Early and extended erythropoietin monotherapy after hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy: a multicentre double-blind pilot randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the feasibility of early and extended erythropoietin monotherapy after hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy (HIE). DESIGN: Double-blind pilot randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Eight neonatal units in South Asia. PATIENTS: Neonates (≥36 weeks) with moderate or severe HIE admitted between 31 December 2022 and 3 May 2023. INTERVENTIONS: Erythropoietin (500 U/kg daily) or to the placebo (sham injections using a screen) within 6 hours of birth and continued for 9 days. MRI at 2 weeks of age. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Feasibility of randomisation, drug administration and assessment of brain injury using MRI. RESULTS: Of the 154 neonates screened, 56 were eligible; 6 declined consent and 50 were recruited; 43 (86%) were inborn. Mean (SD) age at first dose was 4.4 (1.2) hours in erythropoietin and 4.1 (1.0) hours in placebo. Overall mortality at hospital discharge occurred in 5 (19%) vs 11 (46%) (p=0.06), and 3 (13%) vs 9 (40.9%) (p=0.04) among those with moderate encephalopathy in the erythropoietin and placebo groups. Moderate or severe injury to basal ganglia, white matter and cortex occurred in 5 (25%) vs 5 (38.5%); 14 (70%) vs 11 (85%); and 6 (30%) vs 2 (15.4%) in the erythropoietin and placebo group, respectively. Sinus venous thrombosis was seen in two (10%) neonates in the erythropoietin group and none in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Brain injury and mortality after moderate or severe HIE are high in South Asia. Evaluation of erythropoietin monotherapy using MRI to examine treatment effects is feasible in these settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05395195.

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy for Patients with Mild to Moderately Reduced Ejection Fraction and Left Bundle Branch Block.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown if CRT would improve or halt the progression of heart failure (HF) in patients with mild-moderately reduced LVEF (HFmmrEF) and LBBB. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the outcomes of CRT in patients with HFmmrEF and LV conduction delay. METHODS: A prospective, randomized clinical trial sponsored by NHLBI included 76 patients who met the study inclusion criteria (LVEF 36-50% and LBBB). Patients received CRTP and were randomized to CRT-OFF (RV pacing 40bpm) or CRT-ON (BIV pacing 60-150bpm). At a 6-month follow-up, pacing programming was changed to the opposite settings. NYHA class, NT pro-BNP levels, and echocardiography were collected at baseline, 6-month, and 12-month. The primary study endpoint was the LV end-systolic volume (LVESV) change from baseline, and the primary randomized comparison was the comparison of 6-month to 12-month changes between randomized groups. RESULTS: The mean patient age was 68.4±9.8 years (male 71%). Baseline characteristics were similar between 2 randomized groups (all P>0.05). In patients randomized to CRT-OFF first, then ON, LVESV was reduced from baseline only after CRT-ON (baseline 116.1±36.5 mL, CRT-ON 87.6±26.0 mL, P<0.0001). The randomized analysis of LVEF showed a significantly better change from 6 to 12 months in the "OFF-ON" group, P=0.003. LVEF was improved by CRT (baseline 41.3±4.7%, CRT-ON 46.0±8.0%, P=0.002). In patients randomized to CRT-ON first, then OFF, LVESV was reduced both after CRT-ON and CRT-OFF (baseline 109.8±23.5 mL, CRT-ON 91.7±30.5 mL, P<0.0001; CRT-OFF 99.3±28.9 mL, P=0.012). However, the LVESV reduction effect became smaller between CRT-ON and OFF (P=0.027). LVEF improved both after CRT-ON and CRT-OFF (baseline 42.7±4.3%, CRT-ON 48.5±8.6%, P<0.001; CRT-OFF 45.9±7.7%, P=0.025). CONCLUSION: CRT for patients with HFmmrEF significantly improves LVEF and ventricular remodeling after 6 months of CRT. The study provides novel evidence that early CRT benefits patients with HFmmrEF with LBBB.

Trends and disparities in cardiac implantable electronic device infection-related mortality in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: We performed a cross-sectional study using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's) Wide-Ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research (WONDER) database to analyze the trends in cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infection-related mortality from 1999 to 2020. METHODS: We analyzed the death certificate data from the CDC WONDER database from 1999 to 2020 for CIED infections in the US population aged ≥25 years using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes, listed as the underlying or contributing cause of death. Age-adjusted mortality rates (AAMR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed per 1 million population by standardizing crude mortality rates to the 2000 US census population. To assess annual mortality trends, we employed the Joinpoint regression model, calculating the annual percent change (APC) in AAMR and corresponding 95% CIs. RESULTS: Overall, there was an observed declining trend in AAMRs related to CIED infection-related mortality. Males accounted for 55% of the total deaths, with persistently higher AAMRs compared to females over the study duration. Both males and females had an overall decreasing trend in AAMRs throughout the study duration. On race/ethnicity stratified analysis, non-Hispanic (NH) Blacks exhibited the highest overall AAMR, followed by NH American Indians or Alaska Natives, NH Whites, Hispanic or Latinos, and NH Asian or Pacific Islanders. On a stratified analysis based on region, the South region had the highest overall AAMR, followed by the Midwest, West, and Northeast regions. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates a significant decline in CIED infection-related mortality in patients over the last two decades. Notable gender, racial/ethnic, and regional differences exist in the rates of mortality related to CIED infections.

Left bundle branch pacing vs ventricular septal pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Background: The outcomes of left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) and left ventricular septal pacing (LVSP) in patients with heart failure remain to be learned. Objective: The objective of this study was to assess the echocardiographic and clinical outcomes of LBBP, LVSP, and deep septal pacing (DSP). Methods: This retrospective study included patients who met the criteria for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and underwent attempted LBBP in 5 Mayo centers. Clinical, electrocardiographic, and echocardiographic data were collected at baseline and follow-up. Results: A total of 91 consecutive patients were included in the study. A total of 52 patients had LBBP, 25 had LVSP, and 14 had DSP. The median follow-up duration was 307 (interquartile range 208, 508) days. There was significant left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) improvement in the LBBP and LVSP groups (from 35.9 ± 8.5% to 46.9 ± 10.0%, P < .001 in the LBBP group; from 33.1 ± 7.5% to 41.8 ± 10.8%, P < .001 in the LVSP group) but not in the DSP group. A unipolar paced right bundle branch block morphology during the procedure in lead V1 was associated with higher odds of CRT response. There was no significant difference in heart failure hospitalization and all-cause deaths between the LBBP and LVSP groups. The rate of heart failure hospitalization and all-cause deaths were increased in the DSP group compared with the LBBP group (hazard ratio 5.10, 95% confidence interval 1.14-22.78, P = .033; and hazard ratio 7.83, 95% confidence interval 1.38-44.32, P = .020, respectively). Conclusion: In patients undergoing CRT, LVSP had comparable CRT outcomes compared with LBBP.

Electrical storm after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation.

INTRODUCTION: Ventricular tachycardia storm or electrical storm (ES) is a common complication following left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. The factors contributing to ES and outcomes are less studied. The study aimed to determine the factors associated with ES and the probability of survival in patients undergoing LVAD in three tertiary centers over a span of 15 years. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study on all patients who underwent LVAD implantation at the Mayo Clinic (Rochester, Phoenix, and Jacksonville) from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2020. ES was defined as ≥3 episodes of sustained ventricular tachycardia over a period of 24 h with no identifiable reversible cause. Detailed chart reviews of the electronic health records within the Mayo Clinic and outside medical records were performed. RESULTS: A total of 883 patients who underwent LVAD implantation were included in our study. ES occurred in 7% (n = 61) of patients with a median of 13 days (interquartile range [IQR]: 5-297 days) following surgery. We found 57% of patients (n = 35) developed ES within 30 days, while 43% (n = 26) patients developed ES at a median of 545  (IQR 152-1032) days after surgery. Following ES, 26% of patients died within 1 year. Patients with ES had a significant association with a history of ventricular arrhythmias and implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) shocks before the procedure. ES was significantly associated with reduced survival compared to patients without ES (hazards ratio [HR]: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.39-2.64, p < .001). CONCLUSION: Following LVAD implantation, the rate of ES was 7% with majority of ES occurring within 30 days of LVAD. Risk factors for ES included pre-implant history of ventricular arrhythmias and ICD shock. ES was significantly associated with reduced survival compared to patients without ES.

Trends in the 30-year span of noninfectious cardiovascular implantable electronic device complications in Olmsted County.

Background: Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), such as permanent pacemakers, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, and cardiac resynchronization therapy devices, alleviate morbidity and mortality in various diseases. There is a paucity of real-world data on CIED complications and trends. Objectives: We sought to describe trends in noninfectious CIED complications over the past 3 decades in Olmsted County. Methods: The Rochester Epidemiology Project is a medical records linkage system comprising records of over 500,000 residents of Olmsted County from 1966 to present. CIED implantations between 1988 and 2018 were determined. Trends in noninfectious complications within 30 days of implantation were analyzed. Results: A total of 157 (6.2%) of 2536 patients who received CIED experienced device complications. A total of 2.7% of the implants had major complications requiring intervention. Lead dislodgement was the most common (2.8%), followed by hematoma (1.7%). Complications went up from 1988 to 2005, and then showed a downtrend until 2018, driven by a decline in hematomas in the last decade (P < .01). Those with complications were more likely to have prosthetic valves. Obesity appeared to have a protective effect in a multivariate regression model. The mean Charlson comorbidity index has trended up over the 30 years. Conclusion: Our study describes a real-world trend of CIED complications over 3 decades. Lead dislodgements and hematomas were the most common complications. Complications have declined over the last decade due to safer practices and a better understanding of anticoagulant management.

Arrhythmic manifestations and outcomes of definite and probable cardiac sarcoidosis.

BACKGROUND: The 2014 Heart Rhythm Society consensus statement defines histological (definite) and clinical (probable) diagnostic categories of cardiac sarcoidosis (CS), but few studies have compared their arrhythmic phenotypes and outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the electrophysiological/arrhythmic phenotype and outcomes of patients with definite and probable CS. METHODS: We analyzed the arrhythmic/electrophysiological phenotype in a single-center North American cohort of 388 patients (median age 56 years; 39% female, n = 151) diagnosed with definite (n = 58) or probable (n = 330) CS (2000-2022). The primary composite outcome was survival to first ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation (VT/VF) event or sudden cardiac death. Key secondary outcomes were also assessed. RESULTS: At index evaluation, in situ cardiac implantable electronic devices and antiarrhythmic drug use were more common in definite CS. At a median follow-up of 3.1 years, the primary outcome occurred in 22 patients with definite CS (38%) and 127 patients with probable CS (38%) (log-rank, P = .55). In multivariable analysis, only a higher ratio of the 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose maximum standardized uptake value of the myocardium to the maximum standardized uptake value of the blood pool (hazard ratio 1.09; 95% confidence interval 1.03-1.15; P = .003, per 1 unit increase) was associated with the primary outcome. During follow-up, patients with definite CS had a higher burden of device-treated VT/VF events (mean 2.86 events per patient-year vs 1.56 events per patient-year) and a higher rate of progression to heart transplant/left ventricular assist device implantation but no difference in all-cause mortality compared with patients with probable CS. CONCLUSION: Patients with definite and probable CS had similarly high risks of first sustained VT/VF/sudden cardiac death and all-cause mortality, though patients with definite CS had a higher overall arrhythmia burden. Both CS diagnostic groups as defined by the 2014 Heart Rhythm Society criteria require an aggressive approach to prevent arrhythmic complications.

A Pragmatic Study of Cardiovascular Disease During Long-Term COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Many patients diagnosed with COVID-19 have persistent cardiovascular symptoms, but whether this represents a true cardiac process is unclear. This study assessed whether symptoms associated with long COVID among patients referred for cardiovascular evaluation are associated with objective abnormalities on cardiac testing to explain their clinical presentation. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 40,462 unique patients diagnosed with COVID-19 at our tertiary referral was conducted and identified 363 patients with persistent cardiovascular symptoms a minimum of 4 weeks after polymerase chain reaction confirmed COVID-19 infection. Patients had no cardiovascular symptoms prior to COVID-19 infection. Each patient was referred for cardiovascular evaluation at a tertiary referral center. The incidence and etiology of abnormalities on cardiovascular testing among patients with long COVID symptoms are reported here. The cohort was subsequently divided into 3 categories based on the dominant circulating severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variant at the time of initial infection for further analysis. RESULTS: Among 40,462 unique patients diagnosed with COVID-19 at our tertiary referral center from April 2020 to March 2022, 363 (0.9%) patients with long COVID were evaluated by Cardiology for possible cardiac sequelae from COVID and formed the main study cohort. Of these, 229 (63%) were vaccinated and 47 (12.9%) had severe initial infection, receiving inpatient treatment for COVID prior to developing long COVID symptoms. Symptoms were associated with a cardiac cause in 85 (23.4%), of which 52 (14.3%) were attributed to COVID; 39 (10.7%) with new cardiac disease from COVID, and 13 (3.6%) to worsening of pre-existing cardiac disease after COVID infection. The median troponin change in 45 patients with troponin measurements within 4 weeks of acute infection was +4 ng/dL (9 to 13 ng/dL). Among the total cohort with long COVID, 83.7% were diagnosed during the pre-Delta phase, 13.2% during the Delta phase, and 3.1% during the Omicron phase of the pandemic. There were 6 cases of myocarditis, 11 rhythm disorders, 8 cases of pericarditis, 5 suspected cases of endothelial dysfunction, and 33 cases of autonomic dysfunction. CONCLUSION: This pragmatic retrospective cohort study suggests that patients with long COVID referred for cardiovascular evaluation infrequently have new, objective cardiovascular disease to explain their clinical presentation. A multidisciplinary, patient-centered approach is warranted for symptom management along with conservative use of diagnostic testing.

Catheter ablation versus medical therapy in atrial fibrillation: an umbrella review of meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials.

This umbrella review synthesizes data from 17 meta-analyses investigating the comparative outcomes of catheter ablation (CA) and medical treatment (MT) for atrial fibrillation (AF). Outcomes assessed were mortality, risk of hospitalization, AF recurrence, cardiovascular events, pulmonary vein stenosis, major bleeding, and changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and MLHFQ score. The findings indicate that CA significantly reduces overall mortality and cardiovascular hospitalization with high strength of evidence. The risk of AF recurrence was notably lower with CA, with moderate strength of evidence. Two associations reported an increased risk of pulmonary vein stenosis and major bleeding with CA, supported by high strength of evidence. Improved LVEF and a positive change in MLHFQ were also associated with CA. Among patients with AF and heart failure, CA appears superior to MT for reducing mortality, improving LVEF, and reducing cardiovascular rehospitalizations. In nonspecific populations, CA reduced mortality and improved LVEF but had higher complication rates. Our findings suggest that CA might offer significant benefits in managing AF, particularly in patients with heart failure. However, the risk of complications, including pulmonary vein stenosis and major bleeding, is notable. Further research in understudied populations may help refine these conclusions.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of new-onset atrial fibrillation in the context of COVID-19 infection.

New-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) in COVID-19 raises significant clinical and public health issues. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compile and analyze the current literature on NOAF in COVID-19 and give a more comprehensive understanding of the prevalence and outcomes of NOAF in COVID-19. A comprehensive literature search was carried out using several databases. The random effect model using inverse variance method and DerSimonian and Laird estimator of Tua2 was used to calculate the pooled prevalence and associated 95% confidence interval (CI). Results for outcome analysis were presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CI and pooled using the Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model. The pooled prevalence of NOAF in COVID-19 was 7.8% (95% CI: 6.54%-9.32%),a pooled estimate from 30 articles (81 929 COVID-19 patients). Furthermore, our analysis reported that COVID-19 patients with NOAF had a higher risk of developing severe disease compared with COVID-19 patients without a history of atrial fibrillation (OR = 4.78, 95% CI: 3.75-6.09) and COVID-19 patients with a history of pre-existing atrial fibrillation (OR = 2.75, 95% CI: 2.10-3.59). Similarly, our analysis also indicated that COVID-19 patients with NOAF had a higher risk of all-cause mortality compared with, COVID-19 patients without a history of atrial fibrillation (OR = 3.83, 95% CI: 2.99-4.92) and COVID-19 patients with a history of pre-existing atrial fibrillation (OR = 2.32, 95% CI: 1.35-3.96). The meta-analysis did not reveal any significant publication bias. The results indicate a strong correlation between NOAF and a higher risk of severe illness and mortality. These results emphasize the importance of careful surveillance, early detection, and customized NOAF management strategies to improve clinical outcomes for COVID-19 patients.

Promises and Perils of Consumer Mobile Technologies in Cardiovascular Care: JACC Scientific Statement.

Direct-to-consumer (D2C) wearables are becoming increasingly popular in cardiovascular health management because of their affordability and capability to capture diverse health data. Wearables may enable continuous health care provider-patient partnerships and reduce the volume of episodic clinic-based care (thereby reducing health care costs). However, challenges arise from the unregulated use of these devices, including questionable data reliability, potential misinterpretation of information, unintended psychological impacts, and an influx of clinically nonactionable data that may overburden the health care system. Further, these technologies could exacerbate, rather than mitigate, health disparities. Experience with wearables in atrial fibrillation underscores these challenges. The prevalent use of D2C wearables necessitates a collaborative approach among stakeholders to ensure effective integration into cardiovascular care. Wearables are heralding innovative disease screening, diagnosis, and management paradigms, expanding therapeutic avenues, and anchoring personalized medicine.

Risk factors, clinical implications, and management of peridevice leak following left atrial appendage closure: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is a treatment modality for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). One of the potential complications of LAAC is a peri-device leak (PDL), which could potentially increase the risk of thromboembolism formation. METHODS: This systematic review was done according to PRISMA guidelines. Using four databases, all primary studies through April 2022 that met selection criteria were included. Outcomes of interest were studies reporting on PDL characteristics, risk factors and management. RESULTS: A total of 116 studies met selection criteria (97 original studies and 19 case reports/series). In the original studies (n = 30,133 patients), the weighted mean age was 72.0 ± 7.4 years (57% females) with a HAS-BLED and CHA2DS2-VASc weighted means of 2.8 ± 1.1 and 3.8 ± 1.3, respectively. The most common definition of PDL was based on size; 5 mm: major, 3-5 mm: moderate, < 1 mm minor, or trivial. Follow up time for PDL detection was 7.15 ± 9.0 months. 33% had PDL, irrespective of PDL severity/size, and only 0.9% had PDL of greater than 5 mm. The main risk factors for PDL development included lower degree of over-sizing, lower left ventricular ejection fraction, device/LAA shape mismatch, previous radiofrequency ablation, and male sex. The most common methods to screen for PDL included transesophageal echocardiogram and cardiac CT. PDL Management approaches include Amplatzer Patent Foramen Ovale occluder, Hookless ACP, Amplatzer vascular plug II, embolic coils, and detachable vascular coils; removal or replacement of the device; and left atriotomy. CONCLUSION: Following LAAC, the emergence of a PDL is a significant complication to be aware of. Current evidence suggests possible risk factors that are worth assessing in-depth. Additional research is required to assess suitable candidates, timing, and strategies to managing patients with PDL.

Incidence and Outcomes of New-Onset Right Bundle Branch Block Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: The incidence and prognosis of right bundle branch block (RBBB) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are unknown. Hence, we sought to characterize the incidence of post-TAVR RBBB and determine associated risks of permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation and mortality. METHODS: All patients 18 years and above without preexisting RBBB or PPM who underwent TAVR at US Mayo Clinic sites and Mayo Clinic Health Systems from June 2010 to May 2021 were evaluated. Post-TAVR RBBB was defined as new-onset RBBB in the postimplantation period. The risks of PPM implantation (within 90 days) and mortality following TAVR were compared for patients with and without post-TAVR RBBB using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards modeling. The risks of PPM implantation (within 90 days) and mortality following TAVR were compared for patients with and without post-TAVR RBBB using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards modeling. RESULTS: Of 1992 patients, 15 (0.75%) experienced new RBBB post-TAVR. There was a higher degree of valve oversizing among patients with new RBBB post-TAVR versus those without (17.9% versus 10.0%; P=0.034). Ten patients (66.7%) with post-TAVR RBBB experienced high-grade atrioventricular block and underwent PPM implantation (median 1 day; Q1, 0.2 and Q3, 4), compared with 268/1977 (13.6%) without RBBB. Following propensity score adjustment for covariates (age, sex, balloon-expandable valve, annulus diameter, and valve oversizing), post-TAVR RBBB was significantly associated with PPM implantation (hazard ratio, 8.36 [95% CI, 4.19-16.7]; P<0.001). No statistically significant increase in mortality was seen with post-TAVR RBBB (hazard ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.33-2.11]; P=0.69), adjusting for age and sex. CONCLUSIONS: Although infrequent, post-TAVR RBBB was associated with elevated PPM implantation risk. The mechanisms for its development and its clinical prognosis require further study.

Role of dofetilide in patients with ventricular arrhythmias.

BACKGROUND OR PURPOSE: To assess effectiveness of dofetilide in reducing the burden of ventricular arrhythmias (VAs). BACKGROUND: Prior small sample studies show that dofetilide has benefit in reducing VA. However, large sample investigations with long-term follow-up are lacking. METHODS: Two hundred seventeen consecutive patients admitted between January 2015 and December 2021 for dofetilide initiation for control of VA were assessed. Dofetilide was successfully started in 176 patients (81%) and had to be discontinued in the remaining 41 patients (19%). Dofetilide was initiated for control of ventricular tachycardia (VT) in 136 patients (77%), whereas 40 (23%) patients were initiated on dofetilide for reducing the burden of premature ventricular complexes (PVCs). RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 24 ± 7 months. In total, among the 136 VT patients, 33 (24%) died, 11 (8%) received a left ventricular assist device (LVAD), and 3 (2%) received a heart transplant during follow-up. Dofetilide was discontinued in 117 (86%) patients due to lack of sustained effectiveness during follow-up. Dofetilide use was associated with similar odds of the composite outcome of all-cause mortality/LVAD/heart transplant (OR: 0.97, 0.55-4.23) in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) compared to those with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM). Dofetilide did not reduce PVC burden during follow-up in the 40 patients with PVCs (mean baseline PVC burden: 15%, at 1-year follow-up: 14%). CONCLUSIONS: Dofetilide use was less effective in reducing VA burden in our cohort of patients. Randomized controlled studies are needed to confirm our findings.