Friedman, Paul A.

Background: The treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction has been the subject of numerous randomized controlled trials involving medications and cardiac implantable electronic device therapies. As newer effective pharmacological therapies suggest significant reductions in all-cause mortality, the role of additional device therapy in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction deserves further scrutiny. Methods: A systematic review and network meta-analysis on the effect of medication and device therapies in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction on all-cause mortality was performed. Randomized controlled trials published between January 1980 and July 2017 were identified using Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials databases. Pcnetmeta package in R was used to calculate treatment arm–based estimated rates, rate ratios, and probability ranks with 95% credible intervals. Results: Combination therapy of ACE (angiotensin-converting enzyme) inhibitors or ARBs (angiotensin receptor blockers) with β-blockers (BBs) alone or in addition to implantable cardiac defibrillators or cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillators demonstrated a significant reduction of all-cause mortality when compared with placebo. By probability rank, implantable cardiac defibrillator+ACE inhibitor or ARB+BB+mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, implantable cardiac defibrillator+ACE inhibitor or ARB+BB, and angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor+BB+mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist combination therapies have the highest probability of being ranked the best treatment. There was no significant difference in the rate of mortality when comparing angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor+BB+mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist to implantable cardiac defibrillator+optimal pharmacological combination therapy. Conclusions: BB and renin-angiotensin system blockers alone or in combination with defibrillator device therapy have robust evidence for a reduction in mortality compared with placebo. The comparative efficacy of pharmacological therapy with angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors and device therapy deserves further investigation.

Abstract Background Sonicate fluid (SF), a solution derived from vortexing and sonication of explanted cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), is a higher-yield specimen compared with swabs or tissues for culture-based detection of microorganisms associated with CIED infection. Despite this, SF culture fails to identify a causative organism in ~50% of cases. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of 16S ribosomal RNA gene (rRNA) polymerase chain reaction (PCR)/sequencing of SF and compare it with that of SF culture. Methods We identified 322 SF specimens from extracted CIEDs and reviewed clinical data for each patient. Subjects were classified as having or not having CIED infection. Cases were subcategorized as culture negative if no significant growth was reported from SF cultures and as culture positive if an organism was detected above predefined thresholds. 16S rRNA PCR/sequencing was performed, with the organisms identified reported according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines for sequence data interpretation. Results A total of 278 SF samples corresponded to infected cases, of which 160 were culture positive and 118 culture negative. The remaining 44 were from noninfected cases, of which 2 were culture positive. Compared with SF culture, the sensitivity of 16S rRNA PCR/sequencing was higher (64% vs 57.5%, P = .003). 16S rRNA PCR/sequencing detected a potential pathogen in 28 of 118 culture-negative cases, identifying staphylococci in the majority (18/28). Conclusions 16S rRNA PCR/sequencing has higher sensitivity to detect bacteria in SF from extracted CIEDs than does SF culture.

AbstractObjectivesWe sought to validate a deep learning algorithm designed to predict an ejection fraction (EF) less than or equal to 35% based on the 12‐lead electrocardiogram (ECG) in a large prospective cohort.BackgroundPatients undergoing routine ECG may have undetected left ventricular (LV) dysfunction that warrants further echocardiographic assessment. However, identification of these patients can be challenging.MethodsWe applied the algorithm to all ECGs interpreted by the Mayo Clinic ECG laboratory in September 2018. The performance of the algorithm was tested among patients with recent echocardiographic assessments of LV function. We also applied the algorithm in patients with no recent echocardiographic assessments of LV function to determine the rate of new “positive screens.”ResultsAmong 16 056 adult patients who underwent routine ECG, 8600 (age 67.1 ± 15.2 years, 45.6% male), had a transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) and 3874 patients had a TTE and ECG less than 1 month apart. Among these patients, the algorithm was able to detect an EF less than or equal to 35% with 86.8% specificity, 82.5% sensitivity, and 86.5% accuracy, (area under the curve, 0.918). Among 474 “false‐positives screens,” 189 (39.8%) had an EF of 36% to 50%. Among patients with no prior TTE, the algorithm identified 3.5% of the patients with suspected EF less than or equal to 35%. Exploratory analysis suggests false positives could be reduced by assessing NT‐pro‐BNP after the initial “positive screen.”ConclusionsA deep learning algorithm detected depressed LV function with good accuracy in routine practice. Further studies are needed to validate the algorithm in patients with no prior echocardiogram and to assess the impact on echocardiography utilization, cost, and clinical outcomes.

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.

AbstractBackgroundCardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reverses left ventricular remodeling and improves left ventricular systolic function. However, little is known about whether CRT improves ventricular conduction.ObjectiveTo determine the relationship between CRT response and QRS narrowing.MethodsThe study included consecutive patients who underwent CRT with defibrillator (CRT‐D) implantation between January 2002 and December 2012 and had subsequent generator replacement (GR). At the time of GR, super‐responder was defined as those who had left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 50% or more; patients who had an LVEF of 36–49% with an increase of more than 5% were considered responders, and the others were nonresponders. All patients were assessed 6 months after CRT‐D implantation and at the time of GR.ResultsOf 114 study patients, 58 (50.9%) were nonresponders, 29 (25.4%) responders, and 27 (23.7%) super‐responders. QRS narrowing at 6 months was significant in super‐responders (175.4 ± 21.4 to 159.7 ± 20.7 ms, P = 0.001) and responders (169.0 ± 21.3 to 157.7 ± 17.6 ms, P = 0.008). At time of GR, only super‐responders had further QRS narrowing (159.7 ± 20.7 to 146.3 ± 19.2 ms, P < 0.001). QRS duration change after 6 months was independently associated with super‐response (hazard ratio: 1.20 for every 5 ms QRS duration narrowing; 95% confidence interval, 1.06–1.38; P = 0.005), and QRS narrowing of 10 ms or more was associated with lower risk of all‐cause mortality after GR.ConclusionContinuous QRS narrowing after CRT, as an electrical marker, is associated with a super‐response to CRT. Further QRS narrowing 6 months after CRT implantation was associated with lower risk of mortality after GR.