Mee, Xuan Ci

Abstract Introduction Despite its prevalence, risk stratification for tachycardia-induced cardiomyopathy remains poorly understood. A deep learning model developed at Mayo Clinic uses standard 12-lead electrocardiograms (ECGs) to predict reduced LVEF (≤35%) in the general population with high accuracy (AUC 0.93) Purpose We investigated the performance of AI-ECG in predicting systolic dysfunction among patients with atrial fibrillation and rapid ventricular response, and compared it with NT-proBNP. Methods We conducted a retrospective study (IRB approval #25-000904) of adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) evaluated across our Clinic enterprise with atrial fibrillation and rapid ventricular response (heart rate >100 bpm), including AF occurring in-hospital and AF at presentation, between January 2017 and May 2025. We excluded patients with a known history of heart failure with reduced EF (<50%). We also collected data on NT-proBNP levels when available within one week of the ECG and echocardiogram. Results A total of 11,801 patients were included, with a mean age of 73.2 +- 12.6 years, 48.6% female and 94.8% White. A combination of AI ECG low EF probability cutoff of 75% had specificity of 96% and 98% NPV in ruling out LVEF < 35%. A combination of AI ECG low EF probability cutoff of 17% and LVEF <35% provided the best balance of sensitivity and specificity, 66% and 78%, respectively with an accuracy of 78%. NT-proBNP data was available on 5,279 patients (48%). Mean NT-proBNP level was 4090 pg/mL. Based on ROC curve analysis, AI ECG was superior to NT-proBNP in predicting LVEF <35% (AUC 0.72 vs 0.59), with accuracy of 77% versus 47% at Youden’s cutpoints of AI-ECG probability of 17% and NT-proBNP level of 1767 pg/mL, respectively Conclusions Our study demonstrates the utility of AI-ECG in predicting reduced LVEF among patients with AF RVR. AI-ECG demonstrated excellent specificity and NPV in ruling out reduced LVEF, serving as a powerful clinical screening tool to assist with the pharmacologic choice of rate control and could change the timing of further echocardiographic evaluation. Our study offers novel insights paving the way for future investigations to help fine-tune and further delineate the role of AI ECG in risk stratifying patients with suspected tachycardia-induced cardiomyopathy, guiding therapeutic and diagnostic clinical decisions

Background: Pulsed field ablation (PFA) has become a cornerstone for atrial fibrillation ablation. Multiple platforms have been developed and approved worldwide, and routine screening for asymptomatic brain injury (ABI) has been included in several trials as part of the safety assessment of this technology. The incidence by catheter/platform, predictors of occurrence, and clinical impact remain incompletely understood. Research Question: In patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing pulmonary vein isolation, does the incidence of ABI vary between different PFA platforms? Methods: We searched the MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for studies reporting on patients who underwent PFA and post-procedure brain MRI to screen for ABI. The review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. A random-effects proportion meta-analysis was performed, with subgroup analysis based on the PFA platform used. For studies including a thermal ablation control group, risk ratio (RR) was used to compare outcomes. Finally, a meta-regression was conducted to identify potential predictors of ABI incidence. Results: A total of 19 studies reporting data from 742 patients who underwent post-ablation brain MRI were included in this review. The pooled incidence of silent cerebral events (new findings visible only on DWI sequences) and silent cerebral lesions (new findings on both DWI and FLAIR sequences) was 5% each (95% CI, 3%–8%). The pooled incidence of any ABI was 10% (95% CI, 8%–13%). A platform-level subgroup analysis demonstrated comparable outcomes across the platforms with available data (Figure 1). The meta-regression included age, sex, CHA2DS2-VASc score, and incidence of symptomatic stroke/TIA, but no statistically significant associations were identified. In the four studies that included a thermal ablation control group, there was no significant difference in ABI incidence between PFA and thermal ablation (RR: 1.37; 95% CI, 0.68–2.74; P = 0.38; I2 = 16%) (Figure 2). Seven studies reported follow-up MRI in patients who presented with an ABI. Among 20 patients with ABI after ablation, radiologic lesions persisted in 2 patients. Conclusion: ABI is a relatively frequent finding following PFA; however, current evidence does not reveal significant differences between available platforms. Radiologic findings tend to be transient, suggesting a limited long-term clinical impact.

Background: Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) is increasingly recognized as a cause of acute coronary syndrome, particularly in young to middle-aged women. While most presentations are associated with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), a subset of patients present with acute systolic dysfunction. The characteristics of patients who recover their LVEF are not clearly defined. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 495 patients with angiographically confirmed SCAD treated at three Mayo Clinic sites (Arizona, Rochester, and Florida) from 1994 to 2023. Patients with a prior history of myocardial infarction, coronary artery disease, and congenital heart disease were excluded. Baseline LVEF at SCAD presentation was categorized into <35%, 35–39%, 40–49%, and ≥50%. Follow-up LVEF was assessed by echocardiography performed between 30 days and 1 year post-SCAD. The primary outcome was improvement in LVEF to ≥50% at follow-up. Results: A total of 495 SCAD patients were included. At presentation, 26% had reduced LVEF: 6% had LVEF <35%, 5% had LVEF between 35–39%, and 15% had LVEF between 40–49%. Patients who did not normalize their EF at follow-up were slightly younger (45 vs. 48 years, p=0.04), were more likely to have had an in-hospital cardiac arrest (13% vs. 4%, p=0.01), required mechanical circulatory support during their care, and had SCAD involving the left main artery (11% vs. 2%, p=0.01). Predictors of EF normalization included SCAD which involved the obtuse marginals (15% vs. 4%, p<0.05). The group with the lowest EF at presentation had the highest probability of persistent EF <50% at follow-up (32% for those with LVEF <35%) while patients who had normal EF at presentation had a 6% chance of having EF <50% at follow-up (Figure 1). Conclusions: Our study shows that the majority of SCAD patients have normal EF at presentation. 80% of those with reduced EF at presentation will normalize at follow-up. Predictors of low EF at follow-up included dissection involving the left main artery, lower EF at SCAD presentation, in-hospital arrest and use of mechanical circulatory support.

Abstract Aims Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are a critical intervention for advanced heart failure (HF), serving as destination therapy or bridge to transplantation. Obesity and diabetes impact outcomes in patients with LVADs. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1-RAs) demonstrate cardiovascular benefits; however, their role in patients with LVADs remains underexplored. We evaluated the association of GLP1-RA therapy with cardiovascular outcomes in patients with LVADs. Methods This retrospective cohort study used the TriNetX database, a research network database from 98 healthcare organizations. We queried for all adult LVAD recipients (≥18 years) and were stratified into GLP1-RA users and non-users. Propensity score matching (PSM) (1:1) balanced demographics, comorbidities, medication use and laboratory data. Outcomes included heart transplantation rates, heart failure hospitalizations, all-cause mortality, all-cause hospitalizations and cardiovascular events. Logistic regression models were used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (aOR). Results After PSM, we included a total of 1036 adult LVAD recipients (518 GLP1-RA users, 518 matched non-users) with a mean follow-up time of 311.6 ± 98.4 days for the GLP1-RA cohort and 304.0 ± 111.5 days for the non-GLP1-RAs cohort. Mean age was 56.7 ± 12.2 years in the GLP1-RA cohort and 58.0 ± 12.5 years in the non-GLP1-RA cohort. Females comprised 28.0% of both cohorts while White patients represented 52.1% of the GLP1-RA group and 53.1% of the non-GLP1-RA group. GLP1-RA users had higher heart transplantation rates [n = 98 (18.9%) vs. n = 44 (8.5%); aOR 2.514 (95% CI: 1.720–3.673)]. Acute HF events and all-cause hospitalizations were lower among GLP1-RA users compared with non-users [n = 288 (55.6%) vs. n = 357 (68.9%); aOR 0.565 (95% CI: 0.438–728) and n = 324 (62.5%) vs. n = 390 (75.3%); aOR 0.548 (95% CI: 0.420–0.716)]. No differences were observed when comparing the GLP1-RA cohort with the non-GLP1-RA cohort in regard to all-cause mortality [n = 32 (6.2%) vs. n = 44 (8.5%); aOR 0.709 (95% CI: 0.442–1.138)], stroke [n = 42 (8.1%) vs. n = 58 (11.2%); aOR 0.700 (95% CI: 0.461–1.062)] or cardiac arrest [n = 18 (3.5%) vs. n = 17 (3.3%); aOR 1.061 (95% CI: 0.541–2.082)]. Conclusions GLP1-RA therapy in patients with advanced HF and LVADs is potentially associated with improved heart transplantation rates while decreasing hospitalization and acute HF event rates.

ABSTRACT Background Sodium‐glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2‐Is) are primarily used to manage type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and heart failure (HF), but their impact on reducing stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) remains underexplored. We aimed to investigate the impact of SGLT2‐Is for stroke risk mitigation in patients with AF. Methods Using the TriNetX database, we performed a retrospective cohort study on patients ≥ 18 years with AF and on anticoagulation. These patients were then classified into two cohorts based on their use of SGLT2‐Is. To balance the baseline demographics, comorbidities, and medication use, propensity score matching (PSM) was used. The primary outcome was ischemic and hemorrhagic strokes, and the secondary outcomes were all‐cause mortality, all‐cause hospitalizations, need for AF cardioversion or antiarrhythmic drug initiation, and cardiac arrest. Adjusted odds ratio (aORs) and hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated for both the primary and secondary outcomes. Results A total of 152,778 patients with 76,389 patients were included in each cohort (SGLT2‐Is users, and non‐users) after PSM. The mean age of both SGLT2‐Is users and non‐users was 72.8 years. For the SGLT2‐Is users, the mean follow‐up period was 317 days, whereas the mean follow‐up period for the non‐users was 306 days. For the primary outcome, we found that SGLT2‐Is users had a lower risk of ischemic stroke (aOR: 0.889; 95% CI: 0.857–0.923) and hemorrhagic stroke (aOR: 0.682; 95% CI: 0.620–0.749) compared to non‐users. Regarding the secondary outcomes, SGLT2‐Is users also had lower risk for all‐cause mortality (aOR: 0.615; 95% CI: 0.595–0.636), all‐cause hospitalizations (aOR: 0.599; 95% CI: 0.587–0.611), need of AF cardioversion (aOR: 0.846; 95% CI: 0.813–0.881), antiarrhythmic drug initiation (aOR: 0.790; 95% CI: 0.766–0.815), and cardiac arrest (aOR: 0.643; 95% CI: 0.601–0.688). Conclusions SGLT2‐I use in patients with AF is associated with lower risks of stroke and other cardiovascular and non‐cardiovascular outcomes. Future prospective research is needed to validate these findings.

Abstract Background/Introduction Access to timely healthcare in disadvantaged areas remains essential to achieving equitable health outcomes, especially in regions facing structural and social vulnerabilities. Purpose To assess wait times for cardiovascular disease consultations in US-Mexico border regions compared to non-border regions among US Veterans. Methods This cross-sectional analysis included all veteran cardiovascular consultations referred through the Veterans Choice Program to community healthcare centers from 2014 to 2020. We obtained the average wait times in days for consultation approval, scheduling, completion, and total wait time from approval to consultation completion. All consultations were classified by county of residence as either within a US-Mexico border region or a non-border region, as per the La Paz Agreement. Multivariable linear regression analyses were performed to evaluate the impact of border status on average wait times. ARIMA modeling was completed to estimate forecasted wait times during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results A total of 485,158 consultations related to outpatient cardiovascular disease were retrieved from the VA Healthcare System. Amongst these, 461,696 of the consultations were placed in non-border regions whereas 23,462 consultations were placed in US-Mexico border regions. The most common consultation requests were made for general cardiology clinic (n=365,227), echocardiography (n=32,017), cardio-pulmonary rehabilitation (n=40,699), and cardiac stress testing (n=16,258). Wait times for cardiovascular disease consultations were not higher in US-Mexico border counties than in non-border regions. For electrophysiology consultations specifically, border counties exhibited significantly shorter total wait times (coeff = -10.81, p=0.008). Additionally, while the COVID-19 pandemic led to increased total wait times in non-border areas (Figure 1), total wait times in border regions remained stable during this period (Figure 2). Conclusions Our findings suggest that US-Mexico border region status does not result in longer wait times for cardiovascular disease consultations, with the exception of shorter wait times for electrophysiology services. This study provides important insights into the unique dynamics of healthcare access in structurally disadvantaged regions, highlighting that wait times are not a significant barrier to cardiovascular care in border areas, and emphasizes the need to consider regional differences in healthcare delivery policies.

Abstract Background Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2-Is) have emerged as a vital component in the management of heart failure (HF), demonstrating significant improvements in cardiac function. However, their impact on outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains poorly characterized. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term outcomes of SGLT2-Is among patients with AMI. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from the TriNetX Banner Health Network platform in the United States, including patients aged ≥18 years with AMI identified through ICD-10 codes. Patients were categorized into two cohorts based on SGLT2-I use. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to balance baseline demographics, comorbidities (e.g., hypertension, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, heart failure, and hyperlipidemia), and medication use (e.g., heart failure therapies, antiplatelet agents, anticoagulants). Risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were estimated for the following cardiovascular outcomes: acute HF hospitalizations, stroke, all-cause hospitalizations, recurrent AMI, cardiac arrest, and new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF). Kaplan-Meier analysis was completed to estimate survival probability from all-cause hospitalizations. Results After PSM, 2,440 patients were analyzed (1,220 SGLT2-I users; 1,220 non-users). Both cohorts had similar characteristics without any residual imbalance: mean age 67.7 years in the SGLT2-I group vs. 67.5 years in non-users, and both groups included 85.2% White and 33.6% female patients. Mean follow-up duration was 608 days for SGLT2-I users and 1,013.5 days for non-users. SGLT2-I use was associated with significantly lower rates of all-cause hospitalizations (RR: 0.712; 95% CI: 0.652–0.777), HF-related hospitalizations (RR: 0.878; 95% CI: 0.781–0.987), recurrent AMI (RR: 0.821; 95% CI: 0.703–0.959), and cardiac arrest (RR: 0.500; 95% CI: 0.345–0.725). No significant differences were observed in stroke (RR: 0.909; 95% CI: 0.702–1.178) or new-onset AF (RR: 0.889; 95% CI: 0.782–1.010) between the cohorts. Conclusions SGLT2-Is are associated with improved cardiovascular outcomes in patients with AMI, including reductions in all-cause and HF-related hospitalizations, recurrent AMI, and cardiac arrest. While these findings are hypothesis-generating, they emphasize the need for prospective clinical trials to confirm these results.Kaplan-Meier Analysis.

Abstract Aims Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2-Is) improve heart failure (HF) outcomes but their effects on acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remain poorly characterized. This study aimed to evaluate the 1-year cardiovascular outcomes of SGLT2-Is among patients with AMI. Methods and results We conducted an observational, retrospective cohort study using TriNetX data, including patients aged ≥18 with AMI identified via ICD-10 codes regardless of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), categorized by SGLT2-Is use. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to balance baseline demographics, comorbidities, and medication use. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) were estimated for the primary outcome (recurrent AMI) and the secondary outcomes (acute HF hospitalizations, stroke, all-cause hospitalizations, all-cause mortality, new-onset atrial fibrillation, and cardiac arrest). After PSM, 89 554 patients were analysed (44 777 SGLT2-Is users; 44 777 non-users). The mean age was ∼68 years in both cohorts with a similarly high burden of cardiovascular comorbidities. Mean follow-up duration was 290.854 days for SGLT2-Is users and 284.465 days for non-users. SGLT2-Is use was linked to lower rates of recurrent AMI [aOR: 0.459; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.367–0.551], all-cause hospitalizations (aOR: 0.782; 95% CI: 0.762–0.803), all-cause mortality (aOR: 0.640; 95% CI: 0.612–0.670), and cardiac arrest (aOR: 0.834; 95% CI: 0.773–0.900). No differences were observed in acute HF hospitalizations, new-onset atrial fibrillation, or stroke. Conclusion SGLT2-Is are associated with improved cardiovascular outcomes in patients with AMI, including reductions in recurrent AMI, all-cause hospitalizations and mortality, and cardiac arrest. These findings emphasize the need for prospective clinical trials involving patients with AMI and other cardiovascular comorbidities, regardless of LVEF, to confirm these results.