Dai, Mingyan

AbstractIntroductionThe efficacy of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has been widely studied in the medical literature; however, about 30% of candidates fail to respond to this treatment strategy. Smart computational approaches based on clinical data can help expose hidden patterns useful for identifying CRT responders.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the electronic health records of 1664 patients who underwent CRT procedures from January 1, 2002 to December 31, 2017. An ensemble of ensemble (EoE) machine learning (ML) system composed of a supervised and an unsupervised ML layers was developed to generate a prediction model for CRT response.ResultsWe compared the performance of EoE against traditional ML methods and the state‐of‐the‐art convolutional neural network (CNN) model trained on raw electrocardiographic (ECG) waveforms. We observed that the models exhibited improvement in performance as more features were incrementally used for training. Using the most comprehensive set of predictors, the performance of the EoE model in terms of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and F1‐score were 0.76 and 0.73, respectively. Direct application of the CNN model on the raw ECG waveforms did not generate promising results.ConclusionThe proposed CRT risk calculator effectively discriminates which heart failure (HF) patient is likely to respond to CRT significantly better than using clinical guidelines and traditional ML methods, thus suggesting that the tool can enhanced care management of HF patients by helping to identify high‐risk patients.

AbstractIntroductionAutonomic modulation has been used as a therapy to control recurrent ventricular arrhythmia (VA). This study was to explore stellate ganglion block (SGB) effect on cardiac electrophysiologic properties and evaluate the long‐term outcome of cardiac sympathetic denervation (CSD) for patients with recurrent VA and structural heart disease (SHD).Materials and MethodsPatients who had recurrent VA due to SHD were enrolled prospectively. Electrophysiologic study and ventricular tachycardia (VT) induction were performed before and after left and right SGB. VA burden and long‐term outcomes were assessed for a separate patient group who underwent left or bilateral CSD for drug‐refractory VA due to SHD.ResultsElectrophysiologic study of nine patients showed that baseline mean (SD) corrected sinus node recovery time (cSNRT) increased from 320.4 (73.3) ms to 402.9 (114.2) ms after left and 482.4 (95.7) ms after bilateral SGB (P = .03). SGB did not significantly change P‐R, QRS, and Q‐T intervals and ventricular effective refractory period, nor did the inducibility of VA. Nineteen patients underwent left (n = 14) or bilateral (n = 5) CSD. CSD reduced VA burden and appropriate ICD therapies from a median (interquartile range) of 2.5 (0.4‐11.6) episodes weekly to 0.1 (0.0‐2.4) episodes weekly at 6‐month follow‐up (P = .002). Three‐year freedom from orthotopic heart transplant (OHT) and death was 52.6%. New York Heart Association functional class III/IV and VT rate less than 160 beats per minute were predictors of recurrent VA, OHT, and death.ConclusionSGB increased cSNRT without changing heart rate. CSD was more beneficial for patients with mild‐to‐moderate heart failure and faster VA.

AbstractBackgroundLeadless cardiac pacing (LCP) has emerged as a new modality for permanent pacing. We sought to describe comparative outcomes between LCP and transvenous pacemakers.MethodsPatients receiving LCP (Micra [Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA] and Nanostim [St. Jude Medical/Abbott Laboratories, Chicago, IL, USA]) between 2014 and 2017 at the Mayo Clinic Heart Rhythm Enterprise practice (Rochester, MN, USA; Jacksonville, FL, USA; and Scottsdale, AZ, USA) were identified. We identified 1:1 age‐ and sex‐matched controls receiving single‐chamber transvenous ventricular pacemakers (TVP). Statistical analyses were performed with JMP 13.0.0 (SAS, Institute Cary, NC, USA).ResultsNinety patients underwent LCP implantation (73 Micra and 17 Nanostim) with a median follow‐up duration of 62 (interquartile range 28‐169) days. Both groups had 100% successful device implant rates. There were no differences in procedure‐related major (0% vs 1%) or minor complications (8% vs 3%) in the LCP versus TVP groups (P > 0.05). Excluding Nanostim patients, there was a lower rate of device‐related revision or extraction in the Micra versus TVP groups (0% vs 5%, P = 0.028). Device endocarditis was more common in the TVP group (0% vs 3%, P = 0.04). Estimated longevity was greater for the LCP group (median 12.0 vs 10.0 years, P < 0.0001). An increase in severity of tricuspid valve regurgitation (TR) by ≥2 grades occurred in none of the LCP patients, and in 19% of the TVP patients (P = 0.017).ConclusionThere are no significant differences in procedural complications among patients receiving LCP versus TVP. The Micra group had lower rates of device‐related revision/extraction compared to the TVP group. Patients with leadless pacemaker were less likely to develop endocarditis or worsening TR.

AbstractIntroductionTo evaluate the outcomes of video‐assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) during transvenous lead extractions (TLEs).Methods and resultsNinety‐one high‐risk patients who underwent TLE in the operating room from January 1, 2015, to March 31, 2017, were included in the study. Of these, 9 patients underwent VATS during TLE. Their clinical characteristics, indications for lead extraction, and complications associated with TLE in the 9 patients who had VATS were compared with those for the 82 patients who did not have VATS. The mean (SD) age of the study patients was 61 (17) years (64.8% were male). The lead dwell time, number of leads extracted, and clinical comorbidities were similar between the 2 groups. Superior vena cava (SVC) tear occurred in 2 of the 9 patients in VATS group and in 1 of the 82 in the non‐VATS group (22.2% vs. 1.2%, P = 0.03). Of the 2 patients in the VATS group who had SVC tears, in 1 the tear was visualized immediately and there was no hemodynamic compromise. In the other patient, the SVC tear was within the pericardium; the blood pressure recovered quickly after sternotomy and repair. Both patients had complete lead extraction and survived hospitalization. The patient in the non‐VATS group who had an SVC tear had a successful repair but died of postoperative complications.ConclusionsUtilization of VATS to facilitate TLE is beneficial for early recognition of SVC tear and timely surgical repair in select high‐risk patients.