Global LEADR pivotal trial results.

BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators last longer, and interest in reliable leads with targeted lead placement is growing. The OmniaSecure™ defibrillation lead is a novel small-diameter, catheter-delivered lead designed for targeted placement, based on the established SelectSecure SureScan MRI Model 3830 lumenless pacing lead platform. OBJECTIVE: This trial assessed safety and efficacy of the OmniaSecure defibrillation lead. METHODS: The worldwide LEADR pivotal clinical trial enrolled patients indicated for de novo implantation of a primary or secondary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator/cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator, all of whom received the study lead. The primary efficacy end point was successful defibrillation at implantation per protocol. The primary safety end point was freedom from study lead-related major complications at 6 months. The primary efficacy and safety objectives were met if the lower bound of the 2-sided 95% credible interval was >88% and >90%, respectively. RESULTS: In total, 643 patients successfully received the study lead, and 505 patients have completed 12-month follow-up. The lead was placed in the desired right ventricular location in 99.5% of patients. Defibrillation testing at implantation was completed in 119 patients, with success in 97.5%. The Kaplan-Meier estimated freedom from study lead-related major complications was 97.1% at 6 and 12 months. The trial exceeded the primary efficacy and safety objective thresholds. There were zero study lead fractures and electrical performance was stable throughout the mean follow-up of 12.7 ± 4.8 months (mean ± SD). CONCLUSION: The OmniaSecure lead exceeded prespecified primary end point performance goals for safety and efficacy, demonstrating high defibrillation success and a low occurrence of lead-related major complications with zero lead fractures.

Real-world data of patients affected by advanced heart failure treated with implantable cardioverter defibrillator and left ventricular assist device: Results of a multicenter observational study.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular assist device (L-VAD) implantation is increasingly used in patients with heart failure (HF) and most patients also have an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). Limited data are available on the incidence of ICD therapies and complications in this special setting. The aim of this study was to analyze the real-world incidence and predictors of ICD therapies, complications and interactions between ICD and L-VAD. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter retrospective observational study in patients with advanced HF implanted with ICD and a continuous-flow L-VAD, followed-up in five advanced HF centers in Northern Italy. RESULTS: A total of 234 patients (89.7% male, median age 59, 48.3% with ischemic etiology) were enrolled. After a median follow-up of 21 months, 66 patients (28.2%) experienced an appropriate ICD therapy, 22 patients (9.4%) an inappropriate ICD therapy, and 17 patients (7.3%) suffered from an interaction between ICD and L-VAD. The composite outcome of all ICD-related complications was reported in 41 patients (17.5%), and 121 (51.7%) experienced an L-VAD-related complication. At multivariable analysis, an active ventricular tachycardia (VT) zone and a prior ICD generator replacement were independent predictors of ICD therapies and of total ICD-related complications, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Real-world patients with both L-VAD and ICD experience a high rate of ICD therapies and complications. Our findings suggest the importance of tailoring device programming in order to minimize the incidence of unnecessary ICD therapies, thus sparing the need for ICD generator replacement, a procedure associated to a high risk of complications.

Clinical course of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy patients implanted with a transvenous or subcutaneous defibrillator.

AIMS: The implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is a life-saving therapy in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) at risk of sudden cardiac death. Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator complications are of concern. The subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) does not use transvenous leads and is expected to reduce complications. However, it does not provide bradycardia and anti-tachycardia pacing (ATP). The aim of this study was to compare appropriate and inappropriate ICD interventions, complications, disease-related adverse events and mortality between HCM patients implanted with a S- or transvenous (TV)-ICD. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive HCM patients implanted with a S- (n = 216) or TV-ICD (n = 211) were enrolled. Propensity-adjusted cumulative Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariate Cox proportional hazard ratios were used to compare 5-year event-free survival and the risk of events. The S-ICD patients had lower 5-year risk of appropriate (HR: 0.32; 95%CI: 0.15-0.65; P = 0.002) and inappropriate (HR: 0.44; 95%CI: 0.20-0.95; P = 0.038) ICD interventions, driven by a high incidence of ATP therapy in the TV-ICD group. The S- and TV-ICD patients experienced similar 5-year rate of device-related complications, albeit the risk of major lead-related complications was lower in S-ICD patients (HR: 0.17; 95%CI: 0.038-0.79; P = 0.023). The TV- and S-ICD patients displayed similar risk of disease-related complications (HR: 0.64; 95%CI: 0.27-1.52; P = 0.309) and mortality (HR: 0.74; 95%CI: 0.29-1.87; P = 0.521). CONCLUSION: Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy patients implanted with a S-ICD had lower 5-year risk of appropriate and inappropriate ICD therapies as well as of major lead-related complications as compared to those implanted with a TV-ICD. Long-term comparative follow-up studies will clarify whether the lower incidence of major lead-related complications will translate into a morbidity or survival benefit.

Modern subcutaneous implantable defibrillator therapy in patients with cardiomyopathies and channelopathies: data from a large multicentre registry.

AIMS: Patients with cardiomyopathies and channelopathies are usually younger and have a predominantly arrhythmia-related prognosis; they have nearly normal life expectancy thanks to the protection against sudden cardiac death provided by the implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). The subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) is an effective alternative to the transvenous ICD and has evolved over the years. This study aimed to evaluate the rate of inappropriate shocks (IS), appropriate therapies, and device-related complications in patients with cardiomyopathies and channelopathies who underwent modern S-ICD implantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: We enrolled consecutive patients with cardiomyopathies and channelopathies who had undergone implantation of a modern S-ICD from January 2016 to December 2020 and who were followed up until December 2022. A total of 1338 S-ICD implantations were performed within the observation period. Of these patients, 628 had cardiomyopathies or channelopathies. The rate of IS at 12 months was 4.6% [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.8-6.9] in patients with cardiomyopathies and 1.1% (95% CI: 0.1-3.8) in patients with channelopathies (P = 0.032). No significant differences were noted over a median follow-up of 43 months [hazard ratio (HR): 0.76; 95% CI: 0.45-1.31; P = 0.351]. The rate of appropriate shocks at 12 months was 2.3% (95% CI: 1.1-4.1) in patients with cardiomyopathies and 2.1% (95% CI: 0.6-5.3) in patients with channelopathies (P = 1.0). The rate of device-related complications was 0.9% (95% CI: 0.3-2.3) and 3.2% (95% CI: 1.2-6.8), respectively (P = 0.074). No significant differences were noted over the entire follow-up. The need for pacing was low, occurring in 0.8% of patients. CONCLUSION: Modern S-ICDs may be a valuable alternative to transvenous ICDs in patients with cardiomyopathies and channelopathies. Our findings suggest that modern S-ICD therapy carries a low rate of IS. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/Identifier: NCT02275637.

Procedure, management, and outcome of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator extraction in clinical practice.

AIMS: Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) therapy is expanding rapidly. However, there are few data on the S-ICD extraction procedure and subsequent patient management. The aim of this analysis was to describe the procedure, management, and outcome of S-ICD extractions in clinical practice. METHODS AND RESULTS: We enrolled consecutive patients who required complete S-ICD extraction at 66 Italian centres. From 2013 to 2022, 2718 patients undergoing de novo implantation of an S-ICD were enrolled. Of these, 71 required complete S-ICD system extraction (17 owing to infection). The S-ICD system was successfully extracted in all patients, and no complications were reported; the median procedure duration was 40 (25th-75th percentile: 20-55) min. Simple manual traction was sufficient to remove the lead in 59 (84%) patients, in whom lead-dwelling time was shorter [20 (9-32) months vs. 30 (22-41) months; P = 0.032]. Hospitalization time was short in the case of both non-infectious [2 (1-2) days] and infectious indications [3 (1-6) days]. In the case of infection, no patients required post-extraction intravenous antibiotics, the median duration of any antibiotic therapy was 10 (10-14) days, and the re-implantation was performed during the same procedure in 29% of cases. No complications arose over a median of 21 months. CONCLUSION: The S-ICD extraction was safe and easy to perform, with no complications. Simple traction of the lead was successful in most patients, but specific tools could be needed for systems implanted for a longer time. The peri- and post-procedural management of S-ICD extraction was free from complications and not burdensome for patients and healthcare system. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/Identifier: NCT02275637.

Transcatheter Leadless Pacing in Children: A PACES Collaborative Study in the Real-World Setting.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter Leadless Pacemakers (TLP) are a safe and effective option for adults with pacing indications. These devices may be an alternative in pediatric patients and patients with congenital heart disease for whom repeated sternotomies, thoracotomies, or transvenous systems are unfavorable. However, exemption of children from clinical trials has created uncertainty over the indications, efficacy, and safety of TLP in the pediatric population. The objectives of this study are to evaluate clinical indications, procedural characteristics, electrical performance, and outcomes of TLP implantation in children. METHODS: Retrospective data were collected from patients enrolled in the Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society TLP registry involving 15 centers. Patients ≤21 years of age who underwent Micra (Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, MN) TLP implantation and had follow-up of ≥1 week were included in the study. RESULTS: The device was successfully implanted in 62 of 63 registry patients (98%) at a mean age of 15±4.1 years and included 20 (32%) patients with congenital heart disease. The mean body weight at TLP implantation was 55±19 kg and included 8 patients ≤8 years of age and ≤30 kg in weight. TLP was implanted by femoral (n=55, 87%) and internal jugular (n=8, 12.6%) venous approaches. During a mean follow-up period of 9.5±5.3 months, there were 10 (16%) complications including one cardiac perforation/pericardial effusion, one nonocclusive femoral venous thrombus, and one retrieval and replacement of TLP due to high thresholds. There were no deaths, TLP infections, or device embolizations. Electrical parameters, including capture thresholds, R wave sensing, and pacing impedances, remained stable. CONCLUSIONS: Initial results from the Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society TLP registry demonstrated a high level of successful Micra device implants via femoral and internal venous jugular approaches with stable electrical parameters and infrequent major complications. Long-term prospective data are needed to confirm the reproducibility of these initial findings.

Intermuscular technique for implantation of the subcutaneous implantable defibrillator: a propensity-matched case-control study.

AIMS: A previous randomized study demonstrated that the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) was noninferior to transvenous ICD with respect to device-related complications and inappropriate shocks. However, that was performed prior to the widespread adoption of pulse generator implantation in the intermuscular (IM) space instead of the traditional subcutaneous (SC) pocket. The aim of this analysis was to compare survival from device-related complications and inappropriate shocks between patients who underwent S-ICD implantation with the generator positioned in an IM position in comparison with an SC pocket. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analysed 1577 consecutive patients who had undergone S-ICD implantation from 2013 to 2021 and were followed up until December 2021. Subcutaneous patients (n = 290) were propensity matched with patients of the IM group (n = 290), and their outcomes were compared. : During a median follow-up of 28 months, device-related complications were reported in 28 (4.8%) patients and inappropriate shocks were reported in 37 (6.4%) patients. The risk of complication was lower in the matched IM group than in the SC group [hazard ratio 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17-0.99, P = 0.041], as well as the composite of complications and inappropriate shocks (hazard ratio 0.50, 95% CI 0.30-0.86, P = 0.013). The risk of appropriate shocks was similar between groups (hazard ratio 0.90, 95% CI 0.50-1.61, P = 0.721). There was no significant interaction between generator positioning and variables such as gender, age, body mass index, and ejection fraction. CONCLUSION: Our data showed the superiority of the IM S-ICD generator positioning in reducing device-related complications and inappropriate shocks. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT02275637.

Rationale and design of the Lead Evaluation for Defibrillation and Reliability study: Safety and efficacy of a novel ICD lead design.

BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) are indicated for primary and secondary prevention of sudden cardiac arrest. Despite enhancements in design and technologies, the ICD lead is the most vulnerable component of the ICD system and failure of ICD leads remains a significant clinical problem. A novel, small-diameter, lumenless, catheter-delivered, defibrillator lead was developed with the aim to improve long-term reliability. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Lead Evaluation for Defibrillation and Reliability (LEADR) study is a multi-center, single-arm, Bayesian, adaptive design, pre-market interventional pivotal clinical study. Up to 60 study sites from around the world will participate in the study. Patients indicated for a de novo ICD will undergo defibrillation testing at implantation and clinical assessments at baseline, implant, pre-hospital discharge, 3 months, 6 months, and every 6 months thereafter until official study closure. Patients may be participating for a minimum of 18 months to approximately 3 years. Fracture-free survival will be evaluated using a Bayesian statistical method that incorporates both virtual patient data (combination of bench testing to failure with in-vivo use condition data) with clinical patients. The clinical subject sample size will be determined using decision rules for number of subject enrollments and follow-up time based upon the observed number of fractures at certain time points in the study. The adaptive study design will therefore result in a minimum of 500 and a maximum of 900 patients enrolled. CONCLUSION: The LEADR Clinical Study was designed to efficiently provide evidence for short- and long-term safety and efficacy of a novel lead design using Bayesian methods including a novel virtual patient approach.

Rate and nature of complications with leadless transcatheter pacemakers compared with transvenous pacemakers: results from an Italian multicentre large population analysis.

AIMS: The safety and efficacy of leadless intracardiac-permanent pacemaker (L-PM) have been demonstrated in multiple clinical trials, but data on comparisons with conventional transvenous-permanent pacemaker (T-PM) collected in a consecutive, prospective fashion are limited. The aim of this analysis was to compare the rate and the nature of device-related complications between patients undergoing L-PM vs. T-PM implantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Prospective, multicentre, observational project enrolling consecutive patients who underwent L-PM or T-PM implantation. The rate and nature of device-related complications were analysed and compared between the two groups. Individual 1:1 propensity matching of baseline characteristics was performed. A total of 2669 (n = 665 L-PM) patients were included and followed for a median of 39 months, L-PM patients were on average older and had more co-morbidities. The risk of device-related complications at 12 months was significantly lower in the L-PM group (0.5% vs. 1.9%, P = 0.009). Propensity matching yielded 442 matched pairs. In the matched cohort, L-PM patients trended toward having a lower risk of overall device-related complications (P = 0.129), had a similar risk of early complications (≤30 days) (P = 1.000), and had a significantly lower risk of late complications (>30 days) (P = 0.031). All complications observed in L-PM group were early. Most (75.0%) of complications observed in T-PM group were lead- or pocket-related. CONCLUSION: In this analysis, the risk of device-related complications associated with L-PM implantation tended to be lower than that of T-PM. Specifically, the risk of early complications was similar in two types of PMs, while the risk of late complications was significantly lower for L-PM than T-PM.

Performance of transcatheter pacing system use in relation to patients' age.

PURPOSE: Real-world safety data on the use of transcatheter pacing systems particularly in very elderly patients is still limited. The aim of this analysis was to investigate the effect of age on the safety and efficacy of leadless pacemaker implant. METHODS: From May 2016 through July 2019, 577 patients were implanted with a leadless single-chamber pacemaker according to current pacing indication in 15 Italian cardiologic centers. The population was divided into age quartiles for evaluation, including (1) < 70 years, (2) 70-77 years, (3) 78-83 years, and (4) ≥ 83 years. Procedural data, complications, and electrical parameters were collected at baseline and during the follow-up. RESULTS: Procedural-related complication occurrence was very low (< 1.0%) and similar in the four subgroups according to age even if the older patients were more frail. No cardiac tamponade was reported. Among the groups, no difference was observed in procedural time, fluoroscopy time duration, and electrical parameters (mean pacing impedance: 750 ± 192 and 599 ± 156, mean pacing threshold: 0.7 ± 0.5 and 0.7 ± 0.6, and mean right ventricular sensing 10.7 ± 6.1 and 11.5 ± 4.8 at implant and last follow-up, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The reported data demonstrated a high degree of safety during leadless implant across all patient ages. Procedural complications and device electrical measurements were similar among the different ages.

[Leadless pacemakers: results of a survey from implanter centers in the Lombardy region]. / Pacemaker leadless: risultati di una survey condotta nei centri impiantatori della Regione Lombardia.

BACKGROUND: Transvenous pacing is nowadays the cornerstone of interventional management of bradyarrhythmias. It is still associated, however, with significant complications, mostly related to indwelling transvenous leads or device pocket. In order to reduce these complications, leadless pacemakers have been recently introduced into clinical practice, but no guidelines are yet available to indicate who are those patients that might benefit the most and whether leadless pacing should be preferred in the old or young population. This survey aims to describe the use of leadless pacemaker devices in a real-world setting. METHODS: Eleven arrhythmia centers in the Lombardy region (out of a total of 17 participating centers) responded to the proposed questionnaire regarding patient characteristics and indications to leadless pacing. RESULTS: Out of a total of 411 patients undergoing leadless pacing during 4.2 ± 0.98 years, the median age was 77 years, with 0.18% of patients having less than 18 years, 29.9% 18-65 years, 34.3% 65-80 years and 35.6% >80 years. The most common indication was slow atrial fibrillation (49% of patients), followed by atrioventricular block and sinoatrial dysfunction. Two centers reported in-hospital complications. CONCLUSIONS: Leadless pacemakers proved to be a safe pacing strategy actually destined mostly to elderly patients.

In-vitro investigation of cardiac implantable electronic device malfunction during and after direct photon exposure: A three-centres experience.

PURPOSE: Radiotherapy may cause malfunction of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) and pacemakers (PMs). We carried-out a multicentre randomized in-vitro study on 65 ICDs and 145 PMs to evaluate malfunctions during and after direct irradiation to doses up to 10 Gy. METHODS: Three centres equipped with different linear accelerator and treatment-planning systems participated in the study. Computed Tomography (CT) acquisitions were performed to build the treatment plans. All devices were exposed to dose of 2, 5, or 10 Gy (6 MV). All devices underwent a baseline examination and 64 wireless real-time telemetry-transmissions (47 ICDs and 17 PMs) were monitored during photon exposures. All devices were interrogated after exposure and once monthly for six subsequent months. RESULTS: Fifty-four of the 64 wireless-enabled CIEDs (84.4%) recorded noise-related interferences during exposure. In detail, 40/47 ICDs (85.1%) reported interference, of which 16 ICDs (34%) reported potentially clinically relevant pacing inhibition and inappropriate detections. Following exposure, a soft reset occurred in 1/145 PM (0.7%) while 7/145 PMs (4.8%) reported battery issues. During the six-month follow-up, 1/145 PM (0.7%) reported a soft reset, while 12/145 more PMs (8.3%) and 1/64 ICD (1.5%) showed abnormal battery depletion. All reported issues occurred independently of exposure dose. Finally, irreversible effects on software and battery life occurred in only non-MRI-compatible devices. CONCLUSION: ICDs mostly featured real-time transient sensing issues, while PMs mostly experienced long-term battery or software issues that were observed immediately following radiation exposure and during follow-up. Irreversible effects on battery life and software occurred in only non-MRI-compatible devices.

The "Defibrillation Testing, Why Not?" survey. Testing of subcutaneous and transvenous defibrillators in the Italian clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Defibrillation testing (DT) can be omitted in patients undergoing transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (T-ICD) implantation, but it is still recommended for patients at risk for a high defibrillation threshold and for ICD generator changes. Moreover, DT is still recommended on implantation of subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD). The aim of the present survey was to analyze the current practice of DT during T-ICD and S-ICD implantations. METHODS: In March 2021, an ad hoc questionnaire on the current performance of DT and the standard practice adopted during testing was completed at 72 Italian centers implanting S-ICD and T-ICD. RESULTS: 48 (67%) operators reported never performing DT during de-novo T-ICD implantations, while no operators perform it systematically. The remaining respondents perform it for patients at risk for a high defibrillation threshold. DT is never performed at T-ICD generator change. At the time of de-novo S-ICD implantation, DT is never performed by 9 (13%) operators and performed systematically by 48 (66%). The remaining operators frequently omit DT in patients with more severe systolic dysfunction. DT is not performed at S-ICD generator change by 92% of operators. DT is conducted by delivering a first shock energy of 65 J by 60% of operators, while the remaining 40% test lower energy values. CONCLUSIONS: In current clinical practice, most operators omit DT at T-ICD implantation, even when still recommended in the guidelines. DT is also frequently omitted at S-ICD implantation, and a wide variability exists among operators in the procedures followed during DT.

Implantation of cardiac electronic devices in active COVID-19 patients: Results from an international survey.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation rates as well as the clinical and procedural characteristics and outcomes in patients with known active coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are unknown. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to gather information regarding CIED procedures during active COVID-19, performed with personal protective equipment, based on an international survey. METHODS: Fifty-three centers from 13 countries across 4 continents provided information on 166 patients with known active COVID-19 who underwent a CIED procedure. RESULTS: The CIED procedure rate in 133,655 hospitalized COVID-19 patients ranged from 0 to 16.2 per 1000 patients (P <.001). Most devices were implanted due to high-degree/complete atrioventricular block (112 [67.5%]) or sick sinus syndrome (31 [18.7%]). Of the 166 patients in the study survey, the 30-day complication rate was 13.9% and the 180-day mortality rate was 9.6%. One patient had a fatal outcome as a direct result of the procedure. Differences in patient and procedural characteristics and outcomes were found between Europe and North America. An older population (76.6 vs 66 years; P <.001) with a nonsignificant higher complication rate (16.5% vs 7.7%; P = .2) was observed in Europe vs North America, whereas higher rates of critically ill patients (33.3% vs 3.3%; P <.001) and mortality (26.9% vs 5%; P = .002) were observed in North America vs Europe. CONCLUSION: CIED procedure rates during known active COVID-19 disease varied greatly, from 0 to 16.2 per 1000 hospitalized COVID-19 patients worldwide. Patients with active COVID-19 infection who underwent CIED implantation had high complication and mortality rates. Operators should take these risks into consideration before proceeding with CIED implantation in active COVID-19 patients.

Can we improve the accuracy of electrocardiographic algorithms for accessory pathway location in children?

BACKGROUND: Predicting an accessory pathway location is extremely important in pediatric patients. AIMS: We designed a study to compare previously published algorithms by Arruda, Boersma, and Chiang. METHODS: This multicenter study included patients who had undergone successful ablation of one accessory pathway. Analysis of resting 12-lead electrocardiograms was carried out. An aggregated prediction score was constructed on the basis of algorithm agreement, and a structured workflow approach was proposed. RESULTS: The total population was 120 patients (mean age, 12.7 [± 3.6] years). The algorithm by Boersma had the highest accuracy (71.7%). The inter-rater agreement among the 3 reference algorithms, according to left-sided accessory pathway (AP) identification, was good between Boersma and Chiang (κ = 0.611; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.468-0.753) but moderate between Arruda and Chiang and between Arruda and Boersma (κ = 0.566; 95% CI, 0.419-0.713 and κ = 0.582; 95% CI, 0.438-0.727, respectively). Regarding locations at risk of atrioventricular (AV) block, agreement was fair between Arruda and Chiang and between Boersma and Chiang (κ = 0.358; 95% CI, 0.195-0.520 and κ = 0.307; 95% CI, 0.192-0.422, respectively) but moderate between Arruda and Boersma (κ = 0.45; 95% CI, 0.304-0.597). On applying a first-step diagnostic evaluation, when concordance was achieved, we were able to correctly identify left-sided or non-left-sided ablation sites in 96.4% (n = 80) of cases. When concordance was achieved, correct prediction of risk/no risk of AV block was achieved in 92.2% (n = 59) of cases. CONCLUSIONS: An aggregated prediction score based on 3 reference algorithms proved able to predict an accessory pathway location very precisely and could be used to plan safely invasive procedures.