A transposable element into the human long noncoding RNA CARMEN is a switch for cardiac precursor cell specification.

AIMS: The major cardiac cell types composing the adult heart arise from common multipotent precursor cells. Cardiac lineage decisions are guided by extrinsic and cell-autonomous factors, including recently discovered long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs). The human lncRNA CARMEN, which is known to dictate specification toward the cardiomyocyte (CM) and the smooth muscle cell (SMC) fates, generates a diversity of alternatively spliced isoforms. METHODS AND RESULTS: The CARMEN locus can be manipulated to direct human primary cardiac precursor cells (CPCs) into specific cardiovascular fates. Investigating CARMEN isoform usage in differentiating CPCs represents therefore a unique opportunity to uncover isoform-specific functions in lncRNAs. Here, we identify one CARMEN isoform, CARMEN-201, to be crucial for SMC commitment. CARMEN-201 activity is encoded within an alternatively spliced exon containing a MIRc short interspersed nuclear element. This element binds the transcriptional repressor REST (RE1 Silencing Transcription Factor), targets it to cardiogenic loci, including ISL1, IRX1, IRX5, and SFRP1, and thereby blocks the CM gene program. In turn, genes regulating SMC differentiation are induced. CONCLUSIONS: These data show how a critical physiological switch is wired by alternative splicing and functional transposable elements in a long noncoding RNA. They further demonstrated the crucial importance of the lncRNA isoform CARMEN-201 in SMC specification during heart development.

Corrigendum: Yield of the electrophysiological study in patients with new-onset left bundle branch block after transcathether aortic valve replacement: The PR interval matters.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.910693.].

Yield of the electrophysiological study in patients with new-onset left bundle branch block after transcathether aortic valve replacement: The PR interval matters.

Background: Studies suggest that performing an electrophysiological study (EPS) may be useful to identify patients with new-onset left bundle branch block (LBBB) post-TAVR at risk of atrioventricular block. However, tools to optimize the yield of such strategy are needed. We therefore aimed to investigate whether 12-lead ECG changes post-TAVR may help identify patients with abnormal EPS findings. Materials and methods: Consecutive patients with new-onset LBBB post-TAVR who underwent EPS were included. PR and QRS intervals were measured on 12-lead ECG pre-TAVR and during EPS. Abnormal EPS was defined as an HV interval > 55 ms. Results: Among 61 patients, 28 (46%) had an HV interval > 55 ms after TAVR. Post-TAVR PR interval and ΔPR (PR-post-pre-TAVR) were significantly longer in patients with prolonged HV (PR: 188 ± 38 vs. 228 ± 34 ms, p < 0.001, ΔPR: 10 ± 30 vs. 34 ± 23 ms, p = 0.001), while no difference was found in QRS duration. PR and ΔPR intervals both effectively discriminated patients with HV > 55 ms (AUC = 0.804 and 0.769, respectively; p < 0.001). A PR > 200 ms identified patients with abnormal EPS results with a sensitivity of 89% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 88%. ΔPR ≥ 20 ms alone provided a somewhat lower sensitivity (64%) but combining both criteria (i.e., PR > 200 ms or ΔPR ≥ 20 ms) identified almost every patients with abnormal HV (sensitivity = 96%, NPV = 95%). Selecting EPS candidate based on both criteria would avoid 1/3 of exams. Conclusion: PR interval assessment may be useful to select patients with new-onset LBBB after TAVR who may benefit most from an EPS. In patients with PR ≤ 200 ms and ΔPR < 20 ms the likelihood of abnormal EPS is very low independently of QRS changes.

Quantitative Flow Ratio Analysis by Paramedical Compared With Medical Users.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to validate whether quantitative flow ratio (QFR) analysis could be performed by both medical and paramedical certified users. Therefore, we compared QFR values with conventional guidewire-based fractional flow reserve (FFR) as the reference using core laboratory analysis. QFR allows FFR calculation based on the coronary angiogram. QFR analysis requires certified users with dedicated training and skills. However, the ability of medical and paramedical users to correctly analyze QFR remains unknown. METHODS: In a prospective, single-center study, we included all consecutive patients with stable coronary artery disease and indicated physiological assessment. QFR was performed and analyzed by 1 medical and 2 paramedical QFR users who were unaware of conventional pressure-guidewire FFR measurements. RESULTS: We included 67 consecutive patients and 100 lesions for assessment with QFR and FFR. Pearson's correlation coefficient of QFR performed by paramedical users compared with medical users was 0.89 (range, 0.83-0.92). A Bland-Altman analysis showed no significant bias (-0.0008). Receiver-operator characteristic curves were generated to compare the ability to predict an FFR value above or below 0.80 with QFR performed by paramedical vs medical users. When comparing FFR with QFR performed by paramedical and medical users, the values for area under the curve were 0.964 and 0.970, respectively. Intraclass correlation was 0.884. CONCLUSION: Our study showed a noticeable correlation between QFR analysis performed by QFR-certified paramedical and medical users, as compared with FFR. These data suggest that QFR analysis could be performed by certified paramedicals in order to reduce physician workload without impacting the quality of the obtained results.

Head to head comparison of quantitative flow ratio using 4-French and 6-French catheters versus fractional flow reserve.

OBJECTIVES: To validate QFR using 4-F diagnostic catheters compared to using 6-F guiding catheters, with conventional guidewire-based FFR as the reference standard, using independent core laboratory analysis. BACKGROUND: Quantitative Flow Ratio (QFR) allows Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) calculation based on the coronary angiogram, using 5- or 6-French (F) catheters. However, the use of 4-F diagnostic catheters to perform coronary angiography is currently routine in some centers. METHODS: We included all consecutive patients with stable coronary artery disease and indicated for physiological assessment. QFR was performed using a 4-F diagnostic catheter, then QFR was performed using a 6-F guiding catheter while conventional FFR was measured using a pressure guidewire. Angiograms were sent to two separate core laboratories. RESULTS: One hundred lesions in 67 consecutive patients with QFR performed using 4-F and 6-F catheters, and with conventional FFR, were included. Pearson's correlation coefficient was for QFR 4-F vs. FFR 0.91 [0.87-0.94], for QFR 6-F vs. FFR 0.90 [0.86-0.94], and for QFR 4-F vs. QFR 6-F 0.93 [0.90-0.95]. Receiver-operator characteristic curves (ROC) comparing the ability to predict an FFR value above or below 0.80 with QFR 4-F and 6-F were generated. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) vs. FFR was 0.972 [0.95-0.99] for QFR 4-F and 0.970 [0.94-0.99] for QFR 6-F. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated the feasibility of performing QFR analysis from angiograms obtained by 4-F catheters, and showed a good correlation with QFR performed using 6-F catheters as well as with conventional FFR performed using a pressure guidewire.

Feasibility of Quantitative Flow Ratio in Adult Patients With Anomalous Aortic Origin of the Coronary Artery With 5 Years of Clinical Follow-up.

OBJECTIVES: Anomalous origin of the right coronary artery (ARCA) represents the most common form of abnormal coronary origin and may potentially increase the risk for sudden cardiac death. Morphological and functional evaluation of ARCA in adult patients referred for invasive coronary angiogram (ICA) is challenging. Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is an available method able to virtually calculate fractional flow reserve using 3-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography (3D-QCA) based on ICA. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of QFR analysis in patients with ARCA and its clinical impact. METHODS: Using the registry of proximal anomalous connections of coronary arteries (ANOCOR registry), a multicenter observational registry including 472 adult patients with ANOCOR between 2010 and 2013, we retrospectively performed QFR analysis from ICA and evaluated the rate of death, myocardial infarction, and unplanned revascularization at 5 years. RESULTS: Among 128 patients with ARCA, 41 (32%) could have QFR analysis with median clinical follow-up of 8.3 years. The mean QFR value was 0.90 ± 0.10, and 3D-QCA analysis showed preserved lumen area despite the elliptical shape of the proximal part of the ARCA, which in the worst cases appeared on ICA as a significant narrowing. The event rate was 12.2% (n = 5), including 3 deaths (1 due to cancer, 1 due to stroke, and 1 cause unknown) and 2 unplanned revascularizations at 5 years. No myocardial infarctions were reported. CONCLUSIONS: When QFR analysis of ARCA is feasible, non-significant QFR values are associated with good clinical outcome at 5 years.