RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Most studies of device-detected atrial fibrillation (AF) have recommended indefinite anticoagulation once a patient crosses a particular threshold for AF duration or burden. However, durations and burdens are known to fluctuate over time, but little is known about the magnitude of spontaneous fluctuations and the potential impact on anticoagulation decisions. OBJECTIVE: To quantify spontaneous fluctuations in AF duration and burden in patients with implantable loop recorders (ILRs) METHODS: We reviewed all ILR interrogations for patients with non-permanent AF at our institution from 2018 to 2023. We excluded patients treated with rhythm control. The duration of longest AF episode at each interrogation was classified as < 6, 6-24, and > 24 h, and the AF burden reported at each interrogation was classified as < 2%, 2%-11.4%, and > 11.4%. RESULTS: Out of 156 patients, the mean age at ILR implant was 70.9 ± 12.5 years, CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4.2 ± 1.8, duration of ILR follow-up was 23.4 ± 11.2 months, and number of ILR interrogations per patient was 18.0 ± 8.9. The duration of longest AF episode at any point during follow-up was < 6 , 6-24 , and > 24 h in 110, 30, and 16 patients, respectively. Among the 30 patients with a longest AF episode of 6-24 h at some point during follow-up, out of 594 total ILR interrogations, only 75 (12%) showed a longest episode of 6-24 h. In the remaining 519 interrogations, the longest episode was < 6 h. In patients with a longest episode of > 24 h at any point during follow-up (n = 16), only 47 out of 320 total ILR interrogations (15%) showed an episode of > 24 h. When evaluating AF burden, 96, 38, and 22 patients had maximum reported AF burdens of < 2%, 2%-11.4%, and > 11.4% at any point during ILR follow-up. Among those with a maximum burden of 2%-11.4% at some point during follow-up (n = 38), out of 707 ILR interrogations, only 76 (11%) showed a burden of 2%-11.4%. In the remaining 631 interrogations, the burden was < 2%. In the 22 patients with a burden > 11.4% at some point during follow-up, only 80 out of 480 interrogations (17%) showed a burden of > 11.4%. In 65% of interrogations, the burden was < 2%. CONCLUSION: Significant, spontaneous fluctuations in AF burden and duration are common in patients with ILRs. Even in patients with AF episodes of 6-24 h or > 24 h at some point during follow-up, the vast majority of interrogations show episodes of < 6 h. Similarly, in patients with burdens of 2%-11.4% or > 11.4% at some point during follow-up, the vast majority of interrogations show burdens of < 2%. More data are needed to determine whether crossing an AF burden or duration threshold once is sufficient to merit lifelong anticoagulation or whether spontaneous fluctuations in AF burden and duration should impact anticoagulation decisions.
RESUMO
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Tricuspid regurgitation is a commonly encountered valvular pathology in patients with trans-tricuspid pacing or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads. Transcatheter tricuspid valve interventions are increasingly performed in patients at high surgical risk. Implantation of these valves can lead to the "jailing" of a trans-tricuspid lead. This practice carries both short- and long-term risks of lead failure and subsequent infection without the ability to perform traditional transvenous lead extraction. Herein, this manuscript reviews available therapeutic options for lead management in patients undergoing transcatheter tricuspid valve interventions. RECENT FINDINGS: The decision to jail a lead may be appropriate in certain high-risk cases, though extraction may be a better option in most cases given the variety of options for re-implant, including leadless pacemakers, valve-sparing systems, epicardial leads, leads placed directly through prosthetic valves, and the completely subcutaneous implantable-defibrillator. A growing number of patients meet the requirement for CIED implantation in the United States. A significant proportion of these patients will have tricuspid valve dysfunction, either related to or independent of their transvenous lead. As with any percutaneous intervention that has shown efficacy, the role of TTVI is also likely to increase as this therapy advances beyond the investigational phase. As such, the role of the heart team in the management of these patients will be increasingly critical in the years to come, and in those patients that have pre-existing CIED leads, we advocate for the involvement of an electrophysiologist in the heart team.
Assuntos
Desfibriladores Implantáveis , Implante de Prótese de Valva Cardíaca , Marca-Passo Artificial , Insuficiência da Valva Tricúspide , Valva Tricúspide , Humanos , Insuficiência da Valva Tricúspide/cirurgia , Valva Tricúspide/cirurgia , Implante de Prótese de Valva Cardíaca/métodos , Cateterismo Cardíaco/métodos , Estimulação Cardíaca Artificial/métodos , Próteses Valvulares Cardíacas , Remoção de Dispositivo/métodosRESUMO
AIMS: Single-connector (DF4) defibrillator leads have become the predominantly implanted transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator lead. However, data on their long-term performance are derived predominantly from manufacturer product performance reports. METHODS AND RESULTS: We reviewed medical records in 5289 patients with DF4 leads between 2011 and 2023 to determine the frequency of lead-related abnormalities. We defined malfunction as any single or combination of electrical abnormalities requiring revision including a sudden increase (≥2×) in stimulation threshold, a discrete jump in high-voltage impedance, or sensing of non-physiologic intervals or noise. We documented time to failure, predictors of failure, and management strategies. Mean follow-up after implant was 4.15 ± 3.6 years (median = 3.63), with 37% of leads followed for >5 years. A total of 80 (1.5%) leads demonstrated electrical abnormalities requiring revision with an average time to failure of 4 ± 2.8 years (median = 3.5). Of the leads that malfunctioned, 62/80 (78%) were extracted and replaced with a new lead and in the other 18 cases, malfunctioned DF4 leads were abandoned, and a new lead implanted. In multivariable models, younger age at implant (OR 1.03 per year; P < 0.001) and the presence of Abbott/St. Jude leads increased the risk of malfunction. CONCLUSION: DF4 defibrillator leads demonstrate excellent longevity with >98.3% of leads followed for at least 5 years still functioning normally. Younger age at implant and lead manufacturer are associated with an increased risk of DF4 lead malfunction. The differences in lead survival between manufacturers require further investigation.
Assuntos
Desfibriladores Implantáveis , Humanos , Desfibriladores Implantáveis/efeitos adversos , Falha de Equipamento , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Data on transvenous (TV) lead-associated superior vena cava (SVC) syndrome are limited. The management of this problem might require a multidisciplinary approach, often involving transvenous lead extraction (TLE) followed by angioplasty and stenting. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe the management and outcome of TV lead-associated SVC syndrome. METHODS: We retrospectively identified patients with a diagnosis of SVC syndrome and TV leads at Emory Healthcare between 2015 and 2023. RESULTS: Fifteen patients with lead-related SVC syndrome were identified. The cohort average age was 50 years. Symptoms included swelling of the face, neck, and upper extremities (67%); shortness of breath (53%); and lightheadedness (40%). Patients had an average of 2 ± 0.7 leads crossing the SVC, with a lead dwell time of 9.8 ± 7.5 years. Thirteen patients were managed with TLE, followed by SVC stenting and angioplasty in 10 and angioplasty alone in 2; 1 patient had no intervention after TLE. One patient was managed with anticoagulation, and another had angioplasty and stenting with lead jailing. One patient experienced SVC perforation and cardiac tamponade during SVC stenting, which was managed successfully with a covered stent and pericardiocentesis. Among the 12 patients with TLE and angioplasty ± stenting, 7 underwent reimplantation of a transvenous lead. Two of those patients had symptoms recurrence, and none of the 5 patients without lead reimplantation had recurrence of symptoms. CONCLUSION: Lead-related SVC syndrome management requires a multidisciplinary approach often including TLE followed by angioplasty and stenting. Avoiding TV lead reimplantation might help reduce symptoms recurrence.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Lead-related venous stenosis and occlusion can complicate the insertion or replacement of transvenous leads in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). A possible solution is to tunnel the lead from the contralateral vasculature to the ipsilateral generator. Procedural complications and long-term outcomes remain unclear with this technique. OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess outcomes of tunneled transvenous leads. METHODS: We retrospectively identified all patients who underwent transvenous CIED lead tunneling to a contralateral pocket at our institution between 2014 and 2024. Clinical characteristics, indications for lead implantation, postoperative complications, and long-term outcomes were collected. RESULTS: We identified that 27 patients underwent transvenous lead tunneling at our institution. Most patients were men (20, 74%) with a mean age of 68.8 ± 18.3 years. Most patients had nonischemic cardiomyopathy (16, 59%) with a mean ejection fraction of 29.3% ± 11.3%. The tunneled leads were coronary sinus leads (20, 74%), followed by defibrillator leads (5, 18.5%) and right ventricular pacing leads (2, 7.4%). Implantation procedures were primarily for device upgrade (18), lead revisions (8), or de novo lead placement (1). No postoperative complications were seen. Patients were followed for a mean of 2.2 ± 1.4 years. One tunneled defibrillator lead (3.7%) had low shock impedance 3 years after implantation, which was monitored and did not require an intervention. CONCLUSION: In patients with ipsilateral venous occlusion, contralateral lead tunneling appears to be an effective and safe approach to manage patients with CIEDs and occluded ipsilateral subclavian veins.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Because of differences in chest wall anatomy, female patients may have higher rates of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) pocket-related complications. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate sex-based outcomes after S-ICD implantation. METHODS: Patients implanted with an S-ICD at Emory Healthcare between 2010 and 2023 were included in the analysis. Patients' clinical characteristics and post-S-ICD implantation complications were collected. RESULTS: There were 429 male patients (68%) and 199 female patients (32%) observed for a median duration of 2.3 years (0.6-4.4 years). Male and female patients had comparable rates of diabetes (28%), end-stage renal disease (29.5%), ejection fraction (30.2% ± 13.4%), and body mass index (29.1 ± 6.6 kg/m2). There was no statistical difference in the incidence of shocks between men and women (26.3% vs 20.1%; P = .09), including appropriate shocks (14.7% vs 12%; P = .98) and inappropriate shocks (11.7% vs 9.5%; P = .98). Pocket-related complications occurred in 21 patients; these included pocket infection (n = 12), wound dehiscence (n = 7), and hematoma requiring drainage (n = 2). Female patients had a significantly higher pocket-related complication rate compared with male patients (7.2% vs 2.5%; P = .016). In controlling for age, body mass index, diabetes, and end-stage renal disease, female patients had higher odds of pocket-related complications compared with male patients (odds ratio, 3.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.27-7.75). Pocket-related complications decreased after 2018 compared with before 2018 (6% vs 2.6%, P = .052), mainly driven by reduction in complications in women (12.3% vs 3.2%; P = .034) but not in men (2.8% vs 2.4%; P = 1). CONCLUSION: In this cohort of S-ICD patients, women had a higher rate of post-S-ICD pocket-related complications that could be explained by sex-based differences in anatomy.
Assuntos
Desfibriladores Implantáveis , Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Fatores Sexuais , Estudos Retrospectivos , Morte Súbita Cardíaca/prevenção & controle , Morte Súbita Cardíaca/epidemiologia , Morte Súbita Cardíaca/etiologia , Idoso , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/prevenção & controle , Seguimentos , Incidência , Resultado do Tratamento , Fatores de Risco , Arritmias Cardíacas/terapiaRESUMO
The risk of thromboembolism in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients remains uncertain and was assessed in this review to better weigh benefits vs. risks of prophylactic anticoagulation in this population. A search was performed through three databases: Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library until 2022. Self-controlled case series, case-control and cohort studies were included, and findings summarized narratively. Meta-analyses for risk of thromboembolism including deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), and myocardial infarction (MI) between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 non-hospitalized patients were conducted. Frequency, incidence rate ratio (IRR), and risk ratio (RR) of stroke were used to assess risk in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients considering the lack of studies to conduct a meta-analysis. Ten studies met inclusion criteria characterized by adult non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Risk of bias was relatively low. Risk of DVT (RR: 1.98 with 95% CI: 1.03-3.83) and PE (OR: 6.72 with 95% CI: 4.81-9.39 and RR: 4.44 with 95% CI: 1.98-9.99) increased in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients compared to controls. Risk of MI (OR: 1.91 with 95% CI: 0.89-4.09) is possibly increased in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients with moderate certainty when compared to controls. A trend in favor of stroke was documented in the first week following infection. Our meta-analyses support the increase in risk of DVT and PE, and likely increase of MI, in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients. The risk of stroke appears significant in the first week following infection but drops to insignificance two weeks later. More studies are needed to establish evidence-based recommendations for prophylactic anticoagulation therapy in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Embolia Pulmonar , Acidente Vascular Cerebral , Tromboembolia , Adulto , Humanos , Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , COVID-19/complicações , Embolia Pulmonar/etiologia , Embolia Pulmonar/induzido quimicamente , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/epidemiologia , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/etiologia , Tromboembolia/epidemiologia , Tromboembolia/etiologiaRESUMO
Background: Patients with heart failure were affected severely by COVID-19. Most heart failure patients are on guideline directed medical therapy, which includes ACE inhibitors (ACEI) and ARBs. These medications were controversial at the beginning of the pandemic due to their interplay with the receptor that SARS-CoV-2 binds in the lungs. We investigated the effect that ACEI and ARB had on patients with hypertension, coronary artery disease, and heart failure. Methods: We recruited 176 patients with COVID-19 infection and cardiovascular comorbidities at the American University of Beirut Medical Center in Lebanon. Of these, 110 patients were taking ACEI or ARB and 66 were not. We collected clinical data and looked at inflammatory markers such as CRP and IL-6 and cardiac markers such as troponin T. We also reported the incidence of ARDS, sepsis, and death of each patient, and compared the 2 groups. Results: We found that patients taking ACEI and ARB had a statistically significant decrease in levels of troponin T, IL-6, and CRP compared to patients not taking these medications (p < 0.05). We found no difference in rates of ARDS, sepsis, or death between the 2 groups. Conclusion: Inhibition of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone-system had no effect on the mortality of patients with COVID-19 and on their overall disease progression. However, it may be beneficial not to stop these medications as they decrease inflammation in the body and the levels of troponin, which are related to increased stress on the heart.