2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: The "2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 12, 2022, to November 3, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through November 2022, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate. STRUCTURE: Atrial fibrillation is the most sustained common arrhythmia, and its incidence and prevalence are increasing in the United States and globally. Recommendations from the "2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" and the "2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk assessment, anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion, atrial fibrillation catheter or surgical ablation, and risk factor modification and atrial fibrillation prevention have been developed.

2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: The "2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 12, 2022, to November 3, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through November 2022, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate. STRUCTURE: Atrial fibrillation is the most sustained common arrhythmia, and its incidence and prevalence are increasing in the United States and globally. Recommendations from the "2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" and the "2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk assessment, anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion, atrial fibrillation catheter or surgical ablation, and risk factor modification and atrial fibrillation prevention have been developed.

2023 HRS/APHRS/LAHRS guideline on cardiac physiologic pacing for the avoidance and mitigation of heart failure.

Cardiac physiologic pacing (CPP), encompassing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and conduction system pacing (CSP), has emerged as a pacing therapy strategy that may mitigate or prevent the development of heart failure (HF) in patients with ventricular dyssynchrony or pacing-induced cardiomyopathy. This clinical practice guideline is intended to provide guidance on indications for CRT for HF therapy and CPP in patients with pacemaker indications or HF, patient selection, pre-procedure evaluation and preparation, implant procedure management, follow-up evaluation and optimization of CPP response, and use in pediatric populations. Gaps in knowledge, pointing to new directions for future research, are also identified.

2023 HRS/APHRS/LAHRS guideline on cardiac physiologic pacing for the avoidance and mitigation of heart failure.

Cardiac physiologic pacing (CPP), encompassing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and conduction system pacing (CSP), has emerged as a pacing therapy strategy that may mitigate or prevent the development of heart failure (HF) in patients with ventricular dyssynchrony or pacing-induced cardiomyopathy. This clinical practice guideline is intended to provide guidance on indications for CRT for HF therapy and CPP in patients with pacemaker indications or HF, patient selection, pre-procedure evaluation and preparation, implant procedure management, follow-up evaluation and optimization of CPP response, and use in pediatric populations. Gaps in knowledge, pointing to new directions for future research, are also identified.

Worldwide survey on implantation of and outcomes for conduction system pacing with His bundle and left bundle branch area pacing leads.

BACKGROUND: Adoption and outcomes for conduction system pacing (CSP), which includes His bundle pacing (HBP) or left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP), in real-world settings are incompletely understood. We sought to describe real-world adoption of CSP lead implantation and subsequent outcomes. METHODS: We performed an online cross-sectional survey on the implantation and outcomes associated with CSP, between November 15, 2020, and February 15, 2021. We described survey responses and reported HBP and LBBAP outcomes for bradycardia pacing and cardiac resynchronization CRT indications, separately. RESULTS: The analysis cohort included 140 institutions, located on 5 continents, who contributed data to the worldwide survey on CSP. Of these, 127 institutions (90.7%) reported experience implanting CSP leads. CSP and overall device implantation volumes were reported by 84 institutions. In 2019, the median proportion of device implants with CSP, HBP, and/or LBBAP leads attempted were 4.4% (interquartile range [IQR], 1.9-12.5%; range, 0.4-100%), 3.3% (IQR, 1.3-7.1%; range, 0.2-87.0%), and 2.5% (IQR, 0.5-24.0%; range, 0.1-55.6%), respectively. For bradycardia pacing indications, HBP leads, as compared to LBBAP leads, had higher reported implant threshold (median [IQR]: 1.5 V [1.3-2.0 V] vs 0.8 V [0.6-1.0 V], p = 0.0008) and lower ventricular sensing (median [IQR]: 4.0 mV [3.0-5.0 mV] vs. 10.0 mV [7.0-12.0 mV], p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, CSP lead implantation has been broadly adopted but has yet to become the default approach at most surveyed institutions. As the indications and data for CSP continue to evolve, strategies to educate and promote CSP lead implantation at institutions without CSP lead implantation experience would be necessary.

A randomized controlled trial of simulation training in teaching coronary angiographic views.

INTRODUCTION: Simulation technology has an established role in teaching technical skills to cardiology fellows, but its impact on teaching trainees to interpret coronary angiographic (CA) images has not been systematically studied. The aim of this randomized controlled study was to test whether structured simulation training, in addition to traditional methods would improve CA image interpretation skills in a heterogeneous group of medical trainees. METHODS: We prospectively randomized a convenience sample of 105 subjects comprising of medical students (N = 20), residents (N = 68) and fellows (N = 17) from the University of Arizona. Subjects were randomized in a stratified fashion into a simulation training group which received simulation training in addition to didactic teaching (n = 53) and a control training group which received didactic teaching alone (n = 52). The change in pre and post-test score (delta score) was analyzed by a two-way ANOVA for education status and training arm. RESULTS: Subjects improved in their post-test scores with a mean change of 4.6 ± 4.0 points. Subjects in the simulation training arm had a higher delta score compared to control (5.4 ± 4.2 versus 3.8 ± 3.7, p = 0.04), with greatest impact for residents (6.6 ± 4.0 versus 3.5 ± 3.4) with a p = 0.02 for interaction of training arm and education status. CONCLUSIONS: Simulation training complements traditional methods to improve CA interpretation skill, with greatest impact on residents. This highlights the importance of incorporating high-fidelity simulation training early in cardiovascular fellowship curricula.

Outcomes in patients implanted with a Watchman device in relation to choice of anticoagulation and indication for implant.

BACKGROUND: Patients with atrial fibrillation are increasingly prescribed a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) over warfarin and seek to avoid anticoagulation even without a history of major bleeding. This study explores the outcomes of patients implanted with a Watchman device in relation to anticoagulation choice (warfarin versus DOAC) in the post-procedure period and a history of bleeding. METHODS: Patients implanted with a Watchman device at a single center were retrospectively analyzed. Characteristics including anticoagulation in the first 45 days and history of major bleed were assessed and efficacy (thromboembolism) and safety (bleeding) outcomes compared by Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: Two hundred nine patients were implanted (57% male, age 74.6 ± 7.8 years) and followed for 23.5 ± 7.1 months. In the first half of patients, 98% were prescribed warfarin, which dropped to 51% in the second half (p < 0.0001). A history of major bleed was present in 80.8% of the first half of patients and decreased to 60% in the second half (p = 0.001). There were 16 safety and 4 efficacy events. There was no difference in safety outcomes according to history of major bleeding or anticoagulant choice in the first 45 days. There was no difference in efficacy outcomes over the duration of follow-up according to anticoagulation choice in the first 45 days. CONCLUSIONS: Patients implanted with a Watchman device were increasingly over time prescribed a DOAC and implanted without a history of major bleeding. Bleeding and thromboembolic events were infrequent and related neither to choice of anticoagulant nor to prior major bleeding.

IL-18 mediates sickle cell cardiomyopathy and ventricular arrhythmias.

Previous reports indicate that IL18 is a novel candidate gene for diastolic dysfunction in sickle cell disease (SCD)-related cardiomyopathy. We hypothesize that interleukin-18 (IL-18) mediates the development of cardiomyopathy and ventricular tachycardia (VT) in SCD. Compared with control mice, a humanized mouse model of SCD exhibited increased cardiac fibrosis, prolonged duration of action potential, higher VT inducibility in vivo, higher cardiac NF-κB phosphorylation, and higher circulating IL-18 levels, as well as reduced voltage-gated potassium channel expression, which translates to reduced transient outward potassium current (Ito) in isolated cardiomyocytes. Administering IL-18 to isolated mouse hearts resulted in VT originating from the right ventricle and further reduced Ito in SCD mouse cardiomyocytes. Sustained IL-18 inhibition via IL-18-binding protein resulted in decreased cardiac fibrosis and NF-κB phosphorylation, improved diastolic function, normalized electrical remodeling, and attenuated IL-18-mediated VT in SCD mice. Patients with SCD and either myocardial fibrosis or increased QTc displayed greater IL18 gene expression in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs), and QTc was strongly correlated with plasma IL-18 levels. PBMC-derived IL18 gene expression was increased in patients who did not survive compared with those who did. IL-18 is a mediator of sickle cell cardiomyopathy and VT in mice and a novel therapeutic target in patients at risk for sudden death.

SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Cardiovascular Disease: COVID-19 Heart.

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is a serious illness caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The symptoms of the disease range from asymptomatic to mild respiratory symptoms and even potentially life-threatening cardiovascular and pulmonary complications. Cardiac complications include acute myocardial injury, arrhythmias, cardiogenic shock and even sudden death. Furthermore, drug interactions with COVID-19 therapies may place the patient at risk for arrhythmias, cardiomyopathy and sudden death. In this review, we summarise the cardiac manifestations of COVID-19 infection and propose a simplified algorithm for patient management during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Arrhythmias in Relation to Mortality After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to identify predictors of mortality and potentially modifiable factors related to arrhythmias in patients that undergo transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Patients that undergo TAVR are at risk for complete heart block requiring pacemaker implant. Additionally, other arrhythmias, specifically atrial fibrillation (AF), are common in this population. It is unclear how arrhythmias and their management contribute to mortality risk. METHODS: The study analyzed 176 patients who underwent TAVR at a single center. Factors associated with pacemaker implantation within 30 days were analyzed by logistic regression. Factors associated with mortality were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: Mean age was 80 ± 8.5 years. AF was present in 69 patients, and 39 received anticoagulation. Post-TAVR, a pacemaker was implanted in 25 patients within 30 days. Over a follow up of 566 ± 496 days, 49 patients died. In multivariable analysis, right bundle branch block remained significant (odds ratio 4.212, P = 0.012) for pacemaker implant within 30 days. The AF (hazard ratio [HR] 3.905, P = 0.001), albumin level (HR 0.316, P = 0.034), and diabetes (HR 2.323, P = 0.027) were predictors of death in a multivariate analysis, while pacemaker implant within 30 days was not. Patients with AF who were anticoagulated had improved survival in a stratified Kaplan-Meier analysis compared with those who were not anticoagulated (P = 0.0001). CONCLUSION: AF, diabetes, and low albumin levels are independently associated with mortality after TAVR. In particular, patients with AF who are not anticoagulated are at highest risk for death. Efforts to identify AF and consider anticoagulation should be emphasized.

2019 HRS expert consensus statement on evaluation, risk stratification, and management of arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy: Executive summary.

Arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy (ACM) is an arrhythmogenic disorder of the myocardium not secondary to ischemic, hypertensive, or valvular heart disease. ACM incorporates a broad spectrum of genetic, systemic, infectious, and inflammatory disorders. This designation includes, but is not limited to, arrhythmogenic right/left ventricular cardiomyopathy, cardiac amyloidosis, sarcoidosis, Chagas disease, and left ventricular noncompaction. The ACM phenotype overlaps with other cardiomyopathies, particularly dilated cardiomyopathy with arrhythmia presentation that may be associated with ventricular dilatation and/or impaired systolic function. This expert consensus statement provides the clinician with guidance on evaluation and management of ACM and includes clinically relevant information on genetics and disease mechanisms. PICO questions were utilized to evaluate contemporary evidence and provide clinical guidance related to exercise in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy. Recommendations were developed and approved by an expert writing group, after a systematic literature search with evidence tables, and discussion of their own clinical experience, to present the current knowledge in the field. Each recommendation is presented using the Class of Recommendation and Level of Evidence system formulated by the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association and is accompanied by references and explanatory text to provide essential context. The ongoing recognition of the genetic basis of ACM provides the opportunity to examine the diverse triggers and potential common pathway for the development of disease and arrhythmia.

2019 HRS expert consensus statement on evaluation, risk stratification, and management of arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy.

Arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy (ACM) is an arrhythmogenic disorder of the myocardium not secondary to ischemic, hypertensive, or valvular heart disease. ACM incorporates a broad spectrum of genetic, systemic, infectious, and inflammatory disorders. This designation includes, but is not limited to, arrhythmogenic right/left ventricular cardiomyopathy, cardiac amyloidosis, sarcoidosis, Chagas disease, and left ventricular noncompaction. The ACM phenotype overlaps with other cardiomyopathies, particularly dilated cardiomyopathy with arrhythmia presentation that may be associated with ventricular dilatation and/or impaired systolic function. This expert consensus statement provides the clinician with guidance on evaluation and management of ACM and includes clinically relevant information on genetics and disease mechanisms. PICO questions were utilized to evaluate contemporary evidence and provide clinical guidance related to exercise in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy. Recommendations were developed and approved by an expert writing group, after a systematic literature search with evidence tables, and discussion of their own clinical experience, to present the current knowledge in the field. Each recommendation is presented using the Class of Recommendation and Level of Evidence system formulated by the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association and is accompanied by references and explanatory text to provide essential context. The ongoing recognition of the genetic basis of ACM provides the opportunity to examine the diverse triggers and potential common pathway for the development of disease and arrhythmia.

Thoracic versus nonthoracic MR imaging for patients with an MR nonconditional cardiac implantable electronic device.

BACKGROUND: Observational studies have explored the safety of magnetic resonance (MR) scanning of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) that are not Food and Drug Administration approved for MR scanning ("nonconditional"). However, concern has been raised that MR scanning that includes the thoracic region may pose a higher risk. This study examines the safety of MR scanning of thoracic versus nonthoracic regions of patients with CIEDs. METHODS: Patients underwent MR scanning utilizing an institutional protocol. CIED variables examined included sensing value, pacing capture threshold, lead impedance, and battery voltage. Regression analysis of the CIED variable differences (pre- to immediately post-MR and pre-MR to long-term follow-up) was performed to determine if CIED variable differences were dependent on region scanned (thoracic vs nonthoracic), time from CIED implant to MR scanning, or CIED type (pacemaker vs implantable cardioverter defibrillator). RESULTS: 238 patients (38% female, age 65 ± 15 years) underwent 339 MR scans, including 99 MR scans of the thoracic region. CIED variable differences to immediately post-MR or to long-term follow-up were not significantly different from zero (P > 0.05) and there was no dependence upon region scanned (thoracic vs nonthoracic), time from CIED implant to MR scan, or CIED type. One power-on reset occurred in a patient that underwent a cardiac MR and the CIED was successfully reprogrammed. There were no clinical adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: CIED variable differences following MR scan were not dependent on the region scanned (thoracic vs nonthoracic) and there were no clinical adverse effects in this prospective cohort.