Impact of ventricular tachycardia ablation in subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator carriers: a multicentre, international analysis from the iSUSI project.

AIMS: Catheter ablation (CA) of ventricular tachycardia (VT) has become an important tool to improve clinical outcomes in patients with appropriate transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) shocks. The aim of our analysis was to test whether VT ablation (VTA) impacts long-term clinical outcomes even in subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) carriers. METHODS AND RESULTS: International Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (iSUSI) registry patients who experienced either an ICD shock or a hospitalization for monomorphic VT were included in this analysis. Based on an eventual VTA after the index event, patients were divided into VTA+ vs. VTA- cohorts. Primary outcome of the study was the occurrence of a combination of device-related appropriate shocks, monomorphic VTs, and cardiovascular mortality. Secondary outcomes were addressed individually. Among n = 1661 iSUSI patients, n = 211 were included: n = 177 experiencing ICD shocks and n = 34 hospitalized for VT. No significant differences in baseline characteristics were observed. Both the crude and the yearly event rate of the primary outcome (5/59 and 3.8% yearly event rate VTA+ vs. 41/152 and 16.4% yearly event rate in the VTA-; log-rank: P value = 0.0013) and the cardiovascular mortality (1/59 and 0.7% yearly event rate VTA+ vs. 13/152 and 4.7% yearly event rate VTA-; log-rank P = 0.043) were significantly lower in the VTA + cohort. At multivariate analysis, VTA was the only variable remaining associated with a lower incidence of the primary outcome [adjusted hazard ratio 0.262 (0.100-0.681), P = 0.006]. CONCLUSION: In a real-world registry of S-ICD carriers, the combined study endpoint of arrhythmic events and cardiovascular mortality was lower in the patient cohort undergoing VTA at long-term follow-up. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT0473876.

Differences in Pathophysiology and Treatment Efficacy Based on Heterogeneous Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is heterogeneous in terms of etiology and severity. Owing to this heterogeneity, differences in outcome and treatment efficacy have been reported from case to case; however, few reviews have focused on the heterogeneity of OHCA. We conducted a literature review to identify differences in the prognosis and treatment efficacy in terms of CA-related waveforms (shockable or non-shockable), age (adult or pediatric), and post-CA syndrome severity and to determine the preferred treatment for patients with OHCA to improve outcomes.

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator lead failure and revision following transcutaneous bicaval valve (TricValve®) implantation.

INTRODUCTION: Tricuspid regurgitation is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, and occurs at a higher rate in patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices. Percutaneous strategies for managing tricuspid regurgitation are evolving, including the development of bicaval valve implantation which has been successfully used in patients with pacing leads. METHODS AND RESULTS: We present the first documented case of lead failure following TricValve® implantation, a dedicated self-expanding system for bicaval valve implantation, and the first successful lead revision procedure in this setting. CONCLUSION: The case illustrates important considerations in undertaking percutaneous intervention in patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices, and their ongoing management.

Incorporation of Drone Technology Into the Chain of Survival for OHCA: Estimation of Time Needed for Bystander Treatment of OHCA and CPR Performance.

BACKGROUND: Drone-delivered automated external defibrillators (AEDs) hold promises in the treatment of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Our objective was to estimate the time needed to perform resuscitation with a drone-delivered AED and to measure cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) quality. METHODS: Mock out-of-hospital cardiac arrest simulations that included a 9-1-1 call, CPR, and drone-delivered AED were conducted. Each simulation was timed and video-recorded. CPR performance metrics were recorded by a Laerdal Resusci Anne Quality Feedback System. Multivariable regression modeling examined factors associated with time from 9-1-1 call to AED shock and CPR quality metrics (compression rate, depth, recoil, and chest compression fraction). Comparisons were made among those with recent CPR training (≤2 years) versus no recent (>2 years) or prior CPR training. RESULTS: We recruited 51 research participants between September 2019 and March 2020. The median age was 34 (Q1-Q3, 23-54) years, 56.9% were female, and 41.2% had recent CPR training. The median time from 9-1-1 call to initiation of CPR was 1:19 (Q1-Q3, 1:06-1:26) minutes. A median time of 1:59 (Q1-Q3, 01:50-02:20) minutes was needed to retrieve a drone-delivered AED and deliver a shock. The median CPR compression rate was 115 (Q1-Q3, 109-124) beats per minute, the correct compression depth percentage was 92% (Q1-Q3, 25-98), and the chest compression fraction was 46.7% (Q1-Q3, 39.9%-50.6%). Recent CPR training was not associated with CPR quality or time from 9-1-1 call to AED shock. Younger age (per 10-year increase; ß, 9.97 [95% CI, 4.63-15.31] s; P<0.001) and prior experience with AED (ß, -30.0 [95% CI, -50.1 to -10.0] s; P=0.004) were associated with more rapid time from 9-1-1 call to AED shock. Prior AED use (ß, 6.71 [95% CI, 1.62-11.79]; P=0.011) was associated with improved chest compression fraction percentage. CONCLUSION: Research participants were able to rapidly retrieve an AED from a drone while largely maintaining CPR quality according to American Heart Association guidelines. Chest compression fraction was lower than expected.

Expanded application of wearable cardioverter defibrillators beyond current guidelines: proposal for a European register explained through single clinical scenarios.

The wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) is becoming a more and more widely used instrument for the prevention of sudden cardiac death of patients either with a secondary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillator indication or with a transient high risk of sudden cardiac death. Although clinical practice has demonstrated a benefit of protecting patients for a period as long as 3-6 months with such devices, the current European guidelines concerning ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death are still extremely restrictive in the patient selection in part because of the costs derived from such a prevention device, in part because of the lack of robust randomised trials.To illustrate expanded use cases for the WCD, four real-life clinical cases are presented where patients received the device slightly outside the established guidelines. These cases demonstrate the broader utility of WCDs in situations involving acute myocarditis, thyrotoxicosis, pre-excited atrial fibrillation and awaiting staging/prognosis of a lung tumour. The findings prompt expansion of the existing guidelines for WCD use to efficiently protect more patients whose risk of arrhythmic cardiac death is transient or uncertain. This could be achieved by establishing a European register of the patients who receive a WCD for further analysis.

The impact of supraventricular arrhythmias on the outcomes of guideline-compliant implantable cardioverter defibrillator programming.

INTRODUCTION: Several implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) programming strategies are applied to minimize ICD therapy, especially unnecessary therapies from supraventricular arrhythmias (SVA). However, it remains unknown whether these optimal programming recommendations only benefit those with SVAs or have any detrimental effects from delayed therapy on those without SVAs. This study aims to assess the impact of SVA on the outcomes of ICD programming based on 2015 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/SOLAECE expert consensus statement and 2019 focused update on optimal ICD programming and testing guidelines. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent ICD insertion for primary prevention were classified into four groups based on SVA status and ICD programming: (1) guideline-concordant group (GC) with SVA, (2) GC without SVA, (3) nonguideline concordant group (NGC) with SVA, and (4) NGC without SVA. Cox proportional hazard models were analyzed for freedom from ICD therapies, shock, and mortality. RESULTS: Seven hundred and seventy-two patients (median age, 64 years) were enrolled. ICD therapies were the most frequent in NGC with SVA (24.0%), followed by NGC without SVA (19.9%), GC without SVA (11.6%), and GC with SVA (8.1%). Guideline concordant programming was associated with 68% ICD therapy reduction (HR 0.32, p = .007) and 67% ICD shock reduction (HR 0.33, p = .030) in SVA patients and 44% ICD therapy reduction in those without SVA (HR 0.56, p = .030). CONCLUSION: Programming ICDs in primary prevention patients based on current guidelines reduces therapy burden without increasing mortality in both SVA and non-SVA patients. A greater magnitude of reduced ICD therapy was found in those with supraventricular arrhythmias.

Prior history of atrial fibrillation and arrhythmic outcomes: Data from the WEARIT-II prospective registry.

INTRODUCTION: Wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) is utilized in patients with assumed but not yet confirmed risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD). Many of these patients also present with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, the rate of WCD-detected ventricular or atrial arrhythmia events in this specific high-risk cohort is not well understood. METHODS: In WEARIT-II, the cumulative probability of any sustained or nonsustained VT/VF (WCD-treated and nontreated), and atrial/supraventricular arrhythmias during WCD use was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method by prior AF, with comparisons by the log-rank test. The incidence of ventricular and atrial arrhythmia events were expressed as events per 100 patient-years, and were analyzed by prior AF using negative binomial regression. RESULTS: WEARIT-II enrolled 2000 patients, 557 (28%) of whom had AF before enrollment. Cumulative probability of any sustained or nonsustained WCD-detected VT/VF during WCD use was significantly higher among patients with a history of AF than without AF (6% vs. 3%, p = .001). Similarly, the recurrent rate of any sustained or nonsustained VT/VF was significantly higher in patients with prior AF versus no prior AF (131.5 events per 100 patient-years vs. 22.7 events per 100 patient-years, p = .001). Patients with prior AF also had a significantly higher burden of any WCD-detected atrial arrhythmias/SVT/inappropriate arrhythmias therapy (183.2 events per 100 patient-years vs. 74.8 events per 100 patient-years, p < .001). CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that patients with a history of AF wearing the WCD for risk assessment have a higher incidence of ventricular arrhythmias that may facilitate the decision making for ICD implantation.

Artificial Intelligence Model Predicts Sudden Cardiac Arrest Manifesting With Pulseless Electric Activity Versus Ventricular Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: There is no specific treatment for sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) manifesting as pulseless electric activity (PEA) and survival rates are low; unlike ventricular fibrillation (VF), which is treatable by defibrillation. Development of novel treatments requires fundamental clinical studies, but access to the true initial rhythm has been a limiting factor. METHODS: Using demographics and detailed clinical variables, we trained and tested an AI model (extreme gradient boosting) to differentiate PEA-SCA versus VF-SCA in a novel setting that provided the true initial rhythm. A subgroup of SCAs are witnessed by emergency medical services personnel, and because the response time is zero, the true SCA initial rhythm is recorded. The internal cohort consisted of 421 emergency medical services-witnessed out-of-hospital SCAs with PEA or VF as the initial rhythm in the Portland, Oregon metropolitan area. External validation was performed in 220 emergency medical services-witnessed SCAs from Ventura, CA. RESULTS: In the internal cohort, the artificial intelligence model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.68 (95% CI, 0.61-0.76). Model performance was similar in the external cohort, achieving an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.72 (95% CI, 0.59-0.84). Anemia, older age, increased weight, and dyspnea as a warning symptom were the most important features of PEA-SCA; younger age, chest pain as a warning symptom and established coronary artery disease were important features associated with VF. CONCLUSIONS: The artificial intelligence model identified novel features of PEA-SCA, differentiated from VF-SCA and was successfully replicated in an external cohort. These findings enhance the mechanistic understanding of PEA-SCA with potential implications for developing novel management strategies.

Left ventricular assist device in the presence of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator: Data from a multicenter experience.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are an increasingly used strategy for the management of patients with advanced heart failure (HF). Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) might be a viable alternative to conventional ICDs with a lower risk of short- and long-term of device-related complications and infections.The aim of this multicenter study was to evaluate the outcomes and management of S-ICD recipients who underwent LVAD implantation. METHODS: The study population included patients with a preexisting S-ICD who underwent LVAD implantation for advanced HF despite optimal medical therapy. RESULTS: The study population included 30 patients (25 male; median age 45 [38-52] years).The HeartMate III was the most common LVAD type. Median follow-up in the setting of concomitant use of S-ICDs and LVADs was 7 months (1-20).There were no reports of inability to interrogate S-ICD systems in this population. Electromagnetic interference (EMI) occurred in 21 (70%) patients. The primary sensing vector was the one most significantly involved in determining EMI. Twenty-seven patients (90%) remained eligible for S-ICD implantation with at least one optimal sensing vector. The remaining 3 patients (10%) were ineligible for S-ICD after attempts of reprogramming of sensing vectors. Six patients (20%) experienced inappropriate shocks (IS) due to EMI. Six patients (20%) experienced appropriate shocks. No S-ICD extraction because of need for antitachycardia pacing, ineffective therapy or infection was reported. CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant use of LVAD and S-ICD is feasible in most patients. However, the potential risk of EMI oversensing, IS and undersensing in the post-operative period following LVAD implantation should be considered. Careful screening for EMI should be performed in all sensing vectors after LVAD implantation.

Differences in underlying cardiac substrate among S-ICD recipients and its impact on long-term device-related outcomes: Real-world insights from the iSUSI registry.

BACKGROUND: Outcome comparisons among subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) recipients with nonischemic cardiomyopathies are scarce. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate differences in device-related outcomes among S-ICD recipients with different structural substrates. METHODS: Patients enrolled in the i-SUSI (International SUbcutaneouS Implantable cardioverter defibrillator registry) project were grouped according to the underlying substrate (ischemic vs nonischemic) and subgrouped into dilated cardiomyopathy, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, Brugada syndrome (BrS), arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC). The main outcome of our study was to compare the rates of appropriate and inappropriate shocks and device-related complications. RESULTS: Among 1698 patients, the most common underlying substrate was ischemic (31.7%), followed by dilated cardiomyopathy (20.5%), BrS (10.8%), hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (8.5%), and ARVC (4.4%). S-ICD for primary prevention was more common in the nonischemic cohort (70.9% vs 65.4%; P = .037). Over a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 26.5 (12.6-42.8) months, no differences were observed in appropriate shocks between ischemic and nonischemic patients (4.8%/y vs 3.9%/y; log-rank, P = .282). ARVC (9.0%/y; hazard ratio [HR] 2.492; P = .001) and BrS (1.8%/y; HR 0.396; P = .008) constituted the groups with the highest and lowest rates of appropriate shocks, respectively. Device-related complications did not differ between groups (ischemic: 6.4%/y vs nonischemic: 6.1%/y; log-rank, P = .666), nor among underlying substrates (log-rank, P = .089). Nonischemic patients experienced higher rates of inappropriate shocks than did ischemic S-ICD recipients (4.4%/y vs 3.0%/y; log-rank, P = .043), with patients with ARVC (9.9%/y; P = .001) having the highest risk, even after controlling for confounders (adjusted HR 2.243; confidence interval 1.338-4.267; P = .002). CONCLUSION: Most S-ICD recipients were primary prevention nonischemic cardiomyopathy patients. Among those, patients with ARVC tend to receive the most frequent appropriate and inappropriate shocks and patients with BrS the least frequent appropriate shocks.

Electric Cardioversion in Older Adults. Is Sedation Using Propofol Safe in the Absence of the Direct Anesthetist's Assistance?

Aims: This study aimed to assess the safety of electric cardioversion in the absence of anesthetists assistance. We also evaluated the efficacy and safety of this procedure in older adults (≥80 years) compared to younger populations. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the data of patients who underwent electric cardioversion at our cardiology department. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to age: ≥ 80 years and <80 years old. Results: The study included 218 participants, 73 were aged 80 years or more (mean age: 84.8 years), and 145 were younger than 80 years (mean age: 66.7 years). Electric cardioversion was effective in 97.3% of older patients and 96.5% of younger patients (P = 1.00). No thromboembolic complications were observed in either of the groups. Asystole >5 s occurred immediately after shock in 4.1% of older and 2.1% of younger patients (P = .405). Propofol was used as a sedative, with a mean dose of 0.83 mg/kg versus 0.93 mg/kg, in older and younger patients, respectively. Intubation, medical intervention, or other advanced resuscitation techniques were not required. During hospitalization, arrhythmia recurred in 9.6% and 12.4% of the older and younger patients, respectively (P = .537). Conclusions: Electrical cardioversion is an effective and safe procedure regardless of patient age. Sedation with propofol administered by cardiologists was safe. Adverse events were not considered serious or reversible.

The clinical and economic impact of extended battery longevity of a substernal extravascular implantable cardioverter defibrillator.

INTRODUCTION: The extravascular implantable cardioverter defibrillator (EV ICD) has extended projected battery longevity compared to the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD). This study used modeling to characterize the need for generator changes, long-term complications, and overall costs for both the EV ICD and S-ICD in healthcare systems of various countries. METHODS: Battery longevity data were modeled using a Markov model from averages reported in device labeling for the S-ICD and with engineering estimates based on real life usage from EV ICD Pivotal Study patient data to introduce variability. Clinical demographic data were derived from published literature. The primary outcomes were defined as the number of generator replacement surgeries, complications, and total healthcare system costs due to battery depletion over the expected lifetime of patients receiving EV ICD or S-ICD therapy. RESULTS: Average modeled battery longevity was determined to be 7.3 years for the S-ICD versus 11.8 years for the EV ICD. The probability of a complication after a replacement procedure was 1.4%, with an operative mortality rate of 0.02%. The use of EV ICD was associated with 1.4-1.6 fewer replacements on average over an expected patient lifetime as compared to S-ICD and a 24.3%-26.0% reduction in cost. A one-way sensitivity analysis of the model for the US healthcare system found that use of an EV ICD resulted in a reduction in replacement surgeries of greater than 1 (1.1-1.6) along with five-figure cost savings in all scenarios ($18 602-$40 948). CONCLUSION: The longer projected battery life of the EV ICD has the potential to meaningfully reduce long-term morbidity and healthcare resources related to generator changes from the perspective of multiple diverse healthcare systems.

Detecting deceased patients on cardiac device remote monitoring: A case series and management guide for cardiac device services.

BACKGROUND: Remote monitoring (RM) of implantable cardiac devices provides substantial and complex information, presenting new challenges such as detection of a patient's death. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe RM transmissions indicating death and propose a management strategy for services. METHODS: The study included consecutive ambulatory outpatients whose deaths were detected via RM. Clinical and device data were collected from electronic records, and ethical approval was obtained from the service's institutional review board. RESULTS: Over a 9-year period (2014-2023), 28 patients were detected. The deceased patients had implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, pacemakers, and implantable loop recorders. In 54% of the cases, the patient's death had already been recognized. Alert transmissions indicating death were commonly related to ventricular arrhythmia events, but also due to lead measurements, and implantable loop recorder battery status. Several diagnostic features may indicate a patient's death. The most reliable was the presenting electrogram, demonstrating base rate pacing with no capture. Device diagnostics, lead parameters, and arrhythmia recordings may indicate death; however, not all cases present with recordings and diagnosis may not be conclusive. A majority (82%) had ventricular arrhythmia at the time of death. In cases where defibrillator shocks were delivered, the arrhythmia reinitiated shortly after successful cardioversion. Delayed therapy was observed, and some patients did not receive defibrillator shocks because of discriminators or because the arrhythmia rate fell below the shock zone. CONCLUSION: Detecting a patient death via RM presents unique challenges and considerations for services. Standard operational policies and legal consultation should be established to address the implications.

Hypotension and respiratory events related to electrical cardioversion for atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter in the emergency department.

INTRODUCTION: Electrical cardioversion for atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter (AF/AFL) is common in the ED. Our previous work showed that hypotension and respiratory events were important adverse events that occurred in patients undergoing electrical cardioversion for AF/AFL. The purpose of this study was to examine if (1) beta-blockers or calcium channel blocker use prior to ECV were associated with hypotension and (2) medications used for procedural sedation were associated with respiratory events. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of pooled study data from four previous multicentred studies on AF/AFL. We conducted a multivariable logistic regression to examine predictors of hypotension and respiratory adverse events. RESULTS: There were 1736 patients who received ECV. A hypotensive event occurred in 62 (3.6%) patients. There was no significant difference in the odds of a hypotensive event in patients who received a beta-blocker or calcium channel blocker in the ED compared to no rate control. Procedural sedation with fentanyl (OR 2.01 95% CI 1.15-3.51) and home beta-blocker use (OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.14-3.21) were significantly associated with hypotensive events. A respiratory event occurred in 179 (10.3%) patients. Older age (OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.30- 3.15) and receiving midazolam for procedural sedation were found to be significantly associated with respiratory events (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.02-3.88). CONCLUSION: Beta-blocker or calcium channel blocker use prior to ECV for AF/AFL was not associated with hypotension. However, sedation with fentanyl and home beta-blocker use was associated with hypotension. The use of midazolam for procedural sedation was significantly associated with respiratory events.

RéSUMé: INTRODUCTION: La cardioversion électrique pour la fibrillation auriculaire / flutter auriculaire (AF / AFL) est fréquente aux urgences. Nos travaux précédents ont montré que l'hypotension et les événements respiratoires étaient des événements indésirables importants qui se sont produits chez les patients subissant une cardioversion électrique pour AF / AFL. Le but de cette étude était d'examiner si 1) les bêtabloquants ou les inhibiteurs calciques utilisés avant l'ECV étaient associés à l'hypotension et 2) les médicaments utilisés pour la sédation procédurale sont associés à des événements respiratoires. MéTHODES: Il s'agissait d'une analyse secondaire des données d'études regroupées de quatre études multicentriques précédentes sur l'AF/AFL. Nous avons effectué une régression logistique multivariée pour examiner les prédicteurs de l'hypotension et des événements indésirables respiratoires. RéSULTATS: Il y avait 1736 patients qui ont reçu ECV. Un événement hypotenseur s'est produit dans 62 (3,6%) patients. Il n'y avait pas de différence significative dans la probabilité d'un événement hypotenseur chez les patients qui ont reçu un bêtabloquant ou un inhibiteur calcique à l'urgence par rapport à aucun contrôle de taux. La sédation procédurale avec du fentanyl (RC 2,01 à 95 %, IC 1,15 à 3,51) et l'utilisation de bêtabloquants à domicile (RC 1,92, IC à 95 %, 1,14 à 3,21) étaient significativement associées à des événements hypotensifs. Un événement respiratoire est survenu chez 179 (10,3 %) patients. Un âge plus avancé (RC 2,02, IC à 95 % : 1,30 à 3,15) et la réception de midazolam pour sédation procédurale étaient significativement associés à des événements respiratoires (RC 1,99, IC à 95 % 1,02-3,88). CONCLUSIONS: L'utilisation d'un bêtabloquant ou d'un inhibiteur calcique avant l'ECV pour l'AF/AFL n'était pas associée à l'hypotension. Cependant, la sédation avec du fentanyl et l'utilisation de bêtabloquants à domicile étaient associées à l'hypotension. L'utilisation du midazolam pour la sédation procédurale était significativement associée aux événements respiratoires.