Attia, I Z

Abstract Objective To investigate the ability of artificial intelligence‐enabled electrocardiogram (AI‐ECG) atrial fibrillation (AF) prediction model output and delta age, defined as AI‐estimated age minus chronological age, to predict adverse vascular outcomes in patients with migraine. Background Migraine, especially migraine with aura, is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events. Using normal sinus rhythm ECG, our institution has developed AI‐ECG models that predict the probability of AF and estimate patients' age, and from that, delta age (estimated age minus actual age) has been shown to reflect cardiovascular health and physiologic aging. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study that included adult patients with migraine who had at least one digital, standard 12‐lead ECG from 2000 to 2020 at any Mayo Clinic site. The first normal sinus rhythm ECG was defined as the index ECG, and those with adverse vascular events or AF prior to, or within 3 days after, index ECG were excluded. AI‐ECG AF prediction model output and delta age were obtained from the index ECG. The primary outcome was a composite endpoint of adverse vascular events that included acute myocardial infarction, acute ischemic stroke, venous thromboembolism, and death. New‐onset AF was also recorded as a secondary outcome. Results A total of 29,928 patients were included. The mean age was 44.3 ± 14.5 years, and the median follow‐up time was 54 months. During the study period, 4662 (15.6%) patients had adverse vascular events, and 1384 (4.6%) patients developed new‐onset AF. A higher AF prediction model output was associated with a higher risk of adverse vascular outcomes (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]:1.15 [95% confidence interval: 1.12 to 1.18] for every 10% increase in prediction model output), as was a larger delta age (aHR:1.16 [1.12 to 1.21] for every 10‐year increase in delta age). Moreover, AI‐ECG AF prediction model outputs of ≥1% (aHR: 1.45 [1.36 to 1.54]) and delta age ≥−1 years (aHR: 1.09 [1.02 to 1.16]) were found to be the optimal cutoffs to dichotomize patients into high‐risk and low‐risk groups for adverse vascular events. Higher AI‐ECG AF prediction model output at baseline also predicted a higher likelihood of having new‐onset AF during the study period (aHR: 1.31 [1.26 to 1.37]), and the development of new‐onset AF was associated with a higher risk of adverse vascular events (aHR: 2.43 [2.17 to 2.73]). Conclusions For patients with migraine, a higher AI‐ECG AF prediction model output and delta age are predictive of adverse vascular outcomes. A higher AF prediction model output is also predictive of future AF development. Furthermore, we identified the cutoffs for both AI‐ECG models that can distinguish patients between high‐ and low‐risk groups. Our results showed that AI‐ECG models could inform clinical practice and identify patients with migraine at risk for future adverse vascular events.

Abstract Introduction Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a major contributor to stroke risk, yet many cases remain undiagnosed due to its silent nature. Deep learning-based electrocardiogram (DL-ECG) analysis can streamline AF risk stratification, providing a more reliable and accessible method to stratify risk using only a standard resting ECG. However, this tool has been validated only on AF detected clinically or with short ECG event monitors. Purpose This study aimed to validate the predictive accuracy of a DL-ECG model for identifying AF in normal sinus rhythm (NSR) ECGs among patients undergoing continuous cardiac monitoring with implantable loop recorders (ILRs). Methods We conducted a historical cohort study across three major U.S. academic medical centers, enrolling patients with an ILR and no prior diagnosis or documented ECG evidence of AF. Pre-implantation 10-second, 12-lead ECGs in NSR were analyzed using the DL-ECG model. Performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and compared with the CHARGE-AF score. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards models assessed the association between DL-ECG risk categories and incident AF, defined as any episode lasting ≥6 minutes. Results We included 2,523 patients (mean age 66 ± 17 years, 52% male). AF was detected in 658 (26%) over a median follow-up of 19 months (IQR 8-37), Table 1. The DL-ECG model classified 1,634 patients (65%) as at low-risk and 889 (35%) as at high-risk. AF developed in 242 (14.8%) of the low-risk group and 416 (46.8%) of the high-risk group, yielding an AUC of 0.73 (95% CI 0.70-0.75), surpassing the CHARGE-AF AUC of 0.69 (95% CI 0.66-0.71). A combined DL-ECG and CHARGE-AF model yielded an AUC of 0.74 (95% CI 0.72-0.76), Figure 1 presents the AUC, Net Reclassification Index, and DeLong test comparisons among the three models. High-risk patients had a significantly higher incidence of AF, which remained significant after adjusting for CHARGE-AF variables, Figure 2. AF incidence increased as DL-ECG quartiles increased, with 61% of patients at the top quartile developing AF during follow-up, Figure 3. False negatives (patients initially classified as low-risk but in whom later AF was detected) had a longer median time to AF detection (127 days [IQR 28-425] vs. 101 days [IQR 20-318] for true positives, p = 0.01), and where found to have at least one positive ECG during follow-up in 36%, compared to 32% of true negatives, indicating eventual risk reclassification. Conclusions Among patients undergoing ILR monitoring, the DL-ECG model demonstrated superior predictive performance compared to CHARGE-AF, offering a promising and accessible alternative for early detection of silent AF. This approach could aid early AF detection, particularly in resource-limited settings where access to specialized rhythm monitoring services is limited.Table 1 and Figure 1 Figure 2 and 3

Abstract Background Ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) is the main predictor of mortality in Chagas disease (ChD). Although LVSD can be treated with affordable medications that enhance both symptoms and survival, its diagnosis necessitates advanced imaging tests, which are often unavailable in resource-limited settings. Recently, artificial intelligence (AI) models applied to an electrocardiogram (ECG) have shown promise in detecting LVSD and assessing disease progression, acting as digital biomarkers and offering the potential for screening tools. Purpose This study aims to evaluate the performance of an AI-ECG model in detecting LVSD and predicting mortality in patients with ChD. Specifically, we will fine-tune the AI-ECG model to improve LVSD identification and update the previously published mortality score (JAHA) by replacing NT-proBNP with AI-ECG to assess mortality risk. Methods This study was conducted with patients from the SaMi-Trop project, a prospective cohort of individuals seropositive for ChD from 21 municipalities in Minas Gerais, an endemic region of Brazil. The baseline assessment occurred in 2013–2014, with follow-ups in 2015–2016 (FU1) and 2022–2023 (FU2). The AI-ECG model was fine-tuned using a dataset with an 8% low ejection fraction prevalence. The model was trained with a binary cross-entropy loss function, a batch size of 128, and an Adam optimizer with a learning rate of 0.001. The area under the curve (AUC) was calculated for validation. The fine-tuned model, parsed into 2-second ECG windows, was applied to two waves of the SaMi-Trop cohort: Baseline (4,701 ECGs from 1,906 patients) and FU1 (2,324 ECGs from 1,059 patients). The association between AI-detected LVSD (AI-LVSD) and mortality was assessed using Cox proportional hazard models. Results The fine-tuned AI-LVSD model achieved an AUC of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.78–0.97) in detecting LVSD. When updating the JAHA mortality score, AI-LVSD replaced NT-proBNP with a stronger association with mortality risk, yielding hazard ratios (HR) of 4.5 (95% CI: 3,0–6.8) for two-year mortality and 4.3 (95% CI: 3.4–5.5) for overall mortality. Additionally, when incorporated into a simplified hazard model alongside age and NYHA class, AI-LVSD emerged as a strong biomarker for mortality risk, with hazard ratios of 5.4 (95% CI: 3.7–7.8) for two-year mortality and 4.9 (95% CI: 4.0–6.1) for overall mortality (Figure 1). Conclusion The AI-ECG model accurately identified LVSD for screening purposes and effectively replaced NT-proBNP in a simplified mortality risk model for Chagas disease. This tool can potentially enhance early detection and risk stratification, particularly in remote areas with limited access to advanced diagnostic resources.Figure 01.Cox proportional hazard model

Abstract Background Left ventricular diastolic function (LVDF) and left bundle branch block (LBBB) are both linked with increased risk of LV systolic dysfunction, heart failure, and mortality. Assessing LVDF, which is typically done through echocardiography, becomes challenging in the presence of LBBB due to the intraventricular conduction delay that disrupts the reliability of tissue Doppler imaging. Recently, we validated an artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiogram (AI-ECG) model to assess LVDF and filling pressures. Methods We performed a retrospective study among patients with ECG-confirmed LBBB who also underwent comprehensive echocardiography within 14 days of the index ECG between September 2001 and June 2022. Using multivariable survival models, we assessed the risk of all-cause mortality across AI-ECG-derived LVDF grades. Results Of 2,554 patients with LBBB (mean age 72.0+12.6, 54.6% women), 252 (9.8%), 656 (25.7%), and 1,436 (56.2%), and 210 (8.2%) had normal LVDF, G1 LVDF, G2 LVDF, and G3 LVDF, respectively. The median LV ejection fraction (LVEF) was 54% and 49.3% of the patients had heart failure. Worse LVDF was associated with older age, lower LVEF, and higher rates of diabetes, hypertension, chronic pulmonary disease, renal failure, cardiovascular disease, and heart failure (p-of-trend<0.001 for all). During a median follow-up of 2.6 years (interquartile range 0.5-4.0 years), 847 (33.2%) patients died. In multivariable survival analysis, adjusted to multiple risk factors including baseline LVEF and heart failure, worse LVDF was independently associated with a higher risk of death [G1 LVDF: adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 2.15 (95% confidence interval (95%CI) 0.75-1.77), G2 LVDF: aHR 2.25 (95%CI 1.50-3.38) G3 LVDF: aHR 2.96 (95%CI 1.88-4.65); p<0.001 for both)]. These findings were consistent also in a subgroup of patients with baseline LVEF > 50%. Conclusion Among patients with LBBB, worse LVDF, as derived by a dedicated AI-ECG algorithm is independently associated with all-cause mortality beyond baseline LVEF and clinical heart failure.survival across AI-ECG LVDF grades