Catheter Ablation in End-Stage Heart Failure with Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: The role of catheter ablation in patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation and end-stage heart failure is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a single-center, open-label trial in Germany that involved patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation and end-stage heart failure who were referred for heart transplantation evaluation. Patients were assigned to receive catheter ablation and guideline-directed medical therapy or medical therapy alone. The primary end point was a composite of death from any cause, implantation of a left ventricular assist device, or urgent heart transplantation. RESULTS: A total of 97 patients were assigned to the ablation group and 97 to the medical-therapy group. The trial was stopped for efficacy by the data and safety monitoring board 1 year after randomization was completed. Catheter ablation was performed in 81 of 97 patients (84%) in the ablation group and in 16 of 97 patients (16%) in the medical-therapy group. After a median follow-up of 18.0 months (interquartile range, 14.6 to 22.6), a primary end-point event had occurred in 8 patients (8%) in the ablation group and in 29 patients (30%) in the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.11 to 0.52; P<0.001). Death from any cause occurred in 6 patients (6%) in the ablation group and in 19 patients (20%) in the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.12 to 0.72). Procedure-related complications occurred in 3 patients in the ablation group and in 1 patient in the medical-therapy group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with atrial fibrillation and end-stage heart failure, the combination of catheter ablation and guideline-directed medical therapy was associated with a lower likelihood of a composite of death from any cause, implantation of a left ventricular assist device, or urgent heart transplantation than medical therapy alone. (Funded by Else Kröner-Fresenius-Stiftung; CASTLE-HTx ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04649801.).

Prognosis of patients in end-stage heart failure with atrial fibrillation treated with ablation: Insights from CASTLE-HTx.

BACKGROUND: The CASTLE-HTx trial demonstrated the benefit of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation compared with medical therapy in decreasing mortality, need for left ventricular assist device implantation, or heart transplantation (HTx) in patients with end-stage heart failure (HF). OBJECTIVE: This analysis aimed to identify risk factors related to adverse outcomes in patients with end-stage HF and to assess the impact of ablation. METHODS: The CASTLE-HTx protocol randomized 194 patients with end-stage HF and AF to ablation vs medical therapy. We identified left ventricular ejection fraction <30%, New York Heart Association class ≥III, and AF burden >50% as predictors for the primary end point. The CASTLE-HTx risk score assigned weights to these risk factors. Patients with a risk score ≥3 were identified as high risk. RESULTS: The patients were assigned to low-risk (89 [45.9%]) and high-risk (105 [54.1%]) groups. After a median follow-up of 18 months, a primary end point event occurred in 6 and 31 patients of the low- and high-risk groups (hazard ratio, 4.98; 95% confidence interval, 2.08-11.9). The incidence rate (IR) difference between ablation and medical therapy was much larger in high-risk patients (8/49 [IR, 11.4] vs 23/56 [IR, 36.1]) compared with low-risk patients (2/48 [IR, 2.6] vs 4/41 [IR, 6.3]). The IR difference for ablation was significantly higher in high-risk patients (24.69) compared with low-risk patients (3.70). CONCLUSION: The absolute benefit of ablation is more pronounced in high-risk patients, but low-risk patients may also benefit. The CASTLE-HTx risk score identifies patients with end-stage HF who will particularly benefit from ablation.

Efficacy and safety of the pulsed infusions of levosimendan in outpatients with advanced heart failure (LevoRep) study: a multicentre randomized trial.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to determine whether intermittent ambulatory treatment with levosimendan would improve functional capacity, quality of life, and event-free survival in patients with advanced heart failure. METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, parallel-group trial of pulsed infusions of levosimendan in 120 outpatients with advanced heart failure (EF ≤35%, NYHA class III or IV). The study was conducted at 11 centres in Austria, Greece, and Germany. Levosimendan (0.2 µg/kg/min) or placebo was administered for 6 h at 2-week intervals over 6 weeks, in addition to standard care therapy. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a ≥20% improvement in the 6 min walk test and a ≥15% score increase on the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire at the end of the 24-week study period. Secondary outcomes included event-free survival after 24 weeks. Analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis. The primary endpoint was reached in 19% of patients receiving levosimendan and 15.8% of patients receiving placebo (odds ratio 1.25; 95% confidence interval 0.44-3.59; P = 0.810). Cardiac death (four vs. one), heart transplants (two vs. one), and acute heart failure (14 vs. nine) were more frequent with placebo as compared with levosimendan. The incidence of side effects was comparable between groups. CONCLUSION: Intermittent ambulatory treatment with levosimendan in patients with advanced heart failure did not improve significantly functional capacity or quality of life as compared with placebo. An adequately powered, event-driven trial is warranted to enlarge on our findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01065194.

Asymptomatic infection with novel influenza A/H1N1 virus in a heart transplant recipient.

The spectrum of manifestations and management of the novel influenza A/H1N1 virus in transplanted patients is currently of major concern. Asymptomatic infections are less common yet important for spreading of the virus and thus affect containment measures. To our knowledge, there are no reports of asymptomatic infections with influenza A/H1N1 in immunosuppressed patients. We present the first case of a young heart transplant recipient who remained asymptomatic despite positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) after exposure to individuals with influenza A/H1N1.

Prostaglandin E1 testing in heart failure-associated pulmonary hypertension enables transplantation: the PROPHET study.

BACKGROUND: Elevated pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) is relevant to prognosis of congestive heart failure and heart transplantation. Proof of reversibility by pharmacologic testing in potential transplantation candidates is important because it indicates a reduced probability of right ventricular failure or death in the early post-transplant period. This study aimed to clarify the possible extent of acute reversibility of elevated PVR in a large, consecutive cohort of heart transplant candidates. METHODS: This study included 208 consecutive patients (age 52 +/- 10 years, 89% men and 11% women, ejection fraction 21 +/- 9%, Vo2max 12.6 +/- 4.2 ml/kg/min) being evaluated for heart transplantation in 7 transplant centers in Germany and Switzerland. Testing was performed with increasing intravenous doses of prostaglandin E1 (PGE1; average maximum dose 173 +/- 115 ng/kg/min for at least 10 minutes) in 92 patients exhibiting a baseline PVR of > 2.5 Wood units (WU) and/or a transpulmonary gradient (TPG) of > 12 mm Hg. RESULTS: PGE1 testing lowered PVR from 4.1 +/- 2.0 to 2.1 +/- 1.1 WU (p < 0.01), increased cardiac output from 3.8 +/- 1.0 to 5.0 +/- 1.5 liters/min (p < 0.01), and decreased TPG from 14 +/- 4 to 10 +/- 3 mm Hg (p < 0.01), mean pulmonary artery pressure (PAM) from 39 +/- 9 to 29 +/- 9 mm Hg (p < 0.01) and mean pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) from 24 +/- 7 to 19 +/- 9 mm Hg (p < 0.01). Mean aortic pressure (MAP) decreased to 85% and systemic vascular resistance (SVR) to 65% of baseline values (p < 0.01). Symptomatic systemic hypotension was not observed. For the whole population the percentage of patients with PVR > 2.5 WU was reduced from 44.2% to 10.5% with PGE1. PVR decreased in each patient; only 2 patients (1%) remained ineligible for listing because of a final PVR of > 4.0 WU. TPG, ejection fraction and male gender were independent predictors of reversibility of PVR. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated PVR in heart transplant candidates is highly reversible and can be normalized during acute pharmacologic testing with PGE1.