64-76.38) of DDD-pacing. CONCLUSION: Algorithms for RVPm may be effective in reducing the risk of PerAF and CV hospitalization in patients requiring anti-bradycardia therapies, without an increased risk of adverse symptoms. These results are also consistent for studies enrolling a high percentage of AVB patients.

Same-day discharge vs. overnight stay following catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: a comprehensive review and meta-analysis by the European Heart Rhythm Association Health Economics Committee.

AIMS: Same-day discharge (SDD) after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) may address the growing socio-economic health burden of the increasing demand for interventional AF therapies. This systematic review and meta-analysis analyses the current evidence on clinical outcomes in SDD after AF ablation compared with overnight stay (ONS). METHODS AND RESULTS: A systematic search of the PubMed database was performed. Pre-defined endpoints were complications at short-term (24-96 h) and 30-day post-discharge, re-hospitalization, and/or emergency room (ER) visits at 30-day post-discharge, and 30-day mortality. Twenty-four studies (154 716 patients) were included. Random-effects models were applied for meta-analyses of pooled endpoint prevalence in the SDD cohort and for comparison between SDD and ONS cohorts. Pooled estimates for complications after SDD were low both for short-term [2%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1-5%; I2: 89%) and 30-day follow-up (2%; 95% CI: 1-4%; I2: 91%). There was no significant difference in complications rates between SDD and ONS [short-term: risk ratio (RR): 1.62; 95% CI: 0.52-5.01; I2: 37%; 30 days: RR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.42-1.00; I2: 95%). Pooled rates of re-hospitalization/ER visits after SDD were 4% (95% CI: 1-10%; I2: 96%) with no statistically significant difference between SDD and ONS (RR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.58-1.27; I2: 61%). Pooled 30-day mortality was low after SDD (0%; 95% CI: 0-1%; I2: 33%). All studies were subject to a relevant risk of bias, mainly due to study design. CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis including a large contemporary cohort, SDD after AF ablation was associated with low prevalence of post-discharge complications, re-hospitalizations/ER visits and mortality, and a similar risk compared with ONS. Due to limited quality of current evidence, further prospective, randomized trials are needed to confirm safety of SDD and define patient- and procedure-related prerequisites for successful and safe SDD strategies.

Performance of HAS-BLED and DOAC scores to predict major bleeding events in atrial fibrillation patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants: A report from a prospective European observational registry.

BACKGROUND: The DOAC score has been recently proposed for bleeding risk stratification of patients with atrial fibrillation treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC). OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance of HAS-BLED and DOAC score in predicting major bleeding events in a contemporary cohort of European AF patients treated with DOAC. METHODS: We included patients derived from a prospective observational registry of European AF patients. HAS-BLED and DOAC scores were calculated as per the original schemes. Our primary endpoint was major bleeding events. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to compare the predictive ability of the scores. RESULTS: A total of 2834 AF patients (median age [IQR] 69 [62-77] years; 39.6 % female) treated with DOAC were included in the analysis. According to the HAS-BLED score, 577 patients (20.4 %) were categorized as very low risk of bleeding, as compared to 1276 (45.0 %) according to DOAC score. A total of 55 major bleeding events occurred with an overall incidence of 1.04 per 100 patient-years. Both scores showed only a modest ability for the prediction of bleeding events (HAS-BLED area under the curve [AUC], 0.65, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.55-0.70; DOAC score AUC 0.62, 95 % CI 0.59-0.71, p for difference = 0.332]. At calibration analysis, the DOAC score showed modest calibration, especially for patients at high risk, when compared to HAS-BLED. CONCLUSION: In a contemporary cohort of DOAC-treated AF patients, both HAS-BLED and DOAC scores only modestly predicted the occurrence of major bleeding events. Our results do not support the preferential use of DOAC score over HAS-BLED.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) nonresponders in the contemporary era: A state-of-the-art review.

In the 2000s, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) became a revolutionary treatment for heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF) and wide QRS. However, about one-third of CRT recipients do not show a favorable response. This review of the current literature aims to better define the concept of CRT response/nonresponse. The diagnosis of CRT nonresponder should be viewed as a continuum, and it cannot rely solely on a single parameter. Moreover, baseline features of some patients might predict an unfavorable response. A strong collaboration between heart failure specialists and electrophysiologists is key to overcoming this challenge with multiple strategies. In the contemporary era, new pacing modalities, such as His-bundle pacing and left bundle branch area pacing, represent a promising alternative to CRT. Observational studies have demonstrated their potential; however, several limitations should be addressed. Large randomized controlled trials are needed to prove their efficacy in HFrEF with electromechanical dyssynchrony.

Clinical significance and prognostic value of right bundle branch block in permanent pacemaker patients.

AIMS: In patients undergoing pacemaker implantation with no prior history of heart failure (HF), the presence of left bundle branch block (LBBB) has been identified as an independent predictor of HF-related death or hospitalization, while the prognostic significance of right bundle branch block (RBBB) remains uncertain. We aimed to assess the long-term risk of all-cause mortality in patients with a standard indication for permanent pacing and normal or moderately depressed left ventricular function when RBBB is detected at the time of implantation. METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled 1348 consecutive patients who had undergone single- or dual-chamber pacemaker implantation at the study center, from January 1990 to December 2022. Patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% or a prior diagnosis of HF were excluded. RESULTS: The baseline 12-lead electrocardiogram revealed an RBBB in 241 (18%) and an LBBB in 98 (7%) patients. During a median follow-up of 65 [25th-75th percentile: 32-117] months, 704 (52%) patients died. The combined endpoint of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization was reached by 173 (13%) patients. On multivariate analysis, RBBB was confirmed as an independent predictor of death [hazard ratio, 1.33; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.09-1.63; P  = 0.005]. However, when considering the combined endpoint of cardiovascular death and HF hospitalization, this endpoint was independently associated with LBBB (hazard ratio, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.38-3.29; P  < 0.001), but not with RBBB. CONCLUSION: In patients with standard pacemaker indications and normal or moderately depressed left ventricular function, the presence of basal RBBB was an independent predictor of mortality. However, it was not associated with the combined endpoint of cardiovascular death and HF hospitalization.

Clinical decisions for appropriate management of patients with atrial fibrillation.

The management of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) requires intricate clinical decision-making to optimize outcomes. In everyday clinical practice, physicians undergo difficult choices to better manage patients with AF. They need to balance thromboembolic and bleeding risk to focus on patients' symptoms and to manage a variety of multiple comorbidities. In this review, we aimed to explore the multifaceted dimensions of clinical decision-making in AF patients, encompassing the definition and diagnosis of clinical AF, stroke risk stratification, oral anticoagulant therapy selection, consideration of bleeding risk, and the ongoing debate between rhythm and rate control strategies. We will also focus on possible grey zones for the management of AF patients. In navigating this intricate landscape, clinicians must reconcile the dynamic interplay of patient-specific factors, evolving guidelines, and emerging therapies. The review underscores the need for personalized, evidence-based clinical decision-making to tailor interventions for optimal outcomes according to specific AF patient profiles.

Detection of subclinical atrial fibrillation with cardiac implanted electronic devices: What decision making on anticoagulation after the NOAH and ARTESiA trials?

Atrial fibrillation (AF) may be asymptomatic and the extensive monitoring capabilities of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) revealed asymptomatic atrial tachi-arrhythmias of short duration (minutes-hours) occurring in patients with no prior history of AF and without AF detection at a conventional surface ECG. Both the terms "AHRE" (Atrial High-Rate Episodes) and subclinical AF were used in a series of prior studies, that evidenced the association with an increased risk of stroke. Two randomized controlled studies were planned in order to assess the risk-benefit profile of anticoagulation in patients with AHRE/subclinical AF: the NOAH and ARTESiA trials. The results of these two trials (6548 patients enrolled, overall) show that the risk of stroke/systemic embolism associated with AHRE/subclinical AF is in the range of 1-1.2 % per patient-year, but with an important proportion of severe/fatal strokes occurring in non-anticoagulated patients. The apparent discordance between ARTESiA and NOAH results may be approached by considering the related study-level meta-analysis, which highlights a consistent reduction of ischemic stroke with oral anticoagulants vs. aspirin/placebo (relative risk [RR] 0.68, 95 % CI 0.50-0.92). Oral anticoagulation was found to increase major bleeding (RR 1.62, 95 % CI 1.05-2.5), but no difference was found in fatal bleeding (RR 0.79, 95 % CI 0.37-1.69). Additionally, no difference was found in cardiovascular death or all-cause mortality. Taking into account these results, clinical decision-making for patients with AHRE/subclinical AF at risk of stroke, according to CHA2DS2-VASc, can now be evidence-based, considering the benefits and related risks of oral anticoagulants, to be shared with appropriately informed patients.

Asymptomatic vs. symptomatic atrial fibrillation: Clinical outcomes in heart failure patients.

BACKGROUND: The outcome implications of asymptomatic vs. symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) in specific groups of patients according to clinical heart failure (HF) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) need to be clarified. METHODS: In a prospective observational study, patients were categorized according to overt HF with LVEF≤40 %, or with LVEF>40 %, or without overt HF with LVEF40 %≤ or > 40 %, as well as according to the presence of asymptomatic or symptomatic AF. RESULTS: A total of 8096 patients, divided into 8 groups according to HF and LVEF, were included with similar proportions of asymptomatic AF (ranging from 43 to 48 %). After a median follow-up of 730 [699 -748] days, the composite outcome (all-cause death and MACE) was significantly worse for patients with asymptomatic AF associated with HF and reduced LVEF vs. symptomatic AF patients of the same group (p = 0.004). On adjusted Cox regression analysis, asymptomatic AF patients with HF and reduced LVEF were independently associated with a higher risk for the composite outcome (aHR 1.32, 95 % CI 1.04-1.69) and all-cause death (aHR 1.33, 95 % CI 1.02-1.73) compared to symptomatic AF patients with HF and reduced LVEF. Kaplan-Meier curves showed that HF-LVEF≤40 % asymptomatic patients had the highest cumulative incidence of all-cause death and MACE (p < 0.001 for both). CONCLUSIONS: In a large European cohort of AF patients, the risk of the composite outcome at 2 years was not different between asymptomatic and symptomatic AF in the whole cohort but adverse implications for poor outcomes were found for asymptomatic AF in HF with LVEF≤40 %.

Length of hospital stay for elective electrophysiological procedures: a survey from the European Heart Rhythm Association.

AIMS: Electrophysiological (EP) operations that have traditionally involved long hospital lengths of stay (LOS) are now being undertaken as day case procedures. The coronavirus disease-19 pandemic served as an impetus for many centres to shorten LOS for EP procedures. This survey explores LOS for elective EP procedures in the modern era. METHODS AND RESULTS: An online survey consisting of 27 multiple-choice questions was completed by 245 respondents from 35 countries. With respect to de novo cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantations, day case procedures were reported for 79.5% of implantable loop recorders, 13.3% of pacemakers (PMs), 10.4% of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs), and 10.2% of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices. With respect to CIED generator replacements, day case procedures were reported for 61.7% of PMs, 49.2% of ICDs, and 48.2% of CRT devices. With regard to ablations, day case procedures were reported for 5.7% of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablations, 10.7% of left-sided ablations, and 17.5% of right-sided ablations. A LOS ≥ 2 days for CIED implantation was reported for 47.7% of PM, 54.5% of ICDs, and 56.9% of CRT devices and for 54.5% of AF ablations, 42.2% of right-sided ablations, and 46.1% of left-sided ablations. Reimbursement (43-56%) and bed availability (20-47%) were reported to have no consistent impact on the organization of elective procedures. CONCLUSION: There is a wide variation in the LOS for elective EP procedures. The LOS for some procedures appears disproportionate to their complexity. Neither reimbursement nor bed availability consistently influenced LOS.

Quantification of Myocardial Contraction Fraction with Three-Dimensional Automated, Machine-Learning-Based Left-Heart-Chamber Metrics: Diagnostic Utility in Hypertrophic Phenotypes and Normal Ejection Fraction.

Aims: The differentiation of left ventricular (LV) hypertrophic phenotypes is challenging in patients with normal ejection fraction (EF). The myocardial contraction fraction (MCF) is a simple dimensionless index useful for specifically identifying cardiac amyloidosis (CA) and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) when calculated by cardiac magnetic resonance. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the value of MCF measured by three-dimensional automated, machine-learning-based LV chamber metrics (dynamic heart model [DHM]) for the discrimination of different forms of hypertrophic phenotypes. Methods and Results: We analyzed the DHM LV metrics of patients with CA (n = 10), hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM, n = 36), isolated hypertension (IH, n = 87), and 54 healthy controls. MCF was calculated by dividing LV stroke volume by LV myocardial volume. Compared with controls (median 61.95%, interquartile range 55.43-67.79%), mean values for MCF were significantly reduced in HCM-48.55% (43.46-54.86% p < 0.001)-and CA-40.92% (36.68-46.84% p < 0.002)-but not in IH-59.35% (53.22-64.93% p < 0.7). MCF showed a weak correlation with EF in the overall cohort (R2 = 0.136) and the four study subgroups (healthy adults, R2 = 0.039 IH, R2 = 0.089; HCM, R2 = 0.225; CA, R2 = 0.102). ROC analyses showed that MCF could differentiate between healthy adults and HCM (sensitivity 75.9%, specificity 77.8%, AUC 0.814) and between healthy adults and CA (sensitivity 87.0%, specificity 100%, AUC 0.959). The best cut-off values were 55.3% and 52.8%. Conclusions: The easily derived quantification of MCF by DHM can refine our echocardiographic discrimination capacity in patients with hypertrophic phenotype and normal EF. It should be added to the diagnostic workup of these patients.

Performance of a multi-sensor implantable defibrillator algorithm for heart failure monitoring in the presence of atrial fibrillation.

AIMS: The HeartLogic Index combines data from multiple implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) sensors and has been shown to accurately stratify patients at risk of heart failure (HF) events. We evaluated and compared the performance of this algorithm during sinus rhythm and during long-lasting atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS AND RESULTS: HeartLogic was activated in 568 ICD patients from 26 centres. We found periods of ≥30 consecutive days with an atrial high-rate episode (AHRE) burden <1 h/day and periods with an AHRE burden ≥20 h/day. We then identified patients who met both criteria during the follow-up (AHRE group, n = 53), to allow pairwise comparison of periods. For control purposes, we identified patients with an AHRE burden <1 h throughout their follow-up and implemented 2:1 propensity score matching vs. the AHRE group (matched non-AHRE group, n = 106). In the AHRE group, the rate of alerts was 1.2 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.0-1.5]/patient-year during periods with an AHRE burden <1 h/day and 2.0 (95% CI: 1.5-2.6)/patient-year during periods with an AHRE-burden ≥20 h/day (P = 0.004). The rate of HF hospitalizations was 0.34 (95% CI: 0.15-0.69)/patient-year during IN-alert periods and 0.06 (95% CI: 0.02-0.14)/patient-year during OUT-of-alert periods (P < 0.001). The IN/OUT-of-alert state incidence rate ratio of HF hospitalizations was 8.59 (95% CI: 1.67-55.31) during periods with an AHRE burden <1 h/day and 2.70 (95% CI: 1.01-28.33) during periods with an AHRE burden ≥20 h/day. In the matched non-AHRE group, the rate of HF hospitalizations was 0.29 (95% CI: 0.12-0.60)/patient-year during IN-alert periods and 0.04 (95% CI: 0.02-0.08)/patient-year during OUT-of-alert periods (P < 0.001). The incidence rate ratio was 7.11 (95% CI: 2.19-22.44). CONCLUSION: Patients received more alerts during periods of AF. The ability of the algorithm to identify increased risk of HF events was confirmed during AF, despite a lower IN/OUT-of-alert incidence rate ratio in comparison with non-AF periods and non-AF patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://clinicaltrials.gov/Identifier: NCT02275637.

Atrial fibrillation in vascular surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis on prevalence, incidence and outcome implications.

AIMS: To know the prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF), as well as the incidence of postoperative AF (POAF) in vascular surgery for arterial diseases and its outcome implications. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis following the PRISMA statement. RESULTS: After the selection process, we analyzed 44 records (30 for the prevalence of AF history and 14 for the incidence of POAF).The prevalence of history of AF was 11.5% [95% confidence interval (CI) 1-13.3] with high heterogeneity (I2 = 100%). Prevalence was higher in the case of endovascular procedures. History of AF was associated with a worse outcome in terms of in-hospital death [odds ratio (OR) 3.29; 95% CI 2.66-4.06; P < 0.0001; I2 94%] or stroke (OR 1.61; 95% CI 1.39-1.86; P < 0.0001; I2 91%).The pooled incidence of POAF was 3.6% (95% CI 2-6.4) with high heterogeneity (I2 = 100%). POAF risk was associated with older age (mean difference 4.67 years, 95% CI 2.38-6.96; P = 0.00007). The risk of POAF was lower in patients treated with endovascular procedures as compared with an open surgical procedure (OR 0.35; 95% CI 0.13-0.91; P = 0.03; I2 = 61%). CONCLUSIONS: In the setting of vascular surgery for arterial diseases a history of AF is found overall in 11.5% of patients, more frequently in the case of endovascular procedures, and is associated with worse outcomes in terms of short-term mortality and stroke.The incidence of POAF is overall 3.6%, and is lower in patients treated with an endovascular procedure as compared with open surgery procedures. The need for oral anticoagulants for preventing AF-related stroke should be evaluated with randomized clinical trials.