Performance of alert transmissions from cardiac implantable electronic devices to the CareLink network: A retrospective analysis.

Background: Remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electric devices improves patient outcomes and experiences. Alert-based systems notify physicians of clinical or device issues in near real-time, but their effectiveness is contingent upon device connectivity. Objective: To assess patient connectivity by analyzing alert transmission times from patient transceivers to the CareLink network. Methods: Alert transmissions were retrospectively gathered from a query of the United States de-identified Medtronic CareLink database. Alert transmission time was defined as the duration from alert occurrence to arrival at the CareLink network and was analyzed by device type, alert event, and alert type. Using data from previous studies, we computed the benefit of daily connectivity checks. Results: The mean alert transmission time was 14.8 hours (median = 6 hours), with 90.9% of alert transmissions received within 24 hours. Implantable pulse generators (17.0 ± 40.2 hours) and cardiac resynchronization therapy-pacemakers (17.2 ± 42.5 hours) had longer alert transmission times than implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (13.7 ± 29.5 hours) and cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillators (13.5 ± 30.2 hours), but the median time was 6 hours for all 4 device types. There were differences in alert times between specific alert events. Based on our data and previous studies, daily connectivity checks could improve daily alert transmission success by 8.5% but would require up to nearly 800 additional hours of staff time on any given day. Conclusion: Alert transmission performance from Medtronic devices was satisfactory, with some delays likely underscored by patient connectivity issues. Daily connectivity checks could provide some improvement in transmission success at the expense of increased clinic burden.

New atrial arrhythmia occurrence in single chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillator patients: A real-world investigation.

INTRODUCTION: A current limitation of single chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) is the lack of an atrial lead to reliably detect atrial fibrillation (AF) episodes. A novel ventricular based atrial fibrillation (VBAF) detection algorithm was created for single chamber ICDs to assess R-R variability for detection of AF. METHODS: Patients implanted with Visia AF™ ICDs were prospectively enrolled in the Medtronic Product Surveillance Registry from December 15, 2015 to January 23, 2019 and followed with at least 30 days of monitoring with the algorithm. Time to device-detected daily burden of AF ≥ 6 min, ≥6 h, and ≥23 h were reported. Clinical actions after device-detected AF were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 291 patients were enrolled with a mean follow-up of 22.5 ± 7.9 months. Of these, 212 (73%) had no prior history of AF at device implant. However, 38% of these individuals had AF detected with the VBAF algorithm with daily burden of ≥6 min within two years of implant. In these 80 patients with newly detected AF by their ICD, 23 (29%) had a confirmed clinical diagnosis of AF by their provider. Of patients with a clinical diagnosis of AF, nine (39%) were newly placed on anticoagulation, including five of five (100%) patients having a burden >23 h. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous AF monitoring with the new VBAF algorithm permits early identification and actionable treatment for patients with undiagnosed AF that may improve patient outcomes.

Risk factors for hematoma in patients undergoing cardiac device procedures: A WRAP-IT trial analysis.

Background: Implant site hematoma is a known complication of cardiac device procedures and can lead to major consequences. Objectives: To evaluate risk factors for hematoma and further understand the relationship between anticoagulant (AC), antiplatelet (AP) use, and hematoma development. Methods: We included 6800 patients from the WRAP-IT trial. To assess baseline and procedural characteristics associated with hematoma within the first 30 days postprocedure, a stepwise Cox regression model was implemented with minimal Akaike information criterion. Cox regressions were also used to evaluate AC/AP use and hematoma risk. Results: The overall rate of hematoma was 2.2%. The model identified 11 baseline and procedural characteristics associated with hematoma risk. AC use (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.44, P < .001), lower body mass index (HR: 1.06, P < .001), and history of valve surgery (HR: 2.11, P < .001) were associated with the highest risk. AP use, male sex, history of coronary artery disease, existing pocket, history of nonischemic cardiomyopathy, number of previous cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) procedures, procedure time, and lead revision were associated with moderate risk. Antithrombotic use was high overall (86%) and AC+AP use was highly predictive of hematoma risk. Regardless of AC status, AP use was associated with an almost doubling of risk vs no AP (HR = 1.85, P = .0006) in the general cohort. Interruption of AC was associated with the lowest hematoma risk (HR = 2.35) while heparin bridging (HR = 4.98) and AP use vs no AP use (HR = 1.85) was associated with the highest hematoma risk. Conclusion: The results of this analysis highlight risk factors associated with the development of hematoma in patients undergoing CIED procedures and can inform antithrombotic management.

Risk Factors for CIED Infection After Secondary Procedures: Insights From the WRAP-IT Trial.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to identify risk factors for infection after secondary cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) procedures. BACKGROUND: Risk factors for CIED infection are not well defined and techniques to minimize infection lack supportive evidence. WRAP-IT (World-wide Randomized Antibiotic Envelope Infection Prevention trial), a large study that assessed the safety and efficacy of an antibacterial envelope for CIED infection reduction, offers insight into procedural details and infection prevention strategies. METHODS: This analysis included 2,803 control patients from the WRAP-IT trial who received standard preoperative antibiotics but not the envelope (44 patients with major infections through all follow-up). A multivariate least absolute shrinkage and selection operator machine learning model, controlling for patient characteristics and procedural variables, was used for risk factor selection and identification. Risk factors consistently retaining predictive value in the model (appeared >10 times) across 100 iterations of imputed data were deemed significant. RESULTS: Of the 81 variables screened, 17 were identified as risk factors with 6 being patient/device-related (nonmodifiable) and 11 begin procedure-related (potentially modifiable). Patient/device-related factors included higher number of previous CIED procedures, history of atrial arrhythmia, geography (outside North America and Europe), device type, and lower body mass index. Procedural factors associated with increased risk included longer procedure time, implant location (non-left pectoral subcutaneous), perioperative glycopeptide antibiotic versus nonglycopeptide, anticoagulant, and/or antiplatelet use, and capsulectomy. Factors associated with decreased risk of infection included chlorhexidine skin preparation and antibiotic pocket wash. CONCLUSIONS: In WRAP-IT patients, we observed that several procedural risk factors correlated with infection risk. These results can help guide infection prevention strategies to minimize infections associated with secondary CIED procedures.

Infectious consequences of hematoma from cardiac implantable electronic device procedures and the role of the antibiotic envelope: A WRAP-IT trial analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hematoma is a complication of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) procedures and may lead to device infection. The TYRX antibacterial envelope reduced major CIED infection by 40% in the randomized WRAP-IT (World-wide Randomized Antibiotic Envelope Infection Prevention Trial) study, but its effectiveness in the presence of hematoma is not well understood. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence and infectious consequences of hematoma and the association between envelope use, hematomas, and major CIED infection among WRAP-IT patients. METHODS: All 6800 study patients were included in this analysis (control 3429; envelope 3371). Hematomas occurring within 30 days postprocedure (acute) were characterized and grouped by study treatment and evaluated for subsequent infection risk. Data were analyzed using Cox proportional hazard regression modeling. RESULTS: Acute hematoma incidence was 2.2% at 30 days, with no significant difference between treatment groups (envelope vs control hazard ratio [HR] 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-1.58; P = .39). Through all follow-up, the risk of major infection was significantly higher among control patients with hematoma vs those without (13.1% vs 1.6%; HR 11.3; 95% CI 5.5-23.2; P <.001). The risk of major infection was significantly lower in the envelope vs control patients with hematoma (2.5% vs 13.1%; HR 0.18; 95% CI 0.04-0.85; P = .03). CONCLUSION: The risk of hematoma was 2.2% among WRAP-IT patients. Among control patients, hematoma carried a >11-fold risk of developing a major CIED infection. This risk was significantly mitigated with antibacterial envelope use, with an 82% reduction in major CIED infection among envelope patients who developed hematoma compared to control.

Cost-Effectiveness of an Antibacterial Envelope for Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infection Prevention in the US Healthcare System From the WRAP-IT Trial.

BACKGROUND: In the WRAP-IT trial (Worldwide Randomized Antibiotic Envelope Infection Prevention), adjunctive use of an absorbable antibacterial envelope resulted in a 40% reduction of major cardiac implantable electronic device infection without increased risk of complication in 6983 patients undergoing cardiac implantable electronic device revision, replacement, upgrade, or initial cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator implant. There is limited information on the cost-effectiveness of this strategy. As a prespecified objective, we evaluated antibacterial envelope cost-effectiveness compared with standard-of-care infection prevention strategies in the US healthcare system. METHODS: A decision tree model was used to compare costs and outcomes of antibacterial envelope (TYRX) use adjunctive to standard-of-care infection prevention versus standard-of-care alone over a lifelong time horizon. The analysis was performed from an integrated payer-provider network perspective. Infection rates, antibacterial envelope effectiveness, infection treatment costs and patterns, infection-related mortality, and utility estimates were obtained from the WRAP-IT trial. Life expectancy and long-term costs associated with device replacement, follow-up, and healthcare utilization were sourced from the literature. Costs and quality-adjusted life years were discounted at 3%. An upper willingness-to-pay threshold of $150 000 per quality-adjusted life year was used to determine cost-effectiveness, in alignment with the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association practice guidelines and as supported by the World Health Organization and contemporary literature. RESULTS: The base case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the antibacterial envelope compared with standard-of-care was $112 603/quality-adjusted life year. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio remained lower than the willingness-to-pay threshold in 74% of iterations in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis and was most sensitive to the following model inputs: infection-related mortality, life expectancy, and infection cost. CONCLUSIONS: The absorbable antibacterial envelope was associated with a cost-effectiveness ratio below contemporary benchmarks in the WRAP-IT patient population, suggesting that the envelope provides value for the US healthcare system by reducing the incidence of cardiac implantable electronic device infection. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02277990.

Atrial fibrillation burden and subsequent heart failure events in patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy devices.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) often coexist but little is known on how AF burden associates with subsequent episodes of HF. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to quantitatively assess the short- and long-term association of AF burden with subsequent episodes of HF events in patients with reduced ejection fraction. METHODS: Patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices with at least 90 days of device data were included in the study. Time-dependent Cox regression with a 7-day window was used to evaluate the association of short- and long-term AF burden with subsequent HF events. Each patient with HF was matched to two control patients without an HF event based on age, gender, year of implant and CRT defibrillation capability. RESULTS: In our cohort with 2:1 matching (N = 549), 183 patients developed HF events and 275 (50.1%) had AF over an average follow-up of 24 ± 11 months. A 1-hour increase in short-term AF burden was associated with a 3% increased risk of HF events (HR, 1.034; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.012-1.056; P = .01; HR for 24-hour = 2.23). In contrast, the association between long-term AF burden and subsequent HF events was not statistically significant (HR, 1.009; 95% CI, 0.992-1.026; P = .373). CONCLUSION: A 24-hour increase in AF burden is associated with a more than two-fold increased risk of HF events over the subsequent week while the long-term AF burden is not significantly associated with HF events.

The World-wide Randomized Antibiotic Envelope Infection Prevention (WRAP-IT) trial: Long-term follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The World-wide Randomized Antibiotic Envelope Infection Prevention trial reported a 40% reduction in major cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections within 12 months of the procedure with the use of an antibacterial-eluting envelope (TYRX Absorbable Antibacterial Envelope, Medtronic, Mounds View, MN). OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this report was to describe the longer-term (>12 months) envelope effects on infection reduction and complications. METHODS: All trial patients who underwent CIED replacement, upgrade, revision, or initial cardiac resynchronization therapy - defibrillator implantation received standard-of-care infection prophylaxis and were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive the envelope or not. CIED infection incidence and procedure and system-related complications were characterized through all follow-up (36 months) by using Cox proportional hazards regression modeling. RESULTS: In total, 6800 patients received their intended randomized treatment (3371 envelope; 3429 control; mean follow-up period 21.0 ± 8.3 months). Major CIED-related infections occurred in 32 envelope patients and 51 control patients (Kaplan-Meier [KM] estimate 1.3% vs 1.9%; hazard ratio [HR] 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.41-0.99; P = .046). Any CIED-related infection occurred in 57 envelope patients and 84 control patients (KM estimate 2.1% vs 2.8%; HR 0.69; 95% CI 0.49-0.97; P = .030). System- or procedure-related complications occurred in 235 envelope patients and 252 control patients (KM estimate 8.0% vs 8.2%; HR 0.95; 95% CI 0.79-1.13; P < .001 for noninferiority); the most common were lead dislodgment (1.1%), device lead damage (0.5%), and implant site hematoma (0.4%). Implant site pain occurred less frequently in the envelope group (0.1% vs 0.4%; P = .067). There were no (0.0%) reports of allergic reactions to the components of the envelope (mesh, polymer, or antibiotics). CONCLUSION: The effects of the TYRX envelope on the reduction of the risk of CIED infection are sustained beyond the first year postprocedure, without an increased risk of complications.

Antibacterial Envelope to Prevent Cardiac Implantable Device Infection.

BACKGROUND: Infections after placement of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. There is limited evidence on prophylactic strategies, other than the use of preoperative antibiotics, to prevent such infections. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, controlled clinical trial to assess the safety and efficacy of an absorbable, antibiotic-eluting envelope in reducing the incidence of infection associated with CIED implantations. Patients who were undergoing a CIED pocket revision, generator replacement, or system upgrade or an initial implantation of a cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive the envelope or not. Standard-of-care strategies to prevent infection were used in all patients. The primary end point was infection resulting in system extraction or revision, long-term antibiotic therapy with infection recurrence, or death, within 12 months after the CIED implantation procedure. The secondary end point for safety was procedure-related or system-related complications within 12 months. RESULTS: A total of 6983 patients underwent randomization: 3495 to the envelope group and 3488 to the control group. The primary end point occurred in 25 patients in the envelope group and 42 patients in the control group (12-month Kaplan-Meier estimated event rate, 0.7% and 1.2%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36 to 0.98; P = 0.04). The safety end point occurred in 201 patients in the envelope group and 236 patients in the control group (12-month Kaplan-Meier estimated event rate, 6.0% and 6.9%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.06; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The mean (±SD) duration of follow-up was 20.7±8.5 months. Major CIED-related infections through the entire follow-up period occurred in 32 patients in the envelope group and 51 patients in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive use of an antibacterial envelope resulted in a significantly lower incidence of major CIED infections than standard-of-care infection-prevention strategies alone, without a higher incidence of complications. (Funded by Medtronic; WRAP-IT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02277990.).

Performance of Leadless Pacemaker in Japanese Patients vs. Rest of the World　- Results From a Global Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: A global study designed to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of a transcatheter pacing system included 38 Japanese patients enrolled at 4 sites. Subgroup analysis to evaluate the performance of the leadless intracardiac transcatheter pacing system in Japanese patients was performed.Methods and Results:Safety and efficacy outcomes, patient and implant procedure characteristics, and patient and physician acceptability from the Japanese population were compared with those from outside Japan. Differences in patient characteristics, implant procedure characteristics and patient acceptability were observed. There were no major complications in Japanese patients and pacing thresholds remained low and stable throughout follow-up. There were no observable differences between Japanese patients and patients from outside Japan in the freedom from major complication rate at 12-months post-implant (100.0% vs. 95.7%, P=0.211) or physician acceptability. CONCLUSIONS: Although some differences in specific baseline characteristics, such as body size and pacing indication, and in implant procedure characteristics, including anticoagulation strategy and hospitalization period, were observed in the Japanese patients, transcatheter pacemaker performance was similar to that in the global trial. (Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT02004873.).

Genome-wide association of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator activation with life-threatening arrhythmias.

OBJECTIVES: To identify genetic factors that would be predictive of individuals who require an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), we conducted a genome-wide association study among individuals with an ICD who experienced a life-threatening arrhythmia (LTA; cases) vs. those who did not over at least a 3-year period (controls). BACKGROUND: Most individuals that receive implantable cardioverter-defibrillators never experience a life-threatening arrhythmia. Genetic factors may help identify who is most at risk. METHODS: Patients with an ICD and extended follow-up were recruited from 34 clinical sites with the goal of oversampling those who had experienced LTA, with a cumulative 607 cases and 297 controls included in the analysis. A total of 1,006 Caucasian patients were enrolled during a time period of 13 months. Arrhythmia status of 904 patients could be confirmed and their genomic data were included in the analysis. In this cohort, there were 704 males, 200 females, and the average age was 73.3 years. We genotyped DNA samples using the Illumina Human660 W Genotyping BeadChip and tested for association between genotype at common variants and the phenotype of having an LTA. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: We did not find any associations reaching genome-wide significance, with the strongest association at chromosome 13, rs11856574 at P = 5×10⁻6. Loci previously implicated in phenotypes such as QT interval (measure of the time between the start of the Q wave and the end of the T wave as measured by electrocardiogram) were not found to be significantly associated with having an LTA. Although powered to detect such associations, we did not find common genetic variants of large effect associated with having a LTA in those of European descent. This indicates that common gene variants cannot be used at this time to guide ICD risk-stratification. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00664807.