Contemporary Management of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infection: The American College of Cardiology COGNITO Survey.

Background: Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) infection remains a serious complication, causing increased morbidity and mortality. Early recognition and escalation to definitive therapy including extraction of the infected device often pose challenges. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess U.S.-based physicians current practices in diagnosing and managing CIED infections and explore potential extraction barriers. Methods: An observational survey was performed by the American College of Cardiology including U.S. physicians managing CIEDs from February to March 2022. Sampling techniques and screener questions determined eligibility. The survey featured questions on knowledge and experience with CIED infection patients and case scenarios. Results: Of 387 physicians completing the survey (20% response rate), 49% indicated familiarity with current guidelines regarding CIED infection. Electrophysiologists (EPs) (91%) were more familiar with these guidelines, compared to non-EP cardiologists (29%) and primary care physicians (23%). Only 30% of physicians specified that their institution had guideline-based protocols in place for managing patients with CIED infection. When presented with pocket infection cases, approximately 89% of EPs and 50% of non-EP cardiologists would follow guideline recommendation to do complete CIED system removal, while 70% of primary care physicians did not recommend guideline-directed treatment. Conclusions: There are gaps in familiarity of guidelines as well as the knowledge in practical management of CIED infection with non-extracting physicians. Most institutions lack a definite pathway. Addressing discrepancies, including guideline education and streamlining care or referral pathways, will be a key factor to bridging the gap and improving CIED infection patient outcomes.

Impact of an Organized Treatment Pathway on Management of Atrial Fibrillation: The ER2EP Study.

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia reported worldwide. There is significant heterogeneity in AF care pathways for a patient seen in the emergency room, impacting access to guideline-driven therapies. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare the difference in AF outcomes between those treated with an organized treatment pathway vs routine-care approach. Methods: The emergency room to electrophysiology service study (ER2EP) is a multicenter, prospective observational registry (NCT04476524) enrolling patients with AF from sites where a pathway for management of AF was put in place compared to sites where a pathway was not in place within the same health system and the same physicians providing services at all sites. Multivariable regression modeling was performed to identify predictors of clinical outcomes. Beta coefficient or odds ratio was reported as appropriate. Results: A total of 500 patients (ER2EP group, n = 250; control group, n = 250) were included in the study. The mean age was 73.4 ± 12.9 years, and 52.2% were males. There was a statistically significant difference in primary endpoint [time to ablation (56 ± 50.9 days vs 183.3 ± 109.5 days; P < 0.001), time to anticoagulation initiation (2.1 ± 1.6 days vs 19.7 ± 35 days, P < 0.001), antiarrhythmic drug initiation (4.8 ± 7.1 days vs 24.7 ± 44.4 days, P < 0.001) compared to the control group, respectively. As such, this resulted in reduced length of stay in the ER2EP group compared to the control group (2.4 ± 1.4 days vs 3.23 ± 2.5 days, P = 0.002). Conclusions: This study provides evidence that having an organized pathway from the emergency department for AF patients involving electrophysiology services can improve early access to definitive therapies and clinical outcomes.

Management of Anesthesia for Procedures in the Cardiac Electrophysiology Laboratory.

The complexity of cardiac electrophysiology procedures has increased significantly over the past three decades. Anesthesia requirements of these procedures can be different based on patient- and procedure-specific factors. This manuscript outlines various anesthesia strategies for cardiac implantable electronic devices and electrophysiology procedures including pre-procedural, procedural and post-procedural management. A team-based approach with collaboration between cardiac electrophysiologists and anesthesiologists is required with careful pre-procedural and intra-procedural planning. Given the recent advances in electrophysiology, there is a need for specialized cardiac electrophysiology anesthesia care to improve the efficacy and safety of the procedures.

Feasibility of Amulet occluder implantation after failed left atrial appendage occlusion attempt: Insights from the EMERGE LAA postapproval study.

BACKGROUND: Although expertise in left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) has grown, certain intricate anatomies may pose challenges, rendering them unsuitable for LAAO with the selected device. OBJECTIVE: This analysis aimed to characterize outcomes of patients with prior failed percutaneous LAAO procedures who underwent a subsequent attempt with an Amulet occluder in the EMERGE LAA postapproval study. METHODS: Patients enrolled in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry LAAO Registry who had an Amulet occluder implantation attempt between Food and Drug Administration approval (August 14, 2021) and June 30, 2023, were evaluated. A safety end point through 7 days or hospital discharge (whichever was later) and major adverse events through 45 days were reported. RESULTS: A total of 8591 patients underwent attempted Amulet occluder implantation, of whom 244 patients had prior failed LAAO. Implantation success was 88.9% and 96.2% in patients with prior failed LAAO and index LAAO, respectively (P < .001). The safety composite end point was low, occurring in 1.6% and 0.8% of patients with prior failed LAAO and index LAAO, respectively (P = .148). Any major adverse event through 45 days occurred in 7.4% and 6.3% of prior failed LAAO and index LAAO patient cohorts, respectively (P = .497); most adverse events were similar between the groups (P > .05). At 45 days, peridevice leak ≤3 mm was achieved in >90% of patients in either group. CONCLUSION: A high degree of implantation success with a low rate of adverse events can be achieved with the Amulet occluder. The findings imply that the dual occlusive mechanism Amulet occluder facilitates successful closure, even in challenging anatomic scenarios.

Pulmonary Vein Isolation With or Without Left Atrial Appendage Ligation in Atrial Fibrillation: The aMAZE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Left atrial appendage elimination may improve catheter ablation outcomes for atrial fibrillation. Objective: To assess the safety and effectiveness of percutaneous left atrial appendage ligation adjunctive to catheter pulmonary vein isolation for nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, prospective, open-label, randomized clinical trial evaluated the safety and effectiveness of percutaneous left atrial appendage ligation adjunctive to planned pulmonary vein isolation for nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation present for less than 3 years. Eligible patients were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to undergo left atrial appendage ligation and pulmonary vein isolation or pulmonary vein isolation alone. Use of a 2:1 randomization ratio was intended to provide more device experience and safety data. Patients were enrolled from October 2015 to December 2019 at 53 US sites, with the final follow-up visit on April 21, 2021. Interventions: Left atrial appendage ligation plus pulmonary vein isolation compared with pulmonary vein isolation alone. Main Outcomes and Measures: A bayesian adaptive analysis was used for primary end points. Primary effectiveness was freedom from documented atrial arrythmias of greater than 30 seconds duration 12 months after undergoing pulmonary vein isolation. Rhythm was assessed by Holter monitoring at 6 and 12 months after pulmonary vein isolation, symptomatic event monitoring, or any electrocardiographic tracing obtained through 12 months after pulmonary vein isolation. Primary safety was a composite of predefined serious adverse events compared with a prespecified 10% performance goal 30 days after the procedure. Left atrial appendage closure was evaluated through 12 months after pulmonary vein isolation. Results: Overall, 404 patients were randomized to undergo left atrial appendage ligation plus pulmonary vein isolation and 206 were randomized to undergo pulmonary vein isolation alone. Primary effectiveness was 64.3% with left atrial appendage ligation and pulmonary vein isolation and 59.9% with pulmonary vein isolation only (difference, 4.3% [bayesian 95% credible interval, -4.2% to 13.2%]; posterior superiority probability, 0.835), which did not meet the statistical criterion to establish superiority (0.977). Primary safety was met, with a 30-day serious adverse event rate of 3.4% (bayesian 95% credible interval, 2.0% to 5.0%; posterior probability, 1.0) which was less than the prespecified threshold of 10%. At 12 months after pulmonary vein isolation, complete left atrial appendage closure (0 mm residual communication) was observed in 84% of patients and less than or equal to 5 mm residual communication was observed in 99% of patients. Conclusions and Relevance: Percutaneous left atrial appendage ligation adjunctive to pulmonary vein isolation did not meet prespecified efficacy criteria for freedom from atrial arrhythmias at 12 months compared with pulmonary vein isolation alone for patients with nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation, but met prespecified safety criteria and demonstrated high rates of closure at 12 months. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02513797.

New-generation electronic appliances and cardiac implantable electronic devices: a systematic literature review of mechanisms and in vivo studies.

INTRODUCTION: Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) functions are susceptible to electromagnetic interference (EMI) from electromagnetic fields (EMF). Data on EMI risks from new-generation electronic appliances (EA) are limited. OBJECTIVE: We performed a systematic literature review on the mechanisms of EMI, current evidence, and recently published trials evaluating the effect of EMF on CIEDs from electric vehicles (EV), smartphone, and smartwatch technology and summarize its safety data. METHODS: Electronic databases, including PubMed and EMBASE, were searched for in vivo studies evaluating EMF strength and incidence between CIEDs and commercial EVs, new-generation smartphones, and new-generation smartwatches. RESULTS: A total of ten studies (three on EVs, five on smartphones, one on smartphones, one on smartphones and smartwatches) were included in our systematic review. There was no report of EMI incidence associated with EVs or smartwatches. Magnet-containing smartphones (iPhone 12) can cause EMI when placed directly over CIEDs - thereby triggering the magnet mode; otherwise, no report of EMI was observed with other positions or smartphone models. CONCLUSION: Current evidence suggests CIED recipients are safe from general interaction with EVs/HEVs, smartphones, and smartwatches. Strictly, results may only be applied to commercial brands or models tested in the published studies. There is limited data on EMI risk from EVs wireless charging and smartphones with MagSafe technology.

Pericarditis prophylactic therapy after sinus node-sparing hybrid ablation for inappropriate sinus tachycardia/postural orthostatic sinus tachycardia.

Background: Pericarditis is the most common complication following hybrid sinus node-sparing ablation for inappropriate sinus tachycardia (IST)/postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS). Objective: The study sought to evaluate the association of prophylaxis therapy on the risk of symptomatic pericarditis following hybrid IST/POTS ablation. Methods: All consecutive patients undergoing to hybrid ablation of symptomatic IST/POTS refractory or intolerant to drugs were retrospectively analyzed. Pharmacological prophylaxis therapy was based on acetylsalicylic acid and colchicine started on the day of the ablation and continued for at least 3 months. The primary endpoint was occurrence of symptomatic pericarditis. The secondary endpoint was occurrence of pericarditis-related complications, including the following: duration of pericarditis >3 months, hospitalization for pericarditis, postpericardiectomy pleuro-pericarditis, and pericardiectomy. Results: A total of 220 patients undergone to hybrid IST/POTS ablation were included and 44 (20%) underwent prophylaxis therapy. Pericarditis occurred in 101 (45.9%) patients, with 97 (96%) in the first 5 days. At survival analysis, prophylaxis was associated with higher rate of freedom from pericarditis (81.9% vs 47.2%, log-rank P < .001). Pericarditis-related complications were low, occurring in 7 (3.2%) patients. There was no difference in pericarditis-related complications between the patients who underwent prophylaxis therapy and patients who did not. At Cox multivariate analysis, predictors of pericarditis were IST (vs POTS) (hazard ratio 0.61, 95% confidence interval0.39-0.99, P = .04) and prophylaxis therapy (hazard ratio 0.27, 95% confidence interval 0.13-0.55, P < .001). Conclusion: In a large cohort of patients undergoing hybrid ablation for IST/POTS, a prophylaxis therapy with acetylsalicylic acid and colchicine was associated with a lower rate of symptomatic pericarditis.

The Zero Calcium Score Paradox.

Our study presents a case of angina with a zero calcium score yet severe coronary stenosis from noncalcified plaque. We highlight the limitation of otherwise prognostically powerful coronary calcium score as a singular predictive tool especially when used in symptomatic patients.

First Experience With Amulet in the United States: Early Insights From EMERGE LAA Postapproval Study.

BACKGROUND: The Food and Drug Administration approved the Amulet occluder (Abbott) after demonstrating safety and effectiveness in the Amulet IDE (AMPLATZER Amulet LAA Occluder) trial. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the EMERGE Left Atrial Appendage study is to evaluate early postapproval outcomes of the Amulet occluder in the United States using data from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Registry. METHODS: Patients with a commercial Amulet occluder implant attempt between Food and Drug Administration approval (August 14, 2021) and December 31, 2022, were included. The safety composite endpoint included all-cause death, ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, or device/procedure-related events requiring open cardiac surgery or endovascular intervention between device implantation and 7 days or hospital discharge (whichever is later). Major adverse events through 45 days were also reported and stratified by operator experience (early [<10 cases], moderate [10-29 cases], and high [30+ cases]). RESULTS: A total of 5,499 patients underwent attempted Amulet occluder implantation. Implant success was 95.8%, and complete closure was 97.2% post-left atrial appendage occlusion and 87.1% at 45 days. A safety composite endpoint event occurred in 0.76% patients. Any major adverse event occurred in 2.9% and 5.7% of patients in-hospital and through 45 days, respectively, driven by major bleeding and pericardial effusion (PE) requiring intervention. PE requiring surgery or percutaneous intervention decreased significantly with increasing experience both in-hospital (early vs high operator experience 1.8% vs 1.1%; P = 0.006) and at 45 days (2.3% vs 1.5%; P = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: The EMERGE Left Atrial Appendage study demonstrates favorable safety and effectiveness of the Amulet occluder in the real-world setting. More experienced operators had improved implant success and fewer PEs, suggesting a learning curve effect implanting this dual occlusive mechanism device.

Predicting Major Adverse Events in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion.

BACKGROUND: The National Cardiovascular Data Registry Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Registry (LAAO) includes the vast majority of transcatheter LAAO procedures performed in the United States. The objective of this study was to develop a model predicting adverse events among patients undergoing LAAO with Watchman FLX. METHODS: Data from 41 001 LAAO procedures with Watchman FLX from July 2020 to September 2021 were used to develop and validate a model predicting in-hospital major adverse events. Randomly selected development (70%, n=28 530) and validation (30%, n=12 471) cohorts were analyzed with 1000 bootstrapped samples, using forward stepwise logistic regression to create the final model. A simplified bedside risk score was also developed using this model. RESULTS: Increased age, female sex, low preprocedure hemoglobin, no prior attempt at atrial fibrillation termination, and increased fall risk most strongly predicted in-hospital major adverse events and were included in the final model along with other clinically relevant variables. The median in-hospital risk-standardized adverse event rate was 1.50% (range, 1.03%-2.84%; interquartile range, 1.42%-1.64%). The model demonstrated moderate discrimination (development C-index, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.65-0.70] and validation C-index, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.62-0.70]) with good calibration. The simplified risk score was well calibrated with risk of in-hospital major adverse events ranging from 0.26% to 3.90% for a score of 0 to 8, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A transcatheter LAAO risk model using National Cardiovascular Data Registry and LAAO Registry data can predict in-hospital major adverse events, demonstrated consistency across hospitals and can be used for quality improvement efforts. A simple bedside risk score was similarly predictive and may inform shared decision-making.

Antithrombotic Therapy for Patients Undergoing Cardiac Electrophysiological and Interventional Procedures: JACC State-of-the-Art Review.

Electrophysiological and interventional procedures have been increasingly used to reduce morbidity and mortality in patients experiencing cardiovascular diseases. Although antithrombotic therapies are critical to reduce the risk of stroke or other thromboembolic events, they can nonetheless increase the bleeding hazard. This is even more true in an aging population undergoing cardiac procedures in which the combination of oral anticoagulants and antiplatelet therapies would further increase the hemorrhagic risk. Hence, the timing, dose, and combination of antithrombotic therapies should be carefully chosen in each case. However, the maze of society guidelines and consensus documents published so far have progressively led to a hazier scenario in this setting. Aim of this review is to provide-in a single document-a quick, evidenced-based practical summary of the antithrombotic approaches used in different cardiac electrophysiology and interventional procedures to guide the busy clinician and the cardiac proceduralist in their everyday practice.

Safety and Efficacy of Combining Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion With Another Cardiac Procedure.

BACKGROUND: Clinical outcomes of left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) combined with other cardiac procedures have not been previously examined. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of combining LAAO with other cardiac procedures vs isolated LAAO. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the 2016 to 2020 National Inpatient Sample database to compare patients undergoing LAAO combined with another cardiac procedure vs isolated LAAO. Outcomes included risk-adjusted major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), in-hospital mortality, major complications, length of stay (LOS), and total costs. RESULTS: The total cohort included 88,910 weighted encounters, of which 1,225 (1.4%) involved concomitant cardiac procedures. After risk adjustment, patients in the concomitant procedure group had similar odds of MACEs (adjusted OR: 1.82; 95% CI: 0.94-2.74); in-hospital mortality; and complications including stroke, acute kidney injury, major bleeding, blood transfusion, and vascular injury. They also had similar LOS (1 day vs 1 day; P = 0.32) and higher costs ($44,723 vs $32,364; P < 0.01) compared with isolated LAAO but shorter LOS (1 day vs 2 days; P < 0.01) and lower costs ($51,552 vs $63,170; P = 0.04) compared with LAAO with sequential procedures. In subgroup analyses, concomitant atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter ablation had higher adjusted odds of heart block (P < 0.01), and concomitant transcatheter aortic valve replacement had higher adjusted odds of stroke (P = 0.02) and vascular injury (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective observational study, combining LAAO with another cardiac intervention appeared to be associated with similar MACEs and LOS. However, certain complications appeared to be more frequent, and the cost was higher with combined procedures.

Atrial fibrillation ablation in heart failure patients: Where do we stand in 2023? - State of the art review.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure are common overlapping cardiovascular disorders. Despite important therapeutic advances over the past several decades, controversy persists about whether a rate control or rhythm control approach constitutes the best option in this population. There is also considerable debate about whether antiarrhythmic drug therapy or ablation is the best approach when rhythm control is pursued.  A brief historical examination of the literature addressing this issue will be performed. An analysis of several important clinical outcomes observed in the prospective, randomized studies, which have compared AF ablation to non-ablation treatment options, will be discussed. This review will conclude with recommendations to guide clinicians on the status of AF ablation as a treatment option when considering management options in heart failure patients with atrial fibrillation.