Coronavirus disease 2019 outcomes in heart transplant recipients: A large Australian cohort.

Heart transplant recipients have been reported to be at a significantly elevated risk of poor outcomes from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection owing to their underlying comorbidities and immunosuppression. We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort of all heart transplant recipients who were known to have contracted COVID-19 between January 2020 and September 2022. Electronic medical records were used to collect baseline demographics, vaccination status, COVID-19 treatment received, hospitalization data, and mortality. Our primary end point was mortality, and our secondary endpoint was hospitalization. Between January 2020 and September 2022, 132 heart transplant recipients at our single-center contracted COVID-19 infection. Our population had high rates of vaccination, with 124 patients (94%) having received at least 2 vaccines. We found significantly lower rates of mortality and hospitalization than had been previously reported earlier in the pandemic, with a mortality rate of 8/132 (6%) and hospitalization rate of 21/132 (16%).

Major adverse kidney events predict reduced survival in ventricular assist device supported patients.

AIMS: There is limited data describing major adverse kidney events (MAKE) in patients supported with ventricular assist devices (VAD). We aim to describe the association between MAKE and survival, risk factors for MAKE, and renal trajectory in VAD supported patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a single-centre retrospective analysis of consecutive VAD implants between 2010 and 2019. Baseline demographics, biochemistry, and adverse events were collected for the duration of VAD support. MAKE was defined as the first event to occur of sustained drop (>50%) in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), progression to stage V chronic kidney disease, initiation or continuation of renal replacement therapy beyond implant admission or death on renal replacement therapy at any time. One-hundred and seventy-three patients were included, median age 56.8 years, 18.5% female, INTERMACS profile 1 or 2 in 75.1%. Thirty-seven patients experienced MAKE. On multivariate analysis, post-implant clinical right ventricular failure and the presence of chronic haemolysis, defined by the presence of schistocytes on blood film analysis, were significantly associated with increased risk of MAKE (adjusted odds ratio 9.88, P < 0.001 and adjusted odds ratio 3.33, P = 0.006, respectively). MAKE was associated with reduced survival (hazard ratio 4.80, P < 0.001). Patients who died or experienced MAKE did not demonstrate the expected transient 3-month improvement in eGFR, seen in other cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: MAKE significantly impacts survival. In our cohort, MAKE was predicted by post-implant right ventricular failure and chronic haemolysis. The lack of early eGFR improvement on VAD support may indicate higher risk for MAKE.

Management of the arrhythmic manifestations of cardiac sarcoidosis.

Cardiac sarcoidosis (CS) is characterised by a high burden of arrhythmic manifestations and cardiac electrophysiologists play an important role in both the diagnosis and management of this challenging condition. CS is characterised by the formation of noncaseating granulomas within the myocardium, which can subsequently lead to fibrosis. Clinical presentations of CS are varied and depend on the location and extent of granulomas. Patients may present with atrioventricular block, ventricular arrhythmias, sudden cardiac death or heart failure. CS is being increasing diagnosed through use of advanced cardiac imaging, however endomyocardial biopsy is often still required to confirm the diagnosis. Due to the low sensitivity of fluoroscopy-guided right ventricular biopsies, three-dimensional electro-anatomical mapping and electrogram-guided biopsies are being investigated as a means to improve diagnostic yield. Cardiac implantable electronic devices are often required in the management of CS, either for pacing or for primary or secondary prevention of ventricular arrhythmias. Catheter ablation for ventricular arrythmias may also be required, although this is often associated with high recurrence rates due to the challenging nature of the arrhythmogenic substrate. This review will explore the underlying mechanisms of the arrhythmic manifestations of CS, provide an overview of current clinical practice guidelines, and examine the important role that cardiac electrophysiologists play in managing patients with CS.

Late Outcomes of Patients With Prehospital ST-Segment Elevation and Appropriate Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory Nonactivation.

Background Patients with suspected ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and cardiac catheterization laboratory nonactivation (CCL-NA) or cancellation have reportedly similar crude and higher adjusted risks of death compared with those with CCL activation, though reasons for these poor outcomes are not clear. We determined late clinical outcomes among patients with prehospital ECG STEMI criteria who had CCL-NA compared with those who had CCL activation. Methods and Results We identified consecutive prehospital ECG transmissions between June 2, 2010 to October 6, 2016. Diagnoses according to the Fourth Universal Definition of myocardial infarction (MI), particularly rates of myocardial injury, were adjudicated. The primary outcome was all-cause death. Secondary outcomes included cardiovascular death/MI/stroke and noncardiovascular death. To explore competing risks, cause-specific hazard ratios (HRs) were obtained. Among 1033 included ECG transmissions, there were 569 (55%) CCL activations and 464 (45%) CCL-NAs (1.8% were inappropriate CCL-NAs). In the CCL activation group, adjudicated index diagnoses included MI (n=534, 94%, of which 99.6% were STEMI and 0.4% non-STEMI), acute myocardial injury (n=15, 2.6%), and chronic myocardial injury (n=6, 1.1%). In the CCL-NA group, diagnoses included MI (n=173, 37%, of which 61% were non-STEMI and 39% STEMI), chronic myocardial injury (n=107, 23%), and acute myocardial injury (n=47, 10%). At 2 years, the risk of all-cause death was higher in patients who had CCL-NA compared with CCL activation (23% versus 7.9%, adjusted risk ratio, 1.58, 95% CI, 1.24-2.00), primarily because of an excess in noncardiovascular deaths (adjusted HR, 3.56, 95% CI, 2.07-6.13). There was no significant difference in the adjusted risk for cardiovascular death/MI/stroke between the 2 groups (HR, 1.23, 95% CI, 0.87-1.73). Conclusions CCL-NA was not primarily attributable to missed STEMI, but attributable to "masquerading" with high rates of non-STEMI and myocardial injury. These patients had worse late outcomes than patients who had CCL activation, mainly because of higher rates of noncardiovascular deaths.

Utility of prehospital electrocardiogram interpretation in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction utilizing computer interpretation and transmission for interventional cardiologist consultation.

OBJECTIVES: We examined the appropriateness of prehospital cardiac catheter laboratory activation (CCL-A) in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) utilizing the University of Glasgow algorithm (UGA) and remote interventional cardiologist consultation. BACKGROUND: The incremental benefit of prehospital electrocardiogram (PH-ECG) transmission on the diagnostic accuracy and appropriateness of CCL-A has been examined in a small number of studies with conflicting results. METHODS: We identified consecutive PH-ECG transmissions between June 2, 2010 and October 6, 2016. Blinded adjudication of ECGs, appropriateness of CCL-A, and index diagnoses were performed using the fourth universal definition of MI. The primary outcome was the appropriate CCL-A rate. Secondary outcomes included rates of false-positive CCL-A, inappropriate CCL-A, and inappropriate CCL nonactivation. RESULTS: Among 1088 PH-ECG transmissions, there were 565 (52%) CCL-As and 523 (48%) CCL nonactivations. The appropriate CCL-A rate was 97% (550 of 565 CCL-As), of which 4.9% (n = 27) were false-positive. The inappropriate CCL-A rate was 2.7% (15 of 565 CCL-As) and the inappropriate CCL nonactivation rate was 3.6% (19 of 523 CCL nonactivations). Reasons for appropriate CCL nonactivation (n = 504) included nondiagnostic ST-segment elevation (n = 128, 25%), bundle branch block (n = 132, 26%), repolarization abnormality (n = 61, 12%), artefact (n = 72, 14%), no ischemic symptoms (n = 32, 6.3%), severe comorbidities (n = 26, 5.2%), transient ST-segment elevation (n = 20, 4.0%), and others. CONCLUSIONS: PH-ECG interpretation utilizing UGA with interventional cardiologist consultation accurately identified STEMI with low rates of inappropriate and false-positive CCL-As, whereas using UGA alone would have almost doubled CCL-As. The benefits of cardiologist consultation were identifying "masquerading" STEMI and avoiding unnecessary CCL-As.