Septal myocardial scar burden predicts the response to cardiac contractility modulation in patients with heart failure.

We hypothesized that myocardial septal scarring, assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) using late gadolinium enhancement (LGE), at the site of cardiac contractility modulation (CCM) lead placement may predict treatment response. Eligible heart failure (HF) patients underwent LGE CMR imaging before CCM device implantation. The response to CCM therapy at follow-up was determined by a change in NYHA class and echocardiographic left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) assessment. Patients were classified as responders, if they showed an improvement in either NYHA class or improvement of LVEF by ≥ 5%. 58 patients were included. 67% of patients were classified as responders according to improved NYHA; 55% according to LVEF improvement. 74% of patients were responders if either NYHA class or LVEF improvement was observed. 90% of responders (according to NYHA class) showed septal LGE < 25% at septal position of the leads, while 44% of non-responders showed septal LGE > 25% (p < 0.01). In patients treated with CCM, an improvement of NYHA class was observed when leads were placed at myocardial segments with a CMR- LGE burden less than 25%.

Sex differences and adherence of patients treated with wearable cardioverter-defibrillator: Insights from an international multicenter register.

AIMS: Treatment with the wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) may protect against sudden cardiac death (SCD) as a bridging therapy until a cardioverter-defibrillator may be implanted. We analyzed in a multicenter setting a consecutive patient cohort wearing WCD to explore sex differences. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analyzed 708 consecutive patients, 579 (81.8%) from whom were males and 129 (18.2%) females (age, 60.5 ± 14 vs. 61.6 ± 17 years old; p = .44). While the rate of ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) as a cause of prescription of WCD was significantly higher in males as compared to females (42.7% vs. 26.4%; p = .001), females received it more frequently due to nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) (55.8% vs. 42.7%); p = .009). The wear time of WCD was equivalent in both groups (21.1 ± 4.3 h/days in males vs. 21.5 ± 4.4 h/days in females; p = .27; and 62.6 ± 44.3 days in males vs. 56.5 ± 39 days in females; p = .15). Mortality was comparable in both groups at 2-year-follow-up (6.8% in males vs. 9.7% in females; p = .55). Appropriate WCD shocks and the incidence of ICD implantations were similar in both groups (2.4% in males vs. 3.9% in females; p = .07) (35.1% in males vs. 31.8% in females; p = .37), respectively. In age tertile analysis, compliance was observed more in 73-91 years old group as compared with 14-51 years old group (87.8% vs. 68.3%; p < .001). CONCLUSION: Compliance for wearing WCD was excellent regardless of sex. Furthermore, mortality and the incidence of ICD implantations were comparable in both sexes. Appropriate WCD shocks were similar in both sexes.

Real life experience with the wearable cardioverter-defibrillator in an international multicenter Registry.

Patients at high risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD) may benefit from wearable cardioverter defibrillators (WCD) by avoiding immediate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation. Different factors play an important role including patient selection, compliance and optimal drug treatment. We aimed to present real world data from 4 centers from Germany and Switzerland. Between 04/2012 and 03/2019, 708 patients were included in this registry. Patients were followed up over a mean time of 28 ± 35.5 months. Outcome data including gender differences and different etiologies of cardiomyopathy were analyzed. Out of 708 patients (81.8% males, mean age 61.0 ± 14.6), 44.6% of patients had non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, 39.8% ischemic cardiomyopathy, 7.9% myocarditis, 5.4% prior need for ICD explantation and 2.1% channelopathy. The mean wear time of WCD was 21.2 ± 4.3 h per day. In 46% of patients, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was > 35% during follow-up. The younger the patient was, the higher the LVEF and the lower the wear hours per day were. The total shock rate during follow-up was 2.7%. Whereas an appropriate WCD shock was documented in 16 patients (2.2%), 3 patients received an inappropriate ICD shock (0.5%). During follow-up, implantation of a cardiac implantable electronic device was carried out in 34.5% of patients. When comparing German patients (n = 516) to Swiss patients (n = 192), Swiss patients presented with longer wear days (70.72 ± 49.47 days versus 58.06 ± 40.45 days; p = 0.001) and a higher ICD implantation rate compared to German patients (48.4% versus 29.3%; p = 0.001), although LVEF at follow-up was similar between both groups. Young age is a negative independent predictor for the compliance in this large registry. The most common indication for WCD was non-ischemic cardiomyopathy followed by ischemic cardiomyopathy. The compliance rate was generally high with a decrease of wear hours per day at younger age. Slight differences were found between Swiss and German patients, which might be related to differences in mentality for ICD implantation.

Extent of peri-infarct scar on late gadolinium enhancement cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and outcome in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy.

BACKGROUND: Only a minority of patients who receive an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) on the basis of left ventricular ejection fraction receive appropriate ICD therapy. Peri-infarct scar zone assessed by late gadolinium enhancement cardiac magnetic resonance (LGE-CMR) is a possible substrate for ventricular tachyarrhytmias (VTAs). OBJECTIVE: The aim of our prospective study was to determine whether LGE-CMR parameters can predict the occurrence of VTA in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM). METHODS: Two hundred sixteen patients with ICM underwent CMR imaging before primary or secondary ICD implantation and were prospectively followed. We assessed CMR indices and CMR scar characteristics (infarct core and peri-infarct zone) to predict outcome and VTAs. RESULTS: Patients were followed up for 1497 days (interquartile range 697-2237 days). Forty-seven patients (21%) received appropriate therapy during follow-up. Patients with appropriate ICD therapy had smaller core scar (31.5% ± 8.5% vs 36.8% ± 8.9%; P = .0004) but larger peri-infarct scar (12.4% ± 2.6% vs 10.5% ± 2.9%; P = .0001) than did patients without appropriate therapy. In multivariate Cox regression analysis, peri-infarct scar (hazard ratio 1.15; 95% confidence interval 1.07-1.24; P = .0001) was independently and significantly associated with VTAs whereas left ventricular ejection fraction, right ventricular ejection fraction, core scar, and left atrial ejection fraction were not. CONCLUSION: Scar extent of peri-infarct border zone was significantly associated with appropriate ICD therapy. Thus, LGE-CMR parameters can identify a subgroup of patients with ICM and an increased risk of life-threatening VTAs.

Comparison of the Outcome of Patients Protected by the Wearable Cardioverter Defibrillator (WCD) for <90 Wear Days versus ≥90 Wear Days.

BACKGROUND/AIM: The wearable cardioverter/defibrillator (WCD) is recommended to prevent sudden cardiac death (SCD). Guidelines suggest a 90 days' period, but prolongation of WCD wear time until increasing the ejection fraction (≥35%) might be suggested. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A cohort of 153 patients with prescribed WCD were divided into two groups: A <90 wear days' group (n=112) vs. ≥90 wear days' group (n=41) and followed. RESULTS: In the first group, WCD shock occurred in 3.6% of patients, 47.3% improved in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) after 3 months, and 37.5% had a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation with appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) shock events occurring in 6 patients. Two of these patients already received WCD shock therapy due to ventricular fibrillation. A 20.5% improved in LVEF after 6-12 months, but 73% were already implanted with ICD. In the second group, 4.9% received WCD shock, 34.1% improved in LVEF after 3 months, 48.8% were implanted with ICD, and 2 had ICD shocks during follow up time. LVEF improvement after 6-12 months occurred in 26.8%. ICD implantation was prevented in 7.3% of patients due to LVEF recovery. CONCLUSION: Prolonging wearing days of WCD may reduce the number of inappropriate ICD implantation.

The Wearable Cardioverter-Defibrillator: Experience in 153 Patients and a Long-Term Follow-Up.

Background: The wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) is available for patients at high risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD) when immediate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation is not possible or indicated. Patient selection remains challenging especially in primary prevention. Long-term data on these patients is still lacking. METHODS: 153 patients were included in this study. They were prescribed the WCD between April 2012 and March 2019 at the University Medical Center, Mannheim, Germany. The mean follow-up period was 36.2 ± 15.6 months. Outcome data, including all-cause mortality, were analyzed by disease etiology and ICD implantation following WCD use. RESULTS: We analyzed 56 patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy, 70 patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, 16 patients with prior need for ICD/CRT-D (device for cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator) explanation, 8 patients with acute myocarditis and 3 patients with congenital diseases. 58% of the patients did not need ICD/CRT-D implantation after WCD use. 4% of all patients suffered from appropriate WCD shocks. 2 of these patients (33%) experienced appropriate ICD shocks after implantation due to ventricular tachyarrhythmias. Long-term follow-up shows a good overall survival. All-cause mortality was 10%. There was no significant difference between patients with or without subsequent ICD implantation (p = 0.48). Patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy numerically showed a higher long-term mortality than patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (14% vs. 6%, p = 0.13) and received significantly more ICD shocks after implantation (10% of ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) patients versus 3% of non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) patients, p = 0.04). All patients with ventricular tachyarrhythmias during WCD use or after ICD implantation survived the follow-up period. CONCLUSION: Following WCD use, ICD implantation could be avoided in 58% of patients. Long-term follow-up shows good overall survival. The majority of all patients did not suffer from WCD shocks nor did receive ICD shocks after subsequent implantation. Patient selection regarding predictive conditions on long-term risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias needs further risk stratification.

Incidence, mechanisms, and clinical impact of inappropriate shocks in patients with a subcutaneous defibrillator.

AIMS: Inappropriate shocks (IAS) remain a challenge for patients and physicians after implantation of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD). The aims were to assess and characterize different patterns of IAS. METHODS AND RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty-nine patients were implanted with an S-ICD between 2010 and 2018 for primary and secondary prevention. Follow-up data of at least 6 months were analysed. During a mean follow-up of 34.9 ± 16.0 months, a total of 73 shocks occurred in 38 patients (6%). Forty-three (59%) shocks were considered appropriate due to ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation, while 30 (41%) were inappropriate and occurred in 19 patients (8%). Myopotentials/noise was the most frequent cause of inappropriate shocks (n = 8), followed by T-wave oversensing (n = 6) and undersensing of the QRS, resulting in adaptation of the automatic gain control and inappropriate shock (n = 5). Seventy-four percent of all IAS occurred on the primary vector, while no IAS occurred on the alternate vector. In seven of eight patients (88%), IAS related to myopotentials have occurred on the primary sensing vector. Multivariate analysis identified taller patients, primary sensing vector and first-generation S-ICD device as predictors for IAS. SMART pass effectively reduced the occurrence of IAS in the second-generation S-ICD system. CONCLUSION: Inappropriate therapies are less frequently observed on the alternate vector. The primary vector seems to be unfavourable with regard to oversensing caused by myopotentials. Inappropriate shocks were associated with an increased rate of rehospitalization but not mortality. These observations have implications for the prevention of inappropriate S-ICD shocks.

Impact of Sacubitril/Valsartan on the Long-Term Incidence of Ventricular Arrhythmias in Chronic Heart Failure Patients.

BACKGROUND: Sacubitril/valsartan decreased the risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in patients suffering from heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, long-term data are sparse. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to compare the incidence of life-threatening arrhythmias consisting of ventricular tachycardia and/or ventricular fibrillation before and after initiation of sacubitril/valsartan treatment. METHODS: Out of 12,000 patients with HFrEF from 2016-2018, 148 patients were newly prescribed sacubitril/valsartan, but the long-term data of only 127 patients were available and included in this study. RESULTS: Patients with an average age of 66.8 ± 12.1 had a median left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 25% (interquartile range (IQR) 5.00-45.00) and 30% (IQR 10.00-55.00, p < 0.0005) before and after sacubitril/valsartan treatment, respectively. Systolic blood pressure decreased from 127.93 ± 22.01 to 118.36 ± 20.55 mmHg (p = 0.0035) at 6 months of follow-up. However, in 59 patients with a long-term outcome of 12 months, ventricular arrhythmias persistently increased (ventricular fibrillation from 27.6 to 29.3%, ventricular tachycardia (VT) from 12% to 13.8%, and nonsustained VT from 26.6 to 33.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Sacubitril/valsartan does not reduce the risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias in chronic HFrEF patients over 12 months of follow-up.

Cardioprotective Effects of Dronedarone Mediated by the Influence on the Expression of Urokinase-Type Plasminogen Activator Receptor.

PURPOSE: Dronedarone is a multichannel-blocking antiarrhythmic drug for the treatment of atrial fibrillation. Observational data hypothesized a cardioprotective effect. In an in vitro endothelial cell-platelet model, we evaluated the molecular atheroprotective effects of dronedarone. METHODS: Following a 24-h incubation of human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) with dronedarone (concentration 50, 100, and 150 ng/mL), they were then stimulated for 1 h with lipopolysaccharide (LPS) and were subsequently incubated in direct contact with thrombin-activated platelets. After incubation, the expression of CD40L and CD62P on platelets, and the expression of ICAM-1, VCAM-1, urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor (uPAR), and membrane type 1 matrix metalloproteinase (MT1-MMP) on endothelial cells were measured by flow cytometry. RESULTS: Preincubation with 150 ng/mL of dronedarone reduced the expression of uPAR on endothelial cells after proinflammatory stimulation with LPS and also by direct endothelial contact with activated platelets (p = 0.0038). In contrast, the expression of CD40L and CD62P on platelets after proinflammatory stimulation with thrombin was significantly increased through direct preincubation with 50/100/150 ng/mL of dronedarone. However, dronedarone had no effects on the expression of MT1-MMP and ICAM-1 in HUVECs. CONCLUSION: In this in vitro analysis, dronedarone directly increased platelet activation but showed significant direct effects on endothelial cells and indirect effects on platelets on selected markers of atherosclerosis.

Cardiac contractility modulation improves long-term survival and hospitalizations in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

AIMS: Cardiac contractility modulation (CCM) improves symptoms and exercise tolerance and reduces heart failure (HF) hospitalizations over 6-month follow-up in patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III or IV symptoms, QRS < 130 ms and 25% ≤ left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 45% (FIX-HF-5C study). The current prospective registry study (CCM-REG) aimed to assess the longer-term impact of CCM on hospitalizations and mortality in real-world experience in this same population. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 140 patients with 25% ≤ LVEF ≤ 45% receiving CCM therapy (CCM-REG25-45 ) for clinical indications were included. Cardiovascular and HF hospitalizations, Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) and NYHA class were assessed over 2 years. Mortality was tracked through 3 years and compared with predictions by the Seattle Heart Failure Model (SHFM). A separate analysis was performed on patients with 35% ≤ LVEF ≤ 45% (CCM-REG35-45 ) and 25% ≤ LVEF < 35% (CCM-REG25-34 ). Hospitalizations decreased by 75% (from 1.2/patient-year the year before, to 0.35/patient-year during the 2 years following CCM, P < 0.0001) in CCM-REG25-45 and by a similar amount in CCM-REG35-45 (P < 0.0001) and CCM-REG25-34 . MLHFQ and NYHA class improved in all three cohorts, with progressive improvements over time (P < 0.002). Three-year survival in CCM-REG25-45 (82.8%) and CCM-REG24-34 (79.4%) were similar to those predicted by SHFM (76.7%, P = 0.16; 78.0%, P = 0.81, respectively) and was better than predicted in CCM-REG35-45 (88.0% vs. 74.7%, P = 0.046). CONCLUSION: In real-world experience, CCM produces results similar to those of previous studies in subjects with 25% ≤ LVEF ≤ 45% and QRS < 130 ms; cardiovascular and HF hospitalizations are reduced and MLHFQ and NYHA class are improved. Overall mortality was comparable to that predicted by the SHFM but was lower than predicted in patients with 35% ≤ LVEF ≤ 45%.

Long-term results of combined cardiac contractility modulation and subcutaneous defibrillator therapy in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac contractility modulation (CCM) is an electrical-device therapy for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35% also have indication for an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), and in some cases subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) is selected. HYPOTHESIS: CCM and S-ICD can be combined to work efficaciously and safely. METHODS: We report on 20 patients with HFrEF and LVEF ≤35% who received CCM and S-ICD. To exclude device interference, patients received intraoperative crosstalk testing, S-ICD testing, and bicycle exercise testing while CCM was activated. Clinical and QOL measures before CCM activation and at last follow-up were analyzed. S-ICD performance was evaluated while both CCM and S-ICD were active. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 34.3 months. NYHA class improved from 2.9 ± 0.4 to 2.1 ± 0.7 (P < 0.0001), Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire score improved from 50.2 ± 23.7 to 29.6 ± 22.8 points (P < 0.0001), and LVEF improved from 24.4% ± 8.1% to 30.9% ± 9.6% (P = 0.002). Mean follow-up time with both devices active was 22 months. Three patients experienced a total of 6 episodes of sustained ventricular tachycardia, all successfully treated with first ICD shock. One case received an inappropriate shock unrelated to the concomitant CCM. One patient received an LVAD, so CCM and S-ICD were discontinued. CONCLUSIONS: CCM and S-ICD can be successfully combined in patients with HFrEF. S-ICD and CCM remain efficacious when used together, with no interference affecting their function.

Therapy optimization in patients with heart failure: the role of the wearable cardioverter-defibrillator in a real-world setting.

BACKGROUND: The wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) has emerged as a valuable tool to temporarily protect patients at risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD). The aim of this study was to determine the value of the WCD for therapy optimization of heart failure patients. METHODS: One hundred five consecutive patients that received WCD between 4/2012 and 9/2016 were included in the study. All patients were followed for clinical outcome and echocardiographic parameters during WCD therapy and had continued follow-up after WCD therapy, irrespective of subsequent implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation. RESULTS: The most common indication for WCD were newly diagnosed ischemic (ICM) or non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35%. Mean WCD wear time was 68.8 ± 50.4 days with a mean daily use of 21.5 ± 3.5 h. Five patients (4.8%) received a total of five appropriate WCD shocks. During WCD wear, patients with ICM and NICM showed significant improvement in LVEF, reducing the proportion of patients with a need for primary preventive ICD implantation to 54.8% (ICM) and 48.8% (NICM). An ICD was finally implanted in 51.4% of the study patients (24 trans-venous ICDs, 30 subcutaneous ICDs). After discontinuation of WCD therapy, all patients were followed for a mean of 18.6 ± 12.3 months. 5.6% of patients with implanted ICDs received appropriate therapies. No patient with subcutaneous ICD needed change to a trans-venous device. None of the patients without an implanted ICD suffered from ventricular tachyarrhythmias and no patient died suddenly. In patients with NICM a significant LVEF improvement was observed during long-term follow-up (from 34.8 ± 11.1% to 41.0 ± 10.2%). CONCLUSIONS: WCD therapy successfully bridged all patients to either LVEF recovery or ICD implantation. Following WCD, ICD implantation could be avoided in almost half of the patients. In selected patients, prolongation of WCD therapy beyond 3 months might further prevent unnecessary ICD implantation. The WCD as an external monitoring system contributed important information to optimize device selection in patients that needed ICD implantation.

Low Prevalence of Inappropriate Shocks in Patients With Inherited Arrhythmia Syndromes With the Subcutaneous Implantable Defibrillator Single Center Experience and Long-Term Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: Up to 40% of patients with transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) experience lead-associated complications and may suffer from high complication rates when lead extraction is indicated. Subcutaneous ICD may represent a feasible alternative; however, the efficacy of the subcutaneous ICD in the detection and treatment of ventricular arrhythmias in patients with hereditary arrhythmia syndromes has not been fully evaluated. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with primary hereditary arrhythmia syndromes who fulfilled indication for defibrillator placement were eligible for enrollment. Between 2010 and 2016, 62 consecutive patients with primary hereditary arrhythmia syndromes, without indication for antibradycardia therapy, were enrolled in the study. Mean follow-up was 31.0±14.2 months. The study cohort comprised of 24 patients with Brugada syndrome, 17 with idiopathic ventricular fibrillation, 6 with long-QT syndrome, 1 with short-QT syndrome, 3 with catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia, 8 with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, and 3 with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy. Thirty-nine patients were implanted for secondary prevention. Twenty-two patients had a previous transvenous ICD implanted, but required revision because of infection or lead defects. A total of 20 spontaneous ventricular tachyarrhythmias requiring shock intervention occurred in 10 patients during follow-up. All episodes were terminated within the first ICD shock delivery with 80 J. Two patients had inappropriate therapies caused by oversensing following an uneventful implantation. No pocket-site infections and no premature revisions have occurred during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Our study supports the use of the subcutaneous ICD for both secondary and primary prevention of sudden cardiac death as a reliable alternative to the conventional transvenous ICD.

Impact and management of left ventricular function on the prognosis of Takotsubo syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Early research has proposed that patients with Takotsubo syndrome (TTS) could have a higher mortality rate than the general population. Our study was conducted to determine the short- and long-term outcome of TTS patients associated with a significantly compromised left ventricular function on hospital admission. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our institutional database constituted a collective of 112 patients diagnosed with TTS between 2003 and 2015. The patients were classified into two groups based on the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), with those presenting with a LVEF > 35% on admission categorized into one group (n = 65, 58%) and those presenting with LVEF ≤ 35% (n=47, 42%) categorized into another group. The endpoint was the all-cause of mortality over a mean follow-up of 1529 ± 1121 days. RESULTS: Preliminary results indicated that patients with an EF ≤ 35% had a significantly greater risk of developing life-threatening arrhythmias, and were much more likely to suffer from cardiogenic shock. Patients often required varying forms of mechanical respiratory support. The in-hospital mortality, 30-day mortality, 1-year mortality and ongoing long-term mortality was significantly higher in TTS patients with an EF ≤ 35%. In a multivariate Cox regression analysis, an EF ≤ 35% (HR 3·3, 95% CI: 1·2-9·2, P < 0·05) was identified as a strong independent predictor of the primary endpoint. CONCLUSIONS: In-hospital events as well as short- and long-term mortality rates among TTS patients diagnosed with a significantly reduced LVEF on admission were significantly higher. There is an urgent need for randomized trials, which could help define uniform clinical management strategies for high risk TTS patients.

Cardiac Contractility Modulation: A Technical Guide for Device Implantation.

This article provides a technical description of common implant practice for delivery of cardiac contractility modulation (CCM) therapy to heart failure patients. As of September 2016, the authors of this article collectively have been involved with more than 400 system implantations in five medical centers, beginning with the advent of CCM therapy approximately 12 years ago. CCM therapy has been evaluated in a variety of studies, and was shown to be safe and effective and of benefit to patient quality of life and exercise capacity. As the use of CCM therapy continuously expands among medical centers in Europe, this article describes the technical and practical aspects of the implant procedure, and additional special technical cases based on our cumulative experience.

Cardiac contractility modulation in heart failure patients: Randomized comparison of signal delivery through one vs. two ventricular leads.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac contractility modulation (CCM) is an electrical stimulation treatment for symptomatic heart failure (HF) patients. The procedure involves implantation of two ventricular leads for delivery of CCM impulses. The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of CCM when the signal is delivered through one vs. two ventricular leads. METHODS: This prospective blinded randomized trial enrolled 48 patients. Eligible subjects had symptoms despite optimal HF medications, left ventricular ejection fraction <40% and peakVO2≥9ml O2/kg/min. All patients received a CCM system with two ventricular leads, and were randomized to CCM active through both or just one ventricular lead; 25 patients were randomized to receive signal delivery through two leads (Group A) and 23 patients to signal delivery through one lead (Group B). The study compared the mean changes from baseline to 6 months follow-up in peakVO2, New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification, and quality of life (by MLWHFQ). RESULTS: Following 6 months, similar and significant (p<0.05) improvements from baseline in NYHA (-0.7±0.5 vs. -0.9±0.7) and MLWHFQ (-14±20 vs. -16±22) were observed in Group A and in Group B. PeakVO2 showed improvement trends in both groups (0.34±1.52 vs. 0.10±2.21ml/kg/min; p=ns). No patient died. Serious adverse event rates (20 events in 10 subjects) were not different between groups. No statistically significant difference was found in any of the study endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy and safety of CCM in this study were similar when the signal was delivered through either one or two ventricular leads. These results support the potential use of a single ventricular lead for delivery of CCM.

Simultaneous Non-Invasive Epicardial and Endocardial Mapping in Patients With Brugada Syndrome: New Insights Into Arrhythmia Mechanisms.

BACKGROUND: The underlying mechanisms of Brugada syndrome (BrS) are not completely understood. Recent studies provided evidence that the electrophysiological substrate, leading to electrocardiogram abnormalities and/or ventricular arrhythmias, is located in the right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT). The purpose of this study was to examine abnormalities of epicardial and endocardial local unipolar electrograms by simultaneous noninvasive mapping in patients with BrS. METHODS AND RESULTS: Local epicardial and endocardial unipolar electrograms were analyzed using a novel noninvasive epi- and endocardial electrophysiology system (NEEES) in 12 patients with BrS and 6 with right bundle branch block for comparison. Fifteen normal subjects composed the control group. Observed depolarization abnormalities included fragmented electrograms in the anatomical area of RVOT endocardially and epicardially, significantly prolonged activation time in the RVOT endocardium (65±20 vs 38±13 ms in controls; P=0.008), prolongation of the activation-recovery interval in the RVOT epicardium (281±34 vs 247±26 ms in controls; P=0.002). Repolarization abnormalities included a larger area of ST-segment elevation >2 mV and T-wave inversions. Negative voltage gradient (-2.5 to -6.0 mV) between epicardium and endocardium of the RVOT was observed in 8 of 12 BrS patients, not present in patients with right bundle branch block or in controls. CONCLUSIONS: Abnormalities of epicardial and endocardial electrograms associated with depolarization and repolarization properties were found using NEEES exclusively in the RVOT of BrS patients. These findings support both, depolarization and repolarization abnormalities, being operative at the same time in patients with BrS.

Characteristics and long-term outcome of right ventricular involvement in Takotsubo cardiomyopathy.

OBJECTIVE: Takotsubo cardiomyopathy, also known as stress-induced cardiomyopathy (SCM) resembles a reversible cardiomyopathy that is characterized by localized wall motion abnormalities in the absence of stenotic coronary vascular disease. Patients typically present with apical ballooning of the left ventricle (LV), however the right ventricle (RV) is also affected in up to 50.0% of patients. Long-term prognosis of classical SCM resembles that of patients after ST elevation myocardial infarction. Data on long-term prognosis of biventricular compared to classical SCM is controversial. The aim of this study was therefore to analyze patients with biventricular SCM regarding in-hospital outcome and long-term prognosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 114 consecutive patients with SCM were retrospectively analyzed. 88 patients presented with classical SCM, 26 patients (22.8%) were diagnosed with biventricular SCM. Follow-up was conducted for a total of 4.4years. Mean age was 67.1years with 83.3% of patients being female. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality, recurrence of SCM and re-hospitalization due to heart failure. RESULTS: Although patients with biventricular SCM presented with a tendency towards an increased rate of cardiogenic shock (30.8% vs. 15.9%; p=0.09) and significantly more usage of inotropic support upon hospital admission (34.6% vs. 13.6%; p=0.01), there was no difference concerning the primary endpoint in both groups (50.0% vs. 44.3%; p=0.31). Furthermore, there was no difference in mortality both in-hospital (7.7% vs. 7.9%; p=0.66) and during long-term follow-up (27.3% vs. 23.1%; p=0.46). CONCLUSION: Patients with biventricular SCM have the same in-hospital and long-term outcome compared to classical SCM.