Mainigi, Naiya

ABSTRACT Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) and is associated with increased morbidity, heart failure (HF) exacerbations, and adverse long‐term outcomes. Although catheter ablation is an established rhythm‐control strategy, data comparing its long‐term clinical outcomes with anti‐arrhythmic drug (AAD) therapy in patients with HCM remain limited. Objective To compare long‐term clinical outcomes of catheter ablation versus medical therapy with AADs in patients with HCM and AF. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the TriNetX Research Network, a global federated database of electronic health records. Adult patients with HCM and AF between January 2010 and December 2020 were identified and stratified according to treatment with catheter ablation or AAD therapy. Outcomes included all‐cause mortality, HF exacerbations, AAD‐related adverse events, all‐cause hospitalization, ischemic stroke, repeat ablation, need for cardioversion, need for long‐term AAD use, and atrioventricular nodal ablation. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to balance baseline characteristics. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs). Results After PSM, 3144 patients were included (1572 in each cohort) with a mean follow‐up of approximately 3.4 years. Catheter ablation was associated with lower all‐cause mortality compared with AAD therapy (9.5% vs. 14.8%; HR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.49–0.74; p < 0.001). Ablation was also associated with reduced risk of HF exacerbations (38.4% vs. 43.3%; HR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.71–0.88; p < 0.001) and fewer AAD‐related adverse events (8.4% vs. 11.2%; HR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.55–0.93; p = 0.011). Rates of all‐cause hospitalization (HR: 0.93; p = 0.11) and ischemic stroke (HR: 0.78; p = 0.10) were similar between groups. Conclusion In this large real‐world cohort of patients with HCM and AF, catheter ablation was associated with lower mortality, reduced HF hospitalizations, and decreased AAD therapy‐related adverse events, as compared with medical therapy. These findings suggest that catheter ablation may provide meaningful clinical benefits in selected patients with HCM and AF, although prospective studies are needed to confirm these observations.

ABSTRACT Introduction Frailty is increasingly recognized as an important determinant of outcomes in cardiovascular disease, yet its population‐level impact among patients hospitalized with cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections remains incompletely defined. We examined the prevalence of frailty and its association with clinical outcomes and utilization of transvenous lead removal (TLR) in a contemporary national cohort. Methods and Results We analyzed the National Readmissions Database from 2016–2021 to identify adults hospitalized for CIED infections. Frailty was defined using the Johns Hopkins adjusted clinical groups frailty‐defining diagnoses. Of 288,402 patients hospitalized with CIED infections, 25.1% were classified as frail. Frail patients experienced significantly higher in‐hospital mortality (10.8% vs. 4.6%), 30‐day mortality (9.2% vs. 5.5%), complications, longer length of stay, lower rates of discharge home, and higher 30‐day readmissions compared with non‐frail patients (all p < 0.01). TLR was performed less frequently in frail patients (10.8% vs. 13.4%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.80, 95% CI 0.76–0.83). On adjusted analyses, TLR was independently associated with lower in‐hospital mortality, 30‐day mortality, and 30‐day readmissions in both frail and non‐frail patients. Conclusion Among patients hospitalized with CIED infections, TLR was independently associated with lower mortality and readmissions in both frail and non‐frail patients, despite lower utilization in frail individuals. Frailty was common (25.1%) and independently associated with significantly worse outcomes. These findings highlight important associations between frailty, treatment patterns, and outcomes that warrant prospective evaluation.