Citations

Introduction: Catheter ablation of the arrhythmogenic substrate reduces the recurrence of ventricular tachycardia (VT) in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). However, the all-cause mortality benefit in this population is unclear. Hypothesis: Prophylactic ablation of the arrhythmogenic substrate decreases all-cause mortality and prevents the recurrence of VT/ventricular fibrillation (VF) in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. Methods: We searched the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from inception through May 2021. We included randomized controlled trials that compared all-cause mortality and ventricular arrhythmia recurrence in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy who underwent ICD implantation with and without prophylactic ablation. The data from each study was combined using a fixed effects model to calculate the hazard ratio and 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: Four randomized controlled trials during 2007-2020 involving 505 patients (249 patients with and 256 patients without prophylactic VT ablation) were included in our meta-analysis. Compared with control, prophylactic VT ablation did not decrease the all-cause mortality (pooled hazard ratio = 0.94, 95% CI 0.54-1.63, p = 0.818, I2 = 5.8%). However, prophylactic VT ablation significantly decreased appropriate ICD therapy (pooled hazard ratio = 0.58, 95% CI 0.41-0.82, p = 0.002, I 2 = 26.1%) and VT/VF recurrence (pooled hazard ratio = 0.70, 95% CI 0.52-0.93, p = 0.015, I 2 = 0.0%). Conclusions: Prophylactic VT ablation in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy did not decrease all-cause mortality; however, it did lead to decreased appropriate ICD therapy and VT/VF recurrence.

AbstractMagnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a valuable imaging modality for the assessment of both cardiac and non‐cardiac structures. With a growing population of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), 50%–75% of these patients will need an MRI. MRI‐conditional CIEDs have demonstrated safety of MRI scanning with such devices, yet non‐conditional devices such as hybrid CIEDs which have generator and lead brand mismatch may pose a safety risk. In this retrospective study, we examined the outcomes of patients with hybrid CIEDs undergoing MRI compared to those patients with non‐hybrid CIEDs. A total of 349 patients were included, of which 24 patients (7%) had hybrid CIEDs. The primary endpoint was the safety of MRI for patients with hybrid CIEDs as compared to those with non‐hybrid devices, measured by the rate of adverse events, including death, lead or generator failure needing immediate replacement, loss of capture, new onset arrhythmia, or power‐on reset. Secondary endpoints consisted of pre‐ and post‐MRI changes of decreased P‐wave or R‐wave sensing by ≥50%, changes in pacing lead impedance by ≥50 ohms, increase in pacing thresholds by ≥ 0.5 V at 0.4 ms, and decreasing battery voltage of ≥ 0.04 V. The primary endpoint of any adverse reaction was present in 1 (4.2%) patient with a hybrid device, and consistent of atrial tachyarrhythmia, and in 10 (3.1%) patients with a non‐hybrid device, and consisted of self‐limited atrial and non‐sustained ventricular arrhythmias; this was not statistically significant. No significant differences were found in the secondary endpoints. This study demonstrates that MRI in patients with hybrid CIEDs does not result in increased patient risk or significant device changes when compared to those patients who underwent MRI with non‐hybrid CIEDs.

Introduction: Drug challenge testing is performed to unmask Type-1 Brugada pattern. The safety and prevalence of its complications during the test are unclear. We aimed to assess the relation of complications in patients with positive and negative results by a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hypothesis: The prevalence of arrhythmic complications is higher in patients with positive drug challenge testing. Methods: We comprehensively searched the databases of MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to June 2020. Included studies were cohort studies that reported ventricular arrhythmia that required interventions (VAI) (sustained ventricular tachycardia [VT], polymorphic VT, ventricular fibrillation, appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator [ICD] shock, or sudden cardiac arrest) and ventricular arrhythmias that did not required interventions (VANI) (premature ventricular complexes and non-sustained VT) during drug challenge testing. Data were combined using the random-effects model. Results: Thirteen studies involving 2,688 patients (62.7% positive) were included. The overall prevalence of VAI and VANI were 3.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.8-5.7) and 0.5% (95% CI: 0.1-0.9), respectively. VAI were more common in positive when compared to negative test result patients (1.5% [95% CI: 0.6-2.4] and 0%, respectively) but the prevalence of VANI were similar (2.7% [95% CI: 0.8-4.6] and 2.6% [95% CI: 0.8-4.6], respectively). VAI in positive result patients were more common with flecainide followed by pilsicainide and ajmaline (2.4% [95% CI: -4.3 to 9.2], 2.2% [95% CI: 0.5-4.0], and 1.5% [95% CI: 0.6 to 2.4], respectively). Most of patients with VAI during drug challenge testing underwent ICD implantation (94%). VAI during drug challenge testing in positive result patients carries an increased risk of VAI during 8.6 ± 4.9 years follow-up (odds ratio 3.73, 95% CI: 1.77-7.86, p=0.001). Conclusions: VAI were more common in patients with positive drug challenge testing, more often occurring with positive flecainide challenge, and carries an increased risk of VAI over long-term follow-up in patients with positive drug challenge testing.

Abstract Atrial fibrillation is a common clinical manifestation in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). Medications used to treat atrial fibrillation, such as antiarrhythmic drugs and anticoagulants, may have significant drug interactions with emerging COVID‐19 treatments. Common unintended nontherapeutic target effects of COVID‐19 treatment include potassium channel blockade, cytochrome P 450 isoenzyme inhibition or activation, and P‐glycoprotein inhibition. Drug‐drug interactions with antiarrhythmic drugs and anticoagulants in these patients may lead to significant bradycardia, ventricular arrhythmias, or severe bleeding. It is important for clinicians to be aware of these interactions, drug metabolism changes, and clinical consequences when choosing antiarrhythmic drugs and anticoagulants for COVID‐19 patients with atrial fibrillation. The objective of this review is to provide a practical guide for clinicians who are managing COVID‐19 patients with concomitant atrial fibrillation.

AbstractBackgroundBrugada syndrome (BrS) is an inherited arrhythmic disease associated with an increased risk of major arrhythmic events (MAE). Previous studies reported that a wide QRS complex may be useful as a predictor of MAE in BrS patients. We aimed to assess the correlation of wide QRS complex with MAE by a systematic review and meta‐analysis.MethodsWe comprehensively searched the databases of MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to June 2019. Included studies were cohort and case control studies that reported QRS duration and the relationship between wide QRS complex (>120 milliseconds) and MAE (sudden cardiac death, sudden cardiac arrest, ventricular fibrillation, sustained ventricular tachycardia, or appropriate shock). Data from each study were combined using the random‐effects model.ResultsTwenty‐two studies from 2007 to 2018 were included in this meta‐analysis involving 4,814 BrS patients. The mean age was 46.1 ± 12.8 years. The patients were predominately men (77.6%). Wide QRS duration was an independent predictor of MAE (pooled risk ratio 1.55, 95% confidence interval: 1.04‐2.30, P = .30, I2 = 38.4%). QRS duration was wider in BrS who had history of MAE (weight mean difference = 8.12 milliseconds, 95% confidence interval: 5.75‐10.51 milliseconds).ConclusionsOur study demonstrated that QRS duration is wider in BrS who had history of MAE, and a wide QRS complex is associated with 1.55 times higher risk of MAE in BrS populations. Wide QRS complex can be considered for risk stratification in prediction of MAE in patients with BrS, especially when considering implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator placement in asymptomatic patients.

Decitabine is a pyrimidine analogue of nucleoside cytidine, used for the treatment of myelodysplastic syndromes, chronic myelogenous leukemia, and acute myelogenous leukemia. We present a case of cardiomyopathy associated with decitabine used for secondary acute myelogenous leukemia. The patient presented with new heart failure symptoms and an ejection fraction decline.

Background— The risk of syncope occurring while driving has obvious implications for personal and public safety. We aimed to define the clinical characteristics, causes, and prognosis of syncope while driving. Methods and Results— In this case-control study of consecutive patients evaluated for syncope from 1996 through 1998 at an academic medical center, we documented causes, clinical characteristics, and recurrence of syncope while driving. Of 3877 patients identified, 381 (9.8%) had syncope while driving (driving group). Compared with the 3496 patients (90.2%) who did not have syncope while driving, the driving group was younger ( P =0.01) and had higher percentages of male patients ( P <0.001) and patients with a history of any cardiovascular disease ( P =0.01) and stroke ( P =0.02). Syncope while driving was commonly caused by neurally mediated syncope (37.3%) and cardiac arrhythmias (11.8%). Long-term survival in the driving group was comparable to that of an age- and sex-matched cohort from the Minnesota population ( P =0.15). Among the driving group, syncope recurred in 72 patients, 35 of whom (48.6%) had recurrence >6 months after the initial evaluation. Recurrences during driving happened in 10 patients in the driving group, 7 of which (70%) were >12 months after the initial evaluation. Conclusions— In our study, neurally mediated syncope was the most common type of syncope while driving. The causes of syncope, the late recurrences of syncope (during ≥6 months of follow-up), and the overall low incidence of recurrent syncope while driving provide useful information to supplement current recommendations on driving for these patients.