Asad, Zain Ul Abideen

ABSTRACT Background Disparities in management of atrial fibrillation in rural and urban hospitals across the U.S. have been reported. However, studies investigating disparities regarding outcomes and complications after left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) based on hospital location are lacking. Objective To evaluate differences in outcomes and complications related to LAAO among rural and urban hospitals. Methods The National Inpatient Sample was used to identify patients who underwent LAAO implantations in the U.S. from 2016−2020. Study endpoints assessed included inpatient complications, outcomes, and resource utilization after LAAO procedures among rural and urban hospitals. Results From 2016−2020, there were a total of 87 315 and 1985 LAAO device placements in urban and rural hospitals, respectively. Baseline characteristics were similar among both groups, with a few exceptions. After multivariable adjustment for confounders, odds of inpatient complications and mortality were similar among both groups. However, rural LAAO recipients experienced greater rates of discharge to an acute care facility (3.3% vs 2.4%, p = 0.01), as well as lower costs (aOR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.49–0.69) and length of stay (aOR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.81–0.98). Conclusions A majority of LAAO implantations occurred in urban hospitals in the U.S. Baseline characteristics and adjusted odds of inpatient complications and mortality were similar in rural and urban recipients. However, important differences were described regarding resource utilization and disposition. Further investigation into the specific factors driving these inequities is encouraged to promote improved access to and outcomes of cardiovascular care for rural residents.

ABSTRACT Background Patients with end‐stage renal disease (ESRD) undergoing dialysis have an increased risk of pacemaker‐related complications due to limited vascular access and increased susceptibility to infection. Leadless pacemakers (LPMs) may mitigate these risks compared with conventional transvenous pacemakers (TPMs), but long‐term comparative data in this population remain limited. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the TriNetX Research Network, including adults (≥ 18 years) with ESRD on dialysis who underwent LPM or TPM implantation between May 2016 and December 2020. Propensity score matching (1:1) was performed using demographics and comorbidities. Outcomes assessed over up to 5 years included all‐cause hospitalization, heart failure hospitalization, device re‐intervention, device‐related complications, infection‐related hospitalization, pacemaker‐induced cardiomyopathy, and all‐cause mortality. Results After matching, 901 patients were included in each group with well‐balanced baseline characteristics. LPM implantation was associated with a significantly lower risk of device re‐intervention compared with TPM (4.1% vs. 9.3%; hazard ratio [HR] 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.28–0.69; p < 0.01). There were no significant differences between groups in all‐cause hospitalization (65.5% vs. 68.3%; p = 0.22), heart failure hospitalization (26.9% vs. 30.2%; p = 0.13), all‐cause mortality (37.5% vs. 35.3%; p = 0.34), device‐related complications (14.5% vs. 14.3%; p = 0.94), infection‐related hospitalization (1.6% vs. 2.1%; p = 0.35), or pacemaker‐induced cardiomyopathy (9.0% vs. 8.6%; p = 0.66). Conclusion In a large, propensity‐matched cohort of patients with ESRD on dialysis, LPMs were associated with fewer device re‐interventions and comparable long‐term clinical outcomes compared with TPMs.

ABSTRACT Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) and is associated with increased morbidity, heart failure (HF) exacerbations, and adverse long‐term outcomes. Although catheter ablation is an established rhythm‐control strategy, data comparing its long‐term clinical outcomes with anti‐arrhythmic drug (AAD) therapy in patients with HCM remain limited. Objective To compare long‐term clinical outcomes of catheter ablation versus medical therapy with AADs in patients with HCM and AF. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the TriNetX Research Network, a global federated database of electronic health records. Adult patients with HCM and AF between January 2010 and December 2020 were identified and stratified according to treatment with catheter ablation or AAD therapy. Outcomes included all‐cause mortality, HF exacerbations, AAD‐related adverse events, all‐cause hospitalization, ischemic stroke, repeat ablation, need for cardioversion, need for long‐term AAD use, and atrioventricular nodal ablation. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to balance baseline characteristics. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs). Results After PSM, 3144 patients were included (1572 in each cohort) with a mean follow‐up of approximately 3.4 years. Catheter ablation was associated with lower all‐cause mortality compared with AAD therapy (9.5% vs. 14.8%; HR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.49–0.74; p < 0.001). Ablation was also associated with reduced risk of HF exacerbations (38.4% vs. 43.3%; HR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.71–0.88; p < 0.001) and fewer AAD‐related adverse events (8.4% vs. 11.2%; HR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.55–0.93; p = 0.011). Rates of all‐cause hospitalization (HR: 0.93; p = 0.11) and ischemic stroke (HR: 0.78; p = 0.10) were similar between groups. Conclusion In this large real‐world cohort of patients with HCM and AF, catheter ablation was associated with lower mortality, reduced HF hospitalizations, and decreased AAD therapy‐related adverse events, as compared with medical therapy. These findings suggest that catheter ablation may provide meaningful clinical benefits in selected patients with HCM and AF, although prospective studies are needed to confirm these observations.

ABSTRACT Introduction Frailty is increasingly recognized as an important determinant of outcomes in cardiovascular disease, yet its population‐level impact among patients hospitalized with cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections remains incompletely defined. We examined the prevalence of frailty and its association with clinical outcomes and utilization of transvenous lead removal (TLR) in a contemporary national cohort. Methods and Results We analyzed the National Readmissions Database from 2016–2021 to identify adults hospitalized for CIED infections. Frailty was defined using the Johns Hopkins adjusted clinical groups frailty‐defining diagnoses. Of 288,402 patients hospitalized with CIED infections, 25.1% were classified as frail. Frail patients experienced significantly higher in‐hospital mortality (10.8% vs. 4.6%), 30‐day mortality (9.2% vs. 5.5%), complications, longer length of stay, lower rates of discharge home, and higher 30‐day readmissions compared with non‐frail patients (all p < 0.01). TLR was performed less frequently in frail patients (10.8% vs. 13.4%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.80, 95% CI 0.76–0.83). On adjusted analyses, TLR was independently associated with lower in‐hospital mortality, 30‐day mortality, and 30‐day readmissions in both frail and non‐frail patients. Conclusion Among patients hospitalized with CIED infections, TLR was independently associated with lower mortality and readmissions in both frail and non‐frail patients, despite lower utilization in frail individuals. Frailty was common (25.1%) and independently associated with significantly worse outcomes. These findings highlight important associations between frailty, treatment patterns, and outcomes that warrant prospective evaluation.

ABSTRACT Background Transvenous lead removal (TLR) in patients with a history of mediastinal radiation poses unique challenges due to potential radiation‐induced fibrosis, vascular changes, and anatomical distortion, which may increase procedural complexity and complication risk. However, contemporary data on clinical outcomes in this population remain limited. Methods We analyzed the National Readmissions Database (2016–2021) to identify adults (≥ 18 years) undergoing TLR. Patients were stratified by prior mediastinal radiation. Baseline characteristics were compared using standard statistical tests. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between prior mediastinal radiation and in‐hospital outcomes, 30‐day mortality, and 30‐day readmissions after adjustment for demographics and comorbidities. Results A total of 48,985 patients underwent TLR, of whom 735 (1.5%) had a history of mediastinal radiation. Compared with patients without radiation, those with prior radiation were older (70.1 vs. 66.2 years, p < 0.01), were more frequently females (38.2% vs. 31.6%, p < 0.01), and had higher rates of valvular heart disease, atrial fibrillation, and peripheral vascular disease. Adjusted analyses demonstrated no increased risk of in‐hospital mortality (2.3% vs. 3.4%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.41–1.18, p = 0.29) or major complications, including cardiac arrest, pericardial complications, vascular injury, pulmonary complications, or embolic events. Similarly, (3.6% vs. 5.3%; aOR 0.76, 95% CI 0.48–1.43, p = 0.35) and 30‐day all‐cause readmissions (8.7% vs. 9.1%; aOR 0.81, 95% CI 0.64–1.28, p = 0.70) were not significantly different between groups. Subgroup analyses by indication for TLR (infection vs. mechanical complication) revealed no differences in outcomes. Conclusion Despite theoretical concerns, prior mediastinal radiation was not associated with excess procedural risk or worse short‐term outcomes after TLR. These findings may inform procedural planning and risk counseling in clinical practice.

ABSTRACT Background Early catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) improves outcomes, but the optimal timing, especially in heart failure (HF) subtypes, remains unclear. Objective To evaluate the impact of ablation timing on outcomes in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Methods We used the TriNetX database (2010–2024) to identify HF patients with AF who underwent ablation. Patients were classified as early ablation (≤ 1 year of first AF diagnosis) or delayed ablation (1–3 years), with propensity score matching (PSM) applied to balance the baseline characteristics. The primary outcome was AF recurrence, defined by repeat ablation, direct current cardioversion (DCCV), or antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) use after a 3‐month blanking period. Secondary outcomes included stroke, hospitalization, and mortality over 5 years. Results After PSM, delayed ablation was associated with higher AF recurrence in both HFrEF (HR = 1.28, p < 0.001) and HFpEF (HR = 1.21, p = 0.02), as seen in multivariate analysis. In HFrEF, delayed ablation was associated with higher incidence of re‐do ablation, AAD use, and DCCV, while in HFpEF, higher recurrence with delayed ablation was associated with increased AAD use. Both cohorts had similar stroke and mortality rates between early and delayed ablation. Conclusions Delayed ablation in HFrEF and HFpEF was linked to higher AF recurrence, driven by increased redo ablations, DCCV, AAD use in HFrEF, and higher AAD use in HFpEF. Stroke, HF hospitalization and mortality rates were similar, suggesting earlier ablation may enhance rhythm control over other outcomes.

Background: Ventricular tachycardia (VT) is a major contributor to death among ischemic heart disease (IHD) patients. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we evaluate the efficacy of catheter ablation in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. Methods: We conducted a meta-analysis by searching the electronic database up to April 2025. Seven studies, including 1192 patients, were identified. A random-effect model was used to estimate pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Trial sequential analysis was conducted to assess sample size adequacy. Results: Among Ischemic heart disease patients with ICDs, VT ablation was associated with a significant reduction in ICD shocks (RR = 0.50, 95% CI [0.34–0.74]), a trend toward reduced VT storm (RR = 0.64, 95% CI [0.40–1.04], p = 0.07), and lower rates of cardiovascular hospitalization (RR = 0.73, 95% CI [0.53–1.01], p = 0.06) compared to ICD alone. However, no significant differences were observed when compared to patients receiving ICD plus antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs). Additionally, VT ablation showed no significant impact on mortality or VT/VF recurrence compared to either ICD alone or ICD with AADs. Trial Sequential Analysis provided conclusive evidence for VT/VF recurrence outcomes, while further data are required for other outcomes. Conclusion: Among ischemic heart disease patients with ICD, VT ablation reduces ICD shocks, VT storm, and cardiovascular hospitalizations compared to ICD-only, but offers no significant advantage over ICD combined with antiarrhythmic drugs. VT ablation does not impact mortality or the recurrence of VT/VF. Trial Sequential Analysis confirmed conclusive evidence for VT/VF recurrence, while additional data is needed for other outcomes.

Background: Early catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) improves outcomes, but the optimal timing, especially in heart failure (HF) subtypes, remains unclear. Objective: To evaluate the impact of ablation timing on outcomes in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Methods: We used the TriNetX database (2010–2024) to identify HF patients with AF who underwent ablation. Patients were classified as early ablation (≤1 year of first AF diagnosis) or delayed ablation (1–3 years), with propensity score matching (PSM) applied to balance the baseline characteristics. The primary outcome was AF recurrence, defined by repeat ablation, direct current cardioversion (DCCV), or antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) use after a 3-month blanking period. Secondary outcomes included stroke, hospitalization, and mortality over 5 years. Results: After PSM, delayed ablation was associated with higher AF recurrence in both HFrEF (HR 1.25, p < 0.001) and HFpEF (HR 1.27, p = 0.01), as seen in multivariate analysis. In HFrEF, delayed ablation was associated with higher incidence of re-do ablation, AAD use, and DCCV, while in HFpEF, higher recurrence with delayed ablation was associated with increased AAD use. Both cohorts had similar stroke and mortality rates between early and delayed ablation. Conclusions: Delayed ablation in HFrEF and HFpEF was linked to higher AF recurrence, driven by increased redo ablations, DCCV, AAD use in HFrEF, and higher AAD use in HFpEF. Stroke and mortality rates were similar, suggesting earlier ablation may enhance rhythm control without affecting long-term survival.

ABSTRACT Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a prevalent arrhythmia that frequently coexists with cardiomyopathy, leading to deteriorated cardiovascular outcomes. Analyzing the trends associated with these conditions is essential for improving prevention strategies and management practices. Methods CDC WONDER (1999–2023) data were analyzed to assess AF with cardiomyopathy‐related mortality in patients aged ≥ 25. Using Joinpoint regression analysis, we calculated age‐adjusted mortality rates (AAMRs) per 100,000 patients and average annual percentage changes (AAPCs) to analyze mortality trends. Results AF with cardiomyopathy is responsible for 126,377 deaths among adults aged 25 and older. Alarmingly, AAMRs have surged from 1.8 per 100,000 in 1999 to 3.0 in 2023 (AAPC: 2.11, p < 0.001). The upward trend remains pronounced, particularly between 2016 and 2021, with an annual percentage change of 6.17 ( p = 0.02). Disparities in mortality rates are striking. Men face a higher AAMR than women (3.1 vs. 1.5), and Black individuals bear the heaviest burden at 2.4, closely followed by Whites at 2.3. Regionally, Vermont stands out with the highest AAMR at 3.6, while New York reports the lowest at 1.3. Both rural and urban areas maintain equal AAMRs of 2.1, yet the increase in rural regions is particularly concerning, reflecting an AAPC of 2.44 compared to 1.78 in urban settings. Conclusion The rising mortality rates from AF with cardiomyopathy in patients, particularly among men, Black individuals, and rural residents, demand urgent action. These concerning trends underscore a public health crisis that must be addressed.

ABSTRACT Background Patients with cancer undergoing cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation face unique challenges. This study evaluates the outcomes and implications of CIED implantation in this population. Methods Using data from the National Readmission Database (NRD) from 2016 to 2019, we analyzed CIED implantations in patients aged ≥18 years, categorized by cancer status: no cancer, historical cancer, and active cancer. Multivariable logistic and linear regression models assessed associations with in‐hospital, 30‐day, and 90‐day outcomes, adjusting for various patient characteristics. Results A total of 748,957 CIED procedures were analyzed among which 13.3% were in patients with historical cancer and 3.8% with active cancer. Active cancer was linked to higher odds of pacemaker implantation but lower odds for ICD and CRT devices. Patients with active cancer experienced higher index hospitalization mortality (aOR 1.68; 1.50–1.89; p < 0.001), major adverse cardiovascular events (aOR 1.07; 1.02–1.14; p = 0.01), bleeding (aOR 1.36; 1.27–1.46; p < 0.01), and sepsis‐related (aOR 1.31; 1.19–1.44; p < 0.01) complications, with increased readmission rates at 30 (aOR 1.37; 1.30–1.44; p < 0.01) and 90 days (aOR 1.37; 1.31–1.44; p < 0.01) compared to those without cancer. Historical cancer was associated with better outcomes. Key predictors of adverse outcomes included chronic heart failure, kidney disease, cerebrovascular disease, and protein‐calorie malnutrition. Conclusions Patients with active cancer undergoing CIED implantation have an increased risk of in‐hospital complications and readmissions as compared to those without cancer.