Patel, Harsh

Abstract Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is relatively less frequent in younger patients (age<50). Recently, studies have suggested that early restoration of sinus rhythm may lead to improved outcomes compared with rate control. Methods: We included all hospitalized patients between 18 and 50 years with a diagnosis of AF from the Nationwide Readmission Database 2016-2017 from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. Demographic and comorbidity data were collected and analyzed. Outcomes assessed included one-year AF readmission rates, all-cause readmission, ischemic stroke, and all-cause mortality. Subgroup analyses were performed for all demographic and comorbidity variables.Results: Overall, 52,598 patients (medium age 44, interquartile range 38-48, female 25.7%) were included in the study, including 2,146 (4.0%) who underwent catheter ablation for AF. Patients who underwent catheter ablation had a significantly lower rate of readmission for AF or any cause at one year (adjusted hazard ratios (HR) of 0.52 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.43-0.63] and HR of 0.81 [95% CI: 0.72 - 0.89], respectively). There was no difference in 1-year readmission for stroke or all-cause mortality between the two groups. Subgroup analyses showed a consistent reduction in the risk of AF readmission among major demographic and comorbidity subgroups.Conclusion: Catheter ablation in young patients with AF was associated with a reduction in 1-year AF related and all-cause readmissions. These data merit further prospective investigation for validation.

Background: Different arrhythmias have been reported in patients with COVID-19 due to the complication of the disease, and medications used in the management of COVID-19. Remdesivir was approved by FDA for the management of COVID-19 patients in October 2020. There are several case reports suggesting remdesivir causing bradyarrhythmia in COVID-19 patients. Objective: To increase the knowledge and awareness among healthcare professions (HCPs) about the risk of arrhythmias associated with the use of remdesivir. Methods: We used the FDA Adverse Events Reporting System (FAERS) database to find bradyarrhythmia as a reported adverse event (AE) due to remdesivir until October,2021. Total 6,504 events were reported, out of which 5,996 (92.2%) were reported by HCPs. These AEs were included and further analyzed. Results: Out of 5,996 AEs reported with remdesivir, total 537 (9.0%) events were bradyarrhythmia. There were 74 (1.27%) events reported for atrial fibrillation, and 24 (0.04%) for ventricular tachycardia attributed to the use of remdesivir. Reported events of bradyarrhythmia were further divided and analyzed into men vs women, and different age groups of years 18-64, 65-85, &gt;85. Total events of bradyarrhythmia among men (238, 6.5%) vs women (141, 6.4%) were not significantly different. Among all the age groups, more events were reported in younger women in the age group of 18-64 (12.3%) vs 65-85 (7.9%) vs &gt;85 (6.9%). Conclusion: Multiple studies have shown COVID-19 associated tachyarrhythmias, likely secondary to the myocardial damage due to hypoxia. Few studies have also suggested bradyarrhythmias in these patients. Our analysis of the FAERS database also showed many reported AEs of bradyarrhythmia attributed to the use of remdesivir. Postulated mechanisms include; medication side effects, damage to the SA node as a complication of the COVID-19 disease process, and electrolyte imbalance due to the renal failure. Close surveillance of these patients with early diagnosis can lead to prompt discontinuation of the medication, which can further decrease the mortality related to bradyarrhythmias. Further studies are required to identify the at-risk population and to better understand the risk of bradyarrhythmia associated with remdesivir.

Background: Sacubitril-valsartan is a combination of a neprilysin inhibitor and an angiotensin II receptor blocker respectively. Sacubitril-valsartan has become a standard of care in the treatment of patients with Congestive Heart Failure (CHF) with reduced EF. During its clinical trials and upon review of U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval, sacubitril-valsartan exhibited a side effect profile including hyperkalemia, hypotension, renal dysfunction, and angioedema. Recently, sacubitril-valsartan was also approved for the treatment of CHF patients with preserved EF. Objective: In view of new indications and increased usage, it is important to establish the updated safety profile of sacubitril-valsartan in the general population since the PARADIGM-HF trial. Methods: We explored reported Adverse Events (AEs) of sacubitril-valsartan using the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System. A total of 57,958 AEs were reported until August 2021. Total of 16,658 (28.7%) AEs were reported by HCPs, which were further analyzed. AEs were analyzed in men (56.7%) vs women (25.3%), and also in 3 age groups of 18-64, 65-85, >85. Results: Out of 16,658 AEs, the most frequently reported AE was hypotension (17.2%). Other commonly reported AEs were renal dysfunction (14.3%), allergic reactions including angioedema (10.8%), GI distress (8.8%), tachyarrhythmias (5.8%), hyperkalemia (4.5%), and cough (3.0%). Out of 16,658 AEs, 11,631 (69%) were deemed serious and 4,422 (26.5%) resulted in hospitalization. Deaths were attributed to 3,909 serious AEs (23.5%). In the age group of 18-64, events of atrial fibrillation were less among women compared to men (1% vs 3%), while total events of ventricular tachycardia were noted more among men compared to women (2% vs 0.5%). Conclusion: Most of the reported AEs were consistent with the observed AEs from PARADIGM-HF except for tachyarrhythmia. There are few reports documenting arrhythmias followed by the use of sacubitril-valsartan, however, the clear mechanism is unknown. Despite the wide use of sacubitril-valsartan, there is currently limited data on the safety profile. In future with the increasing use, further randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are needed to better understand the safety profile of the medication.

Introduction: In the last two decades, risk factors, prevalence, and mortality due to coronary artery disease in young adults is on the rise. Hypothesis: Assess the prevalence, trends, and economic burden of ventricular tachycardia (VT) in young adults (18-44 years). Methods: The Nationwide Inpatient Sample was explored for hospitalizations with VT in patients (Age 19-44) between 2005-2018 and divided among 3 groups of the quadrennial period using validated ICD-9 and ICD-10 CM codes. The Pearson chi-square test and Student’s t-test were used for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. We assessed the temporal trends of mortality in VT as well as trends of VT stratified by age, sex, and race by the linear-by-linear association test (Figure 1). Results: Out of 5,156,326 patients were admitted with VT between 2005-2018, 309,636 were in young adults. Among them, 102,433 were admitted between 2005-2009 (mean age 36.1±6.99; 61% male, 58.5% white), 109,591 between 2010-2014 (mean age 35.5±7.16; 59% male, 54.2% white), and 97,495 between 2015-2018 (mean age 35.4±7.00; 60% male, 52.3% white) (p<0.0001). In the young adults with VT, all-cause mortality was 7.37% from 2005-2009, 7.85% from 2010-2014 (6.5% relative increase from 2005-2009), and 8.98% from 2015-2018 (relative increase of 14.4% from 2010-2014) (p<0.0001). Inflation adjusted cost increased over the years [$12,177 in 2005-2009; $13,249 in 2010-2014; $15,807 in 2015-2018; p<0.0001)]. Conclusions: The prevalence of VT in young individuals is rising. VT-related mortality and healthcare utilization costs are on the rise in the study period. VT burden and poor outcomes were notable for Black males. Further studies are required for targeted screening and preventative measures in young adults.

Introduction: Real-world data on the significance of adding a defibrillator to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT-D) in patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) are limited. Hypothesis: CRT-D is associated with a lower risk of mortality and heart failure (HF) readmissions compared to CRT-P in NICM. Methods: We identified patients with NICM who underwent CRT-D and CRT without an ICD (CRT-P) by analyzing the nationwide readmission database from October 2015- December 2018 and using appropriate ICD-10 CM codes. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for the confounders. Kaplan Meier curves were utilized for time to event analysis. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to generate hazard ratios. All-cause mortality at 6 months was the primary outcome whereas readmission due to HF and any other cause at 6 months were defined as secondary outcomes. Results: Post-PSM, 3054 patients with NICM underwent CRT-P, and 2863 patients underwent CRT-D placement. CRT-D did not show any benefit over CRT-P in reducing all-cause mortality at 6 months (2.92% vs. 2.79%, HR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.61-1.16, p=0.29). Similarly, there was no difference in terms of readmissions due to other causes among both groups of patients (36.25% vs. 31.85%, HR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.89-1.08, p=0.77). However, patients with CRT-P implantations had a lower risk of HF readmissions compared to the CRT-D group (10.05% vs. 14.25%, HR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.58-0.79, p<0.0001). Conclusions: The addition of a defibrillator to CRT failed to show a survival benefit in patients with NICM. Moreover, HF readmissions were higher in CRT-D patients compared to CRT-P.

The impact of coronavirus disease, 2019 (COVID-19), has been profound. Though COVID-19 primarily affects the respiratory system, it has also been associated with a wide range of cardiovascular (CV) manifestations portending extremely poor prognosis. The principal hypothesis for CV involvement is through direct myocardial infection and systemic inflammation. We conducted a systematic review of the current literature to provide a foundation for understanding the CV manifestations and outcomes of COVID-19. PubMed and EMBASE databases were electronically searched from the inception of the databases through 27 April 2020. A second literature review was conducted to include major trials and guidelines that were published after the initial search but before submission. The inclusion criteria for studies to be eligible were case reports, case series, and observation studies reporting CV outcomes among patients with COVID-19 infection. This review of the current COVID-19 disease and CV outcomes literature revealed a myriad of CV manifestations with potential avenues for treatment and prevention. Future studies are required to understand on a more mechanistic level the effect of COVID-19 on the myocardium and thus provide avenues to improve mortality and morbidity.

Abstract Background The effectiveness of catheter ablation as a management modality amongst patients with coexisting atrial flutter (AFL) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is scarcely studied. Methods Appropriate ICD 10 codes were applied to the 2016 and 2017 National Readmission Database (NRD) to isolate patients having coexistent AFL and HFrEF including who had undergone an ablation. All-cause mortality at the end of 1 year was used as a primary outcome. Readmission due to AFL, heart failure (HF) and other causes were secondary outcomes. The hazard ratios were generated using Cox regression analysis while the time to event analysis was demonstrated with the Kaplan Meier curves. Results Out of a total of 9966 patients with AFL and HFrEF, 1980 (24.79%) patients underwent catheter ablation. The primary outcome, all-cause mortality (2.8% vs. 4.6%, HR: 0.610, 95% CI: 0.460–0.808, p=0.001) at the end of 1 year was significantly lower. Significant difference was also noted amongst two groups when it came to secondary outcomes such as readmissions due to AFL (1.6% vs. 6.3%, HR: 0.247, 95% CI: 0.173–0.354, p&lt;0.001), HF (8.2% vs. 11.4%, HR: 0.693, 95% CI: 0.587–0.819, p&lt;0.001) and other causes (29.4% vs. 37.1%, HR: 0.735, 95% CI: 0.673–0.804, p&lt;0.001) Conclusion Ablative intervention amongst AFL patients with concomitant HFrEF showed a significant reduction in all-cause mortality. It also leads to significant reductions in readmissions due to AFL, HF and other causes at the end of one year. Outcomes of AFL and HFrEF Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

Abstract Background The availability of real-world data regarding the impact of the catheter ablation in patients with concomitant atrial flutter (AFL) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is limited. Methods 2016 and 2017 National Readmission Database (NRD) was subjected to appropriate ICD-10 codes to identify and extract patients having coexistent atrial flutter and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction including who had undergone ablation. At 1 year, all-cause mortality was utilized as the primary outcome while readmissions due to AFL, heart failure (HF) and any other causes were designated as secondary outcomes. Kaplan Meier curves were used for a time to event analysis. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to generate hazard ratios. Results Out of a total 6099 patients with AFL and HFpEF, 906 (14.85%) underwent catheter ablation. At 1 year all cause mortality (3%, vs. 4.4%, HR: 0.661, 95% CI: 0.444–0.985, p=0.042) and readmissions due to AFL (2.3% vs. 5.3%, HR: 0.424, 95% CI: 0.272–0.661, p&lt;0.001) were significantly less among ablation group. Readmission due to HF (9.3% vs. 9.7%, HR: 0.938, 95% CI: 0.745–1.182, p=0.587) and other causes (37% vs.40.3%, HR: 0.926, 95% CI: 0.825–1.040, p=0.193) did not show any significant difference in outcomes at the end of 1 year. Conclusion The utilization of catheter ablation amongst AFL patients with concomitant HFpEF showed a significant reduction in all-cause mortality and readmission due to AFL. However, it did not show any significant changes in readmissions due to HF or other causes at the end of one year. Outcomes of AFL and HFpEF Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None