A pilot study of longitudinal changes in neurocognition, white matter hyperintensities, and cortical thickness in atrial fibrillation patients following catheter ablation vs medical management.

Background: Cerebral microembolization and atrophy complicate atrial fibrillation (AF). Objectives: We aimed to compare changes in neuroimaging findings between AF patients treated with catheter ablation and those treated with medical therapy. Methods: In this pilot study, we evaluated differences in the change in regional white matter hyperintensity burden (WMHb) and cognitive function from baseline to 6 weeks and 1 year in patients treated with AF ablation (n = 12) and patients treated with medical management alone (n = 11). Change in cortical thickness over time in Alzheimer's disease (AD) risk, aging-associated, and shared AD risk/aging regions was also compared between groups. Results: The mean age was 69.7 ± 5.0 years, 78% of patients were male, 39% had persistent AF, and all received oral anticoagulation. There were no significant differences between groups in the change in cognitive function. At 6 weeks, there were no significant differences in periventricular WMHb changes between groups (0.00 vs 0.04, P = .12), but changes in attention/concentration were inversely correlated with periventricular (P = .01) and total (P = .03) WMHb. Medical management patients demonstrated significantly greater cortical thinning in AD risk regions from baseline to 1 year (P = .003). Conclusions: AF patients who underwent ablation demonstrated less cortical thinning in regions associated with AD risk than patients treated with medical therapy. Larger, prospective studies are needed to better understand the relationship between AF therapies and the development of cognitive decline.

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).

Colchicine for the Prevention of Recurrent Arrhythmia After Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation: Results of a Single-Center, Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: There is evidence to suggest that colchicine reduces the risk of recurrent atrial fibrillation (AF) after catheter ablation; however, the tolerability and safety of colchicine in routine practice is unknown. METHODS: Patients undergoing catheter ablation for AF who received colchicine after ablation were matched 1:1 to patients who did not by age, sex, and renal function. Recurrent AF was compared between groups categorically at 12 months and via propensity weighted Cox proportional hazards models with and without a 3-month blanking period. RESULTS: Overall, 180 patients (n = 90 colchicine and n = 90 matched controls) were followed for a median (Q1, Q3) of 10.3 (7.0, 12.0) months. Mean age was 65.3 ± 9.1 years, 33.9% were women, mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 2.9 ± 1.5, and 51.1% had persistent AF. Most patients (70%) received colchicine 0.6 mg daily for a median of 30 days. In the colchicine group, 55 patients (61.1%) were receiving at least one known interacting medication with colchicine. After ablation, one patient required colchicine dose reduction and four patients required discontinuation. After adjusting for covariate imbalance using propensity weighting, no significant association between colchicine use and AF recurrence was identified (adjusted hazard ratio 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48-1.85; p = 0.853). No significant association was found between colchicine use and all-cause hospitalizations (adjusted odds ratio 0.74, 95% CI 0.28-1.96; p = 0.548). CONCLUSION: Despite the frequent presence of drug-drug interactions, a 30-day course of colchicine is well-tolerated after AF ablation; however, we did not observe any association between colchicine and lower rates of AF recurrence or hospitalization.

Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: anticipating and avoiding complications.

INTRODUCTION: Atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is being performed more frequently and more widely at more centers. This stems from several factors including 1) demographic forces leading to an increased prevalence of the arrhythmia; 2) greater availability of ambulatory monitoring making diagnosis more frequent; 3) relative inefficacy of medications; and 4) improved safety and efficacy of the procedure. Ablation has become much more streamlined and reproducible than a decade ago, but life-threatening complications may still arise. AREAS COVERED: This review will focus on awareness, avoidance, and early recognition and management of complications of AF ablation. This literature review is challenged by differing approaches to ablation of AF both within a center and between centers, the rapid improvement of technology making the outcomes associated with a therapeutic strategy begun a few years prior relatively obsolete, as well as the heterogeneity of the population being studied. EXPERT OPINION: Newer technologies are on the horizon which will allow us to ablate AF with increasing efficacy, efficiency, and hopefully safety. Such new technology and changing usage mandate vigilance to avoid complications.

Prevalence and Phenotypic Burden of Monogenic Arrhythmias Using Integration of Electronic Health Records With Genetics.

BACKGROUND: Inherited primary arrhythmia syndromes and arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathies can lead to sudden cardiac arrest in otherwise healthy individuals. The burden and expression of these diseases in a real-world, well-phenotyped cardiovascular population is not well understood. METHODS: Whole exome sequencing was performed on 8574 individuals from the CATHGEN cohort (Catheterization Genetics). Variants in 55 arrhythmia-related genes (associated with 8 disorders) were identified and assessed for pathogenicity based on American College of Genetics and Genomics/Association for Molecular Pathology criteria. Individuals carrying pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants were grouped by arrhythmogenic disorder and matched 1:5 to noncarrier controls based on age, sex, and genetic ancestry. Long-term phenotypic data were annotated through deep electronic health record review. RESULTS: Fifty-eight P/LP variants were found in 79 individuals in 12 genes associated with 5 arrhythmogenic disorders (arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy, Brugada syndrome, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, LMNA-related cardiomyopathy, and long QT syndrome). The penetrance of these P/LP variants in this cardiovascular cohort was 33%, 0%, 28%, 83%, and 4%, respectively. Carriers of P/LP variants associated with arrhythmogenic disorders showed significant differences in ECG, imaging, and clinical phenotypes compared with noncarriers, but displayed no difference in survival. Carriers of novel truncating variants in FLNC, MYBPC3, and MYH7 also developed relevant arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy phenotypes. CONCLUSIONS: In a real-world cardiovascular cohort, P/LP variants in arrhythmia-related genes were relatively common (1:108 prevalence) and most penetrant in LMNA. While hypertrophic cardiomyopathy P/LP variant carriers showed significant differences in clinical outcomes compared with noncarriers, carriers of P/LP variants associated with other arrhythmogenic disorders displayed only ECG differences.

Acute echocardiographic and hemodynamic response to his-bundle pacing in patients with first-degree atrioventricular block.

BACKGROUND: Atrial pacing and right ventricular (RV) pacing are both associated with adverse outcomes among patients with first-degree atrioventricular block (1°AVB). His-bundle pacing (HBP) provides physiological activation of the ventricle and may be able to improve both atrioventricular (AV) and inter-ventricular synchrony in 1°AVB patients. This study evaluates the acute echocardiographic and hemodynamic effects of atrial, atrial-His-bundle sequential (AH), and atrial-ventricular (AV) sequential pacing in 1°AVB patients. METHODS: Patients with 1°AVB undergoing atrial fibrillation ablation were included. Following left atrial (LA) catheterization, patients underwent atrial, AH- and AV-sequential pacing. LA/left ventricular (LV) pressure and echocardiographic measurements during the pacing protocols were compared. RESULTS: Thirteen patients with 1°AVB (mean PR 221 ± 26 ms) were included. The PR interval was prolonged with atrial pacing compared to baseline (275 ± 73 ms, p = .005). LV ejection fraction (LVEF) was highest during atrial pacing (62 ± 11%), intermediate with AH-sequential pacing (59 ± 7%), and lowest with AV-sequential pacing (57 ± 12%) though these differences were not statistically significant. No significant differences were found in LA or LV mean pressures or LV dP/dT. LA and LV volumes, isovolumetric times, electromechanical delays, and global longitudinal strains were similar across pacing protocols. CONCLUSION: Despite pronounced PR prolongation, the acute effects of atrial pacing were not significantly different than AH- or AV-sequential pacing. Normalizing atrioventricular and/or inter-ventricular dyssynchrony did not result in acute improvements in cardiac output or loading conditions.

Leadless pacemaker implantation after lead extraction for cardiac implanted electronic device infection.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac implanted electronic device (CIED) pocket and systemic infection remain common complications with traditional CIEDs and are associated with high morbidity and mortality. Leadless pacemakers may be an attractive pacing alternative for many patients following complete hardware removal for a CIED infection by eliminating surgical pocket-related complications as well as lower risk of recurrent complications. OBJECTIVE: To describe use and outcomes associated with leadless pacemaker implantation following extraction of a CIED system due to infection. METHODS: Patient characteristics and postprocedural outcomes were described in patients who underwent leadless pacemaker implantation at Duke University Hospital between November 11, 2014 and November 18, 2019, following CIED infection and device extraction. Outcomes of interest included procedural complications, pacemaker syndrome, need for system revision, and recurrent infection. RESULTS: Among 39 patients, the mean age was 71 ± 17 years, 31% were women, and the most frequent primary pacing indication was complete heart block (64.1%) with 9 (23.1%) patients being pacemaker dependent at the time of Micra implantation. The primary organism implicated in the CIED infection was Staphylococcus aureus (43.6%). Nine of the 39 patients had a leadless pacemaker implanted before or on the same day as their extraction procedure, and the remaining 30 patients had a leadless pacemaker implanted after their extraction procedure. During follow-up (mean 24.8 ± 14.7 months) after leadless pacemaker implantation, there were a total of 3 major complications: 1 groin hematoma, 1 femoral arteriovenous fistula, and 1 case of pacemaker syndrome. No patients had evidence of recurrent CIED infection after leadless pacemaker implantation. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a prior CIED infection and an elevated risk of recurrent infection, there was no evidence of CIED infection with a mean follow up of over 2 years following leadless pacemaker implantation at or after CIED system removal. Larger studies with longer follow-up are required to determine if there is a long-term advantage to implanting a leadless pacemaker versus a traditional pacemaker following temporary pacing when needed during the periextraction period in patients with a prior CIED infection.

Arrhythmic and Mortality Outcomes Among Ischemic Versus Nonischemic Cardiomyopathy Patients Receiving Primary ICD Therapy.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine the association of cardiomyopathy etiology with the likelihood of ventricular arrhythmias, appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy, and mortality. BACKGROUND: There are conflicting data on the benefit of primary prevention ICD therapy in patients with ischemic versus nonischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM/NICM). METHODS: The study population comprised 4803 patients with ICM (n = 3,106) or NICM (n = 1,697) with a primary prevention ICD enrolled in 5 randomized trials conducted between 1997 and 2017. The primary end point was sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) ≥200 beats/min or ventricular fibrillation (VF). Secondary end points included appropriate ICD therapy and all-cause mortality. Differences in cause-specific mortality, including noncardiac, sudden cardiac, and non-sudden cardiac death, were also examined. RESULTS: Patients with ICM were significantly older and had more comorbid conditions, whereas those with NICM had a more advanced heart failure class at enrollment and were more often prescribed medical or cardiac resynchronization therapy for heart failure. Multivariate analysis showed that ICM versus NICM had a similar risk of VT/VF events (HR: 0.98 [95% CI: 0.79-1.20]) and appropriate ICD therapy (HR: 1.03 [95% CI: 0.87-1.22]), whereas the risk of all-cause mortality was 1.8-fold higher among ICM versus NICM patients (HR: 1.84 [95% CI: 1.42-2.38]), dominated by non-sudden cardiac mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Combined data from 5 landmark ICD clinical trials show that ICM patients experience a similar risk of life-threatening ventricular arrhythmic events but have an increased risk of all-cause mortality, dominated by non-sudden cardiac death, compared with NICM patients.

Optimizing mechanically sensed atrial tracking in patients with atrioventricular-synchronous leadless pacemakers: A single-center experience.

BACKGROUND: Atrioventricular (AV)-synchronous single-chamber leadless pacing using a mechanical atrial sensing algorithm produced high AV synchrony in clinical trials, but clinical practice experience with these devices has not yet been described. OBJECTIVE: To describe pacing outcomes and programming changes with AV-synchronous leadless pacemakers in clinical practice. METHODS: Consecutive patients without persistent atrial fibrillation who received an AV-synchronous leadless pacemaker and completed follow-up between February 2020 and April 2021 were included. We evaluated tracking index (atrial mechanical sense followed by ventricular pace [AM-VP] divided by total VP), total AV synchrony (sum of AM-ventricular sense [AM-VS], AM-VP, and AV conduction mode switch), use of programming optimization, and improvement in AV synchrony after optimization. RESULTS: Fifty patients met the inclusion criteria. Mean age was 69 ± 16.8 years, 24 (48%) were women, 24 (48%) had complete heart block, and 17 (34%) required ≥50% pacing. Mean tracking index was 41% ± 34%. Thirty-five patients (70%) received ≥1 programming change. In 36 patients with 2 follow-up visits, tracking improved by +9% ± 28% (P value for improvement = .09) and +18% ± 19% (P = .02) among 15 patients with complete heart block. Average total AV synchrony increased from 89% [67%, 99%] to 93% [78%, 100%] in all patients (P = .22), from 86% [52%, 98%] to 97% [82%, 99%] in those with complete heart block (P = .04), and from 73% [52%, 80%] to 78% [70%, 85%] in those with ≥50% pacing (P = .09). CONCLUSION: In patients with AV-synchronous leadless pacemakers, programming changes are frequent and are associated with increased atrial tracking and increased AV synchrony in patients with complete heart block.

Assessment of primary prevention patients receiving an ICD - Systematic evaluation of ATP: APPRAISE ATP.

BACKGROUND: The value of antitachycardia pacing (ATP) in the overall cohort of primary prevention patients who receive implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) remains uncertain. ATP success reported in prior trials potentially included a large number of patients receiving unnecessary ATP for arrhythmias that may have self-terminated owing to the prematurity of the intervention. Although some patients derive benefit from initial ATP in terminating rapid ventricular arrhythmias and thereby preventing shocks, there are limited data allowing us to identify those patients a priori. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of APPRAISE ATP is to understand the role of ATP in primary prevention patients currently indicated for ICD therapy in a large prospective randomized controlled trial with modern programming parameters. METHODS: The study is a global, prospective, randomized, multicenter clinical trial conducted at up to 150 sites globally, enrolling approximately 2600 subjects The primary endpoint of the trial is time to first all-cause shock in a 2-arm study with an equivalent study design in which the incidence of all-cause shocks will be compared between primary prevention subjects programmed with shocks only vs subjects programmed to standard therapy (ATP and shock). RESULTS: An Electrogram and Device Interrogation Core Laboratory will review interrogation data to determine primary endpoints that occur in APPRAISE ATP. Their decisions are based on independent physician review of the data from device interrogation. CONCLUSION: The ultimate purpose of the study is to aid clinicians in the selection of ICD technologies based on hard endpoint evidence across the spectrum of indications for primary prevention implantation.

Survival After Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Shocks.

BACKGROUND: There are conflicting data on the impact of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shocks on subsequent mortality. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine whether the arrhythmic substrate leading to ICD therapy or the therapy itself increases mortality. METHODS: The study cohort included 5,516 ICD recipients who were enrolled in 5 landmark ICD trials (MADIT-II, MADIT-RISK, MADIT-CRT, MADIT-RIT, RAID). The authors evaluated the association of device therapy with subsequent mortality in 4 separate time-dependent models: model I, type of ICD therapy; model II, type of arrhythmia for which ICD therapy was delivered; model III, combined assessment of all arrhythmia and therapy types during follow-up; and model IV, incremental risk associated with repeated ICD shocks. RESULTS: When analyzed by the type of ICD therapy (model I), a first appropriate ICD shock was associated with increased risk of subsequent mortality with or without concomitant occurrence of inappropriate shock during follow-up (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.78 and 2.31; p < 0.001 and p = 0.12), whereas inappropriate shock alone was not associated with mortality risk (HR: 1.23; p = 0.42). Similarly, ICD therapy for ventricular tachycardia (VT) ≥200 beats/min or ventricular fibrillation (VF) (model II) was associated with increased risk of death with or without concomitant therapy for VT <200 beats/min (HRs: 2.25 and 2.62; both p < 0.001), whereas appropriate therapy for VT <200 beats/min or inappropriate therapy (regardless of etiology) did not reach statistical significance (all p > 0.10). Combined assessment of all therapy and arrhythmia types during follow-up (model III) showed that appropriate ICD shocks for VF, shocks for fast VT (≥200 beats/min) without prior antitachycardia pacing (ATP), as well as shocks for fast VT delivered after failed ATP, were associated with the highest risk of subsequent death (HR: all >2.8; p < 0.001). Finally, 2 or more ICD appropriate shocks were not associated with incremental risk to the first appropriate ICD shock (model IV). CONCLUSION: The combined data from 5 landmark ICD trials suggest that the underlying arrhythmic substrate rather than the ICD therapy is the more important determinant of mortality in ICD recipients.

Electrical storm in patients with left ventricular assist devices: Risk factors, incidence, and impact on survival.

BACKGROUND: Ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) and electrical storm (ES) are recognized complications following left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation; however, their association with long term-outcomes remains poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe the clinical impact of ES in a population of patients undergoing LVAD implantation at a quaternary care center in the United States. METHODS: This was an observational retrospective study of patients undergoing LVAD implantation from 2009 to 2020 at Duke University Hospital. The incidence of ES (≥3 sustained VA episodes over a 24-hour period without an identifiable reversible cause) was determined from patient records. Risk factors for ES were identified using multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling. RESULTS: Among 730 patients undergoing LVAD implant, 78 (10.7%) developed ES at a median of 269 (interquartile range [IQR] 7-766) days following surgery. Twenty-seven patients (34.6%) developed ES within 30 days, while 51 (65.4%) presented with ES at a median 639 (IQR 281-1017) days after implant. Following ES, 41% of patients died within 1 year. Patients who developed ES were more likely to have a history of VAs, ventricular tachycardia ablation, antiarrhythmic drug use, and perioperative mechanical circulatory support around the time of LVAD implant than patients without ES. CONCLUSION: ES occurs in 1 in 10 patients after LVAD and is associated with higher mortality. Risk factors for ES include a history of VAs, VT ablation, antiarrhythmic drug use, and perioperative mechanical circulatory support. Optimal management of ES surrounding LVAD implant, including escalation of medical therapy, catheter ablation, or adjunctive sympatholytic therapies, remains uncertain.

Reassessing the role of antitachycardia pacing in fast ventricular arrhythmias in primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients: Results from MADIT-RIT.

BACKGROUND: In Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial - Reduce Inappropriate Therapy (MADIT-RIT), high-rate cutoff (arm B) and delayed therapy (arm C) reduced the risk of inappropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) interventions when compared with conventional programming (arm A); however, appropriate but unnecessary therapies were not evaluated. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the value of antitachycardia pacing (ATP) for fast ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) ≥ 200 beats/min in patients with primary prevention ICD. METHODS: We compared ATP only, ATP and shock, and shock only rates in patients in MADIT-RIT treated for VAs ≥ 200 beats/min. The only difference between these randomized groups was the time delay between ventricular tachycardia detection and therapy (3.4 seconds vs 4.9 seconds vs 14.4 seconds). RESULTS: In arm A, 11.5% patients had events, the initial therapy was ATP in 10.5% and shock in 1%, and the final therapy was ATP in 8% and shock in 3.5%. In arm B, 6.6% had events, 4.2% were initially treated with ATP and 2.4% with shock, and the final therapy was ATP in 2.8% and shock in 3.8%. In arm C, 4.7% had events, 2.5% were initially treated with ATP and 2.3% with shock, and the final therapy was ATP in 1.4% and shock in 3.3%. The final shock rate was similar in arm A vs arm B (3.5% vs 3.8%; P = .800) and in arm A vs arm C (3.5% vs 3.3%; P = .855) despite the marked discrepancy in initial ATP therapy utilization. CONCLUSION: In MADIT-RIT, there was a significant reduction in ATP interventions with therapy delays due to spontaneous termination, with no difference in shock therapies, suggesting that earlier interventions for VAs ≥ 200 beats/min are likely unnecessary, leading to an overestimation of the value of ATP in primary prevention ICD recipients.

Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Surgery Following Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine the indications, characteristics, and outcomes of cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) surgery in patients with LVAD. BACKGROUND: Many patients with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) will require implantable cardioverter-defibrillator generator change or device revision or are candidates for de novo implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation following LVAD implantation. METHODS: We performed an observational retrospective study of all LVAD recipients who subsequently underwent CIED surgery at Duke University Hospital from 2009 to 2019. RESULTS: A total of 159 patients underwent CIED surgery following LVAD implantation, including generator change (n = 93), device revision (n = 38), and de novo implant (n = 28). The median (interquartile range) time from LVAD implantation to CIED surgery was 18.1 months (5.5 to 35.1 months). Pre-operative risk for infection was elevated in the overall cohort with a median (interquartile range) Prevention of Arrhythmia Device Infection Trial (PADIT) score of 7.0 (5.0 to 9.0). Pocket hematoma occurred in 21 patients (13.2%) following CIED surgery. Antimicrobial envelops were used in 43 patients (27%). Device infection due to CIED surgery occurred in 5 (3.1%) patients and occurred only in patients who developed post-operative pocket hematoma (p < 0.001). Mortality at 1 year following CIED surgery was 20% (n = 32). CONCLUSIONS: CIED surgery following LVAD implantation is associated with an increased risk for pocket hematoma and CIED infection. Further studies are needed to determine the risk-benefit ratio of CIED surgery in patients with LVADs.