Cha, Yong-Mei

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves systemic metabolomic profile by enhancing left ventricular function. The observational cohort study aimed to investigate the effect of CRT on left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and circulating plasma metabolites in patients who had heart failure with reduced LVEF. METHODS: We prospectively screened patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and nonischemic cardiomyopathy who received CRT with a defibrillator for LVEF ≤35% according to current guidelines. Clinical assessment included echocardiography and device interrogation. Blood samples for metabolomic analysis were collected before CRT and at 6-month follow-up. Plasma was subjected to gas chromatography-mass spectrometry and 1 H nuclear magnetic resonance-based metabolomic analysis. RESULTS: Totally 92 patients were enrolled, with a mean age of 67.3±11.3 years (37.0% female). LVEF was significantly improved from 28.9±7.6% at baseline to 36.0±11.3% at 6 months ( P <0.001) and to 40.1±12.6% at 12 months ( P <0.001). After CRT, 42 metabolite features were significantly decreased compared with the baseline. The ketone bodies, including 3-hydroxybutyrate ( P <0.001) and acetone ( P =0.01), were reduced. A branched-chain amino acid, isoleucine, was also decreased after CRT ( P =0.01). These metabolomic changes were mainly observed in the nonischemic cardiomyopathy group, while the metabolomic profile in the ischemic cardiomyopathy group was characterized by enhanced amino acid oxidation and elevated levels of lactate and pyruvate. The improvement in LVEF positively correlated with the ratio of changes in ketone bodies and isoleucine. CONCLUSIONS: CRT may modulate the systemic plasma metabolomic profile, which correlated with improvement in left ventricular function in patients with severe heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

Abstract Aims The increasing adoption of transcatheter tricuspid valve replacement (TTVR) offers a promising therapeutic option for patients with severe tricuspid regurgitation. However, many of these patients have pre-existing cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), raising concerns about potential lead-related complications. Despite these concerns, limited data exist on the impact of TTVR on CIED integrity and function. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of TTVR on CIED lead function, including pacing thresholds, sensing, and impedance, in patients undergoing TTVR with the EVOQUE valve system. Methods and results A retrospective observational study was conducted at Mayo Clinic Rochester, including 32 consecutive patients who underwent TTVR with pre-existing CIEDs. A total of 32 patients were included, with a mean age of 79.2 ± 8.4 years; 59% were female. A total of 62.5% had a permanent pacemaker, 12.5% had an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, 15.6% had a cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemaker, and 9.4% had a cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator. Following TTVR, 10 (31%) of patients developed lead function changes during a median device follow-up of 210 days (IQR: 43–307 days). The right ventricular lead was primarily affected, with only one case involving an atrial lead. Neither the Ottawa score nor the anatomical lead position reliably predicted lead abnormality (P = 0.86 and P = 0.53, respectively). R-wave sensing changes were the most common lead change observed, affecting 55% of cases. In 67% of these cases, R-wave sensing alterations occurred as an isolated finding, with no significant change in impedance or thresholds, and were managed conservatively without any need for device reprogramming. Four patients (13%) had findings concerning for a lead insulation breach, in which one (3%) required a lead revision. Among five patients with follow-up exceeding 600 days, two patients exhibited a statistically significant gradual decline in impedance without other lead dysfunction, suggesting potential subclinical lead degradation. Conclusion Transcatheter tricuspid valve replacement with the EVOQUE system in the setting of cardiac device leads is associated with lead function changes in 31%. The majority of lead-related changes were managed conservatively, but 13% of patients had findings concerning for an insulation breach. Future studies should focus on refining implantation techniques and defining optimal strategies for managing device-lead interactions in this population.

ABSTRACT Background Valve‐in‐valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (ViV‐TAVR) is increasingly used to treat structural valve degeneration. Permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) following TAVR is associated with increased morbidity and mortality, yet predictors specific to ViV‐TAVR remain poorly defined. Objective To identify clinical and procedural predictors of PPI in patients undergoing ViV‐TAVR. Methods We conducted a retrospective observational study of consecutive ViV‐TAVR cases at the Mayo Clinic from 2012 to 2022. Clinical, ECG, procedural data and fluoroscopic measurements were analyzed, and propensity score matching was used to adjust for confounding. Predictors of PPI were identified using multivariable logistic regression. Results Among 261 patients, 24 (9.2%) underwent PPI. Balloon‐expandable valves were used in 66.7% and self‐expanding valves in 33.3%. Predictors of PPI included Preprocedural bifascicular block (OR 12.15, 95% CI: 2.52–68.89, p = 0.003), greater septal implantation depth (OR 1.29, 95% CI: 1.04–1.65, p = 0.019), and post‐procedural new left (OR 23.56, 95% CI: 4.91–48.52, p = 0.0004) and right bundle branch blocks (OR 24.4, 95% CI: 3.82–30.51, p = 0.001). Aortic regurgitation as the mechanism of prosthetic valve failure was associated with reduced PPI odds (OR 0.28, 95% CI: 0.10–0.76, p = 0.014). Pacing requirement—defined as > 90% ventricular pacing—increased from 25% at 3 months to 56.25% at 12 months. At a median follow‐up of 962.5 days (IQR 481.5–1555.3), adjusted mortality was significantly higher in the PPI group (aOR 9.4, 95% CI: 1.9–60.4, p = 0.028). Conclusion Bifascicular block, greater septal depth, and new bundle branch blocks predict PPI post‐ViV‐TAVR, while aortic regurgitation appears protective. Risk stratification and procedural planning are critical.

ABSTRACT Background Transvenous lead removal (TLR) is a Class I indication for patients with cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections. However, disparities in the utilization of TLR have not been fully explored, particularly concerning demographic and socioeconomic factors. Objectives This study aims to examine whether disparities exist among patients hospitalized for CIED infections with respect to the utilization of TLR, focusing on sex, race, and income characteristics. Methods We utilized the 2019 National Inpatient Sample (NIS) to assess patients hospitalized with CIED infections and identify those who underwent TLR. Multiple logistic regression was used to examine risk factors for TLR utilization, including age, sex, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic characteristics. Results A total of 56 709 patients were hospitalized for CIED infection in the United States in 2019, of which 9867 (17.4%) underwent TLR. On an adjusted analysis, females and Black patients were found to have lower odds of undergoing TLR compared to males and White patients (OR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.59–0.78; p < 0.01; and OR: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.39–0.57; p < 0.01, respectively). Hispanic patients also had reduced odds of TLR (OR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.58–0.93; p = 0.01). No significant associations were observed between income or insurance status and the likelihood of receiving TLR after adjustment. Conclusions This study identified significant disparities in the utilization of TLR among patients hospitalized for CIED infections. Female, Black, and Hispanic patients were significantly less likely to receive TLR.

ABSTRACTBackgroundThe factors contributing to sustained ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) >30 days after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation are not well‐established.ObjectivesThis study aimed to predict the factors associated with late sustained VAs after LVAD implantation and develop a predictive score to identify patients with an increased risk of late sustained VAs after the procedure.MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study on a training cohort of 623 patients and a validation cohort of 157 patients who underwent LVAD implantation at the Mayo Clinic (Rochester, Phoenix, and Jacksonville) from January 1, 2000, to December 30, 2020. Late sustained VAs were defined as ventricular tachycardia (VT) and ventricular fibrillation (VF) occurring >30 days after the LVAD procedure. Detailed chart reviews of the electronic health records within the Mayo Clinic and outside medical records were performed.ResultsA total of 780 patients were included in our study. Late sustained VAs occurred in 30% (n = 232) of the patients. The significant factors associated with late sustained VAs after LVAD were the history of VAs prior to LVAD (34.1% vs. 23.0%, p < 0.01), implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) (87.9% vs. 77.6%, p < 0.01) or cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in situ (43.5% vs. 33.6%, p = 0.008), VT ablation prior to LVAD (5.2% vs. 1.8%, p = 0.010), use of amiodarone (49.1% vs. 38.7%, p = 0.007), use of mexiletine (15.5% vs. 5.7%, p < 0.01), and higher left ventricular end‐diastolic diameter (LVEDD) on echocardiography prior to LVAD implantation (71.4 vs. 68.7 mm, p = 0.002). During follow‐up, the patients who developed late sustained VAs after LVAD had lower survival than those who did not (HR = 1.96, 95% CI:156–2.4, p < 0.001). The average time from LVAD to orthotopic heart transplant was longer among late sustained VAs patients (23 vs. 14 months, p < 0.01). The “VIN” risk score was created to identify four risk groups: low (scores 0), intermediate (score 1), high (score 2), and very high (score 3). The rates of late VA's in the training cohort at 1 year were 9.5%, 14%, 18%, and 25% which was almost similar to the risk of late VA's at validation cohort 10%, 12%, 20%, and 63%, respectively.ConclusionsLate sustained VAs occurred in 30% of the patients who received LVAD and were associated with lower survival. The VIN risk score was developed and validated to stratify patients into low, intermediate, high, and very high risk of late sustained VAs.

AbstractBackgroundComplications associated with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices may necessitate device and lead removal. An open approach to removal may be electively chosen in cases with high risk of complications or those requiring additional concomitant cardiac surgery. This study aimed to investigate outcomes of patients who underwent elective open lead extractions (OLE) at two large tertiary care centers.MethodsThe records of 29 patients undergoing elective OLE were analyzed through retrospective chart review.Results69 total leads were extracted from 29 patients (77% completely, 23% partially). The average age of the oldest leads was 13.3 ± 11.3 years. Infective endocarditis with severe valvular insufficiency requiring valvular intervention (41%)—an infectious etiology, and tricuspid valve intervention to correct RV lead‐related severe TR (38%)—a noninfectious etiology, were the most common reasons for OLE. 38% of the patients had additional co‐primary or secondary indications for open extraction, such as CABG and pericardiectomies. The rate of major complications and procedural failure was 3% each (1/29). 30‐day survival was 100%, and 1‐year survival was 92%. The average length of hospital stay was 15 days and higher among those undergoing OLE for infectious indications.ConclusionOpen lead extractions offered a similar clinical success rate (97%) to transvenous extractions in this cohort and may be a viable alternative for those necessitating valvular intervention or when the risk of complications from TLE is considered very high.

AbstractIntroductionVentricular tachycardia storm or electrical storm (ES) is a common complication following left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. The factors contributing to ES and outcomes are less studied. The study aimed to determine the factors associated with ES and the probability of survival in patients undergoing LVAD in three tertiary centers over a span of 15 years.MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study on all patients who underwent LVAD implantation at the Mayo Clinic (Rochester, Phoenix, and Jacksonville) from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2020. ES was defined as ≥3 episodes of sustained ventricular tachycardia over a period of 24 h with no identifiable reversible cause. Detailed chart reviews of the electronic health records within the Mayo Clinic and outside medical records were performed.ResultsA total of 883 patients who underwent LVAD implantation were included in our study. ES occurred in 7% (n = 61) of patients with a median of 13 days (interquartile range [IQR]: 5–297 days) following surgery. We found 57% of patients (n = 35) developed ES within 30 days, while 43% (n = 26) patients developed ES at a median of 545 (IQR 152–1032) days after surgery. Following ES, 26% of patients died within 1 year. Patients with ES had a significant association with a history of ventricular arrhythmias and implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) shocks before the procedure. ES was significantly associated with reduced survival compared to patients without ES (hazards ratio [HR]: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.39–2.64, p < .001).ConclusionFollowing LVAD implantation, the rate of ES was 7% with majority of ES occurring within 30 days of LVAD. Risk factors for ES included pre‐implant history of ventricular arrhythmias and ICD shock. ES was significantly associated with reduced survival compared to patients without ES.

Abstract Background Long‐term outcomes of sterile lead management strategies of lead abandonment (LA) or transvenous lead extraction (TLE) remain unclear. Methods We performed a retrospective study of a population residing in southeastern Minnesota with follow‐up at the Mayo Clinic and its health systems. Patients who underwent LA or TLE of sterile leads from January 1, 2000, to January 1, 2011, and had follow‐up for at least 10 years or until their death were included. Results A total of 172 patients were included in the study with 153 patients who underwent LA and 19 who underwent TLE for sterile leads. Indications for subsequent lead extraction arose in 9.1% ( n = 14) of patients with initial LA and 5.3% ( n = 1) in patients with initial TLE, after an average of 7 years. Moreover, 28.6% of patients in the LA cohort who required subsequent extraction did not proceed with the extraction, and among those who proceeded, 60% had clinical success and 40% had a clinical failure. Subsequent device upgrades or revisions were performed in 18.3% of patients in the LA group and 31.6% in the TLE group, with no significant differences in procedural challenges (5.2% vs. 5.3%). There was no difference in 10‐year survival probability among the LA group and the TLE group ( p = .64). Conclusion An initial lead abandonment strategy was associated with more complicated subsequent extraction procedures compared to patients with an initial transvenous lead extraction strategy. However, there was no difference in 10‐year survival probability between both lead management approaches.