Peri-mortem arrhythmias in the non-cardiac intensive care unit.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular failure is recognized as a common final pathway at the end of life but there is a paucity of data describing terminal arrhythmias. AIM: We aimed to describe arrhythmias recorded peri-mortem in critically ill patients. STUDY DESIGN: We enrolled intensive care unit patients admitted to two tertiary Canadian medico-surgical centres. Participants wore a continuous electrocardiogram (ECG) monitor for 14 days, until discharge, removal or death. We recorded all significant occurrences of arrhythmias in the final hour of life. RESULTS: Among 39 patients wearing an ECG monitor at the time of death, 22 (56%) developed at least 1 terminal arrhythmia as adjudicated by an arrhythmia physician: 23% (n = 9) had ventricular fibrillation/polymorphic ventricular tachycardia, 18% (n = 7) had sinoatrial pauses, 15% (n = 6) had atrial fibrillation and 13% (n = 5) had high-degree atrioventricular block. Five participants (13%) developed multiple arrythmias. CONCLUSIONS: Arrhythmias are common in dying critically ill patients. There is a roughly even distribution between ventricular arrhythmias, atrial fibrillation, sinus node dysfunction and atrioventricular block. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The results of this study may be most useful for critically ill patients who are organ donation candidates. The appearance of arrhythmias may serve as a marker of change in clinical status for organ donation teams to plan mobilization efforts. In participants who are sedated or intubated, arrhythmias could be a surrogate marker for respiratory or neurologic changes.

Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence in Patients With Transient New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation Detected During Hospitalization for Noncardiac Surgery or Medical Illness : A Matched Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is often detected for the first time in patients who are hospitalized for another reason. Long-term risks for AF recurrence in these patients are unclear. OBJECTIVE: To estimate risk for AF recurrence in patients with new-onset AF during a hospitalization for noncardiac surgery or medical illness compared with a matched population without AF. DESIGN: Matched cohort study. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03221777). SETTING: Three academic hospitals in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: The study enrolled patients hospitalized for noncardiac surgery or medical illness who had transient new-onset AF. For each participant, an age- and sex-matched control participant with no history of AF from the same hospital ward was recruited. All participants left the hospital in sinus rhythm. MEASUREMENTS: 14-day electrocardiographic (ECG) monitor at 1 and 6 months and telephone assessment at 1, 6, and 12 months. The primary outcome was AF lasting at least 30 seconds on the monitor or captured by ECG 12-lead during routine care at 12 months. RESULTS: Among 139 participants with transient new-onset AF (70 patients with medical illness and 69 surgical patients) and 139 matched control participants, the mean age was 71 years (SD, 10), the mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 3.0 (SD, 1.5), and 59% were male. The median duration of AF during the index hospitalization was 15.8 hours (IQR, 6.4 to 49.6 hours). After 1 year, recurrent AF was detected in 33.1% (95% CI, 25.3% to 40.9%) of participants in the transient new-onset AF group and 5.0% (CI, 1.4% to 8.7%) of matched control participants; after adjustment for the number of ECG monitors worn and for baseline clinical differences, the adjusted relative risk was 6.6 (CI, 3.2 to 13.7). After exclusion of participants who had electrical or pharmacologic cardioversion during the index hospitalization (n = 40) and their matched control participants and limiting to AF events detected by the patch ECG monitor, recurrent AF was detected in 32.3% (CI, 23.1% to 41.5%) of participants with transient new-onset AF and 3.0% (CI, 0% to 6.4%) of matched control participants. LIMITATIONS: Generalizability is limited, and the study was underpowered to evaluate subgroups and clinical predictors. CONCLUSION: Among patients who have transient new-onset AF during a hospitalization for noncardiac surgery or medical illness, approximately 1 in 3 will have recurrent AF within 1 year. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Peer-reviewed grants.

Techniques improving electrical cardioversion success for patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: Electrical cardioversion is commonly used to restore sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), but procedural technique and clinical success vary. We sought to identify techniques associated with electrical cardioversion success for AF patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and the grey literature from inception to October 2022. We abstracted data on initial and cumulative cardioversion success. We pooled data using random-effects models. From 15 207 citations, we identified 45 randomized trials and 16 observational studies. In randomized trials, biphasic when compared with monophasic waveforms resulted in higher rates of initial [16 trials, risk ratio (RR) 1.71, 95% CI 1.29-2.28] and cumulative success (18 trials, RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.04-1.16). Fixed, high-energy (≥200 J) shocks when compared with escalating energy resulted in a higher rate of initial success (four trials, RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.33-1.98). Manual pressure when compared with no pressure resulted in higher rates of initial (two trials, RR 2.19, 95% CI 1.21-3.95) and cumulative success (two trials, RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.06-1.34). Cardioversion success did not differ significantly for other interventions, including: antero-apical/lateral vs. antero-posterior positioned pads (initial: 11 trials, RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.97-1.39; cumulative: 14 trials, RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.96-1.06); rectilinear/pulsed biphasic vs. biphasic truncated exponential waveform (initial: four trials, RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.91-1.34; cumulative: four trials, RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.89-1.08) and cathodal vs. anodal configuration (cumulative: two trials, RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.92-1.07). CONCLUSIONS: Biphasic waveforms, high-energy shocks, and manual pressure increase the success of electrical cardioversion for AF. Other interventions, especially pad positioning, require further study.

Pre-treatment with antiarrhythmic drugs for elective electrical cardioversion of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

AIMS: Our objective was to compare the efficacy of pre-treatment with different classes of anti-arrhythmic drugs (AADs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing electrical cardioversion. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different AADs in patients with AF undergoing electrical cardioversion. We grouped AADs into five network nodes: no treatment or rate control, Class Ia, Class Ic, Class III, and amiodarone. Outcomes were (i) acute restoration and (ii) maintenance of sinus rhythm. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception until June 2020. We used Python 3.8.3 and R 3.6.2 for data analysis. We evaluated the overall certainty of evidence with the GRADE framework. We included 28 RCTs. Compared with no treatment or rate control, Class III AADs [odds ratio (OR): 2.41; 95% credible interval (CrI): 1.37 to 4.62, high certainty] and amiodarone (OR: 2.58; 95% CrI: 1.54 to 4.37, high certainty) improved restoration of sinus rhythm. Amiodarone improved long-term maintenance of sinus rhythm when compared with no treatment or rate control (OR: 5.37; 95% CrI: 4.00-7.39, high certainty), Class Ic (OR: 1.89; 95% CrI: 1.05-3.45, moderate certainty) and Class III AADs (OR: 2.19; 95% CrI: 1.39-3.26, high certainty). CONCLUSION: Before electrical cardioversion of AF, treatment with Class III AADs or amiodarone improves the acute restoration of sinus rhythm. Amiodarone is most likely to improve the maintenance of sinus rhythm after electrical cardioversion, but Class Ic and Class III AADs are also effective.

High-Sensitivity Estimate of the Incidence of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in Critically Ill Patients.

To estimate the incidence of new-onset atrial fibrillation in critically ill patients. DESIGN: Prospective cohort. SETTING: Medical-surgical ICU. SUBJECTS: Consecutive patients without a history of atrial fibrillation but with atrial fibrillation risk factors. INTERVENTIONS: Electrocardiogram patch monitor until discharge from hospital or up to 14 days. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 249 participants (median age of 71 yr [interquartile range] 64-78 yr; 35% female) completed the study protocol of which 158 (64%) were admitted to ICU for medical illness, 78 (31%) following noncardiac surgery, and 13 (5%) with trauma. Median Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score was 16 (interquartile range, 12-22). Median duration of patch electrocardiogram monitoring, ICU, and hospital lengths of stay were 6 (interquartile range, 3-12), 4 (interquartile range, 2-8), and 11 days (interquartile range, 5-23 d), respectively.Atrial fibrillation ≥ 30 seconds was detected by the patch in 44 participants (17.7%), and three participants (1.2%) had atrial fibrillation detected clinically after patch removal, resulting in an overall atrial fibrillation incidence of 18.9% (95% CI, 14.2-24.3%).Total duration of atrial fibrillation ranged from 53 seconds to the entire monitoring time. The proportion of participants with ≥1 episode(s) of ≥6 minute, ≥1 hour, ≥12 hour and ≥24 hour duration was 14.8%, 13.2%, 7.0%, and 5.3%, respectively. The clinical team recognized only 70% of atrial fibrillation cases that were detected by the electrocardiogram patch. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients admitted to an ICU, the incidence of new-onset atrial fibrillation is approximately one in five, although approximately one-third of cases are not recognized by the clinical team.

Restricted versus liberal intraoperative benzodiazepine use in cardiac anaesthesia for reducing delirium (B-Free Pilot): a pilot, multicentre, randomised, cluster crossover trial.

BACKGROUND: Delirium is common after cardiac surgery and is associated with adverse outcomes. Perioperative benzodiazepine use is associated with delirium and is common during cardiac surgery, which may increase the risk of postoperative delirium. We undertook a pilot study to inform the feasibility of a large randomised cluster crossover trial examining whether an institutional policy of restricted benzodiazepine administration during cardiac surgery (compared with liberal administration) would reduce delirium. METHODS: We conducted a two-centre, pilot, randomised cluster crossover trial with four 4 week crossover periods. Each centre was randomised to a policy of restricted or liberal use, and then alternated between the two policies during the remaining three periods. Our feasibility outcomes were adherence to each policy (goal ≥80%) and outcome assessment (one delirium assessment per day in the ICU in ≥90% of participants). We also evaluated the incidence of intraoperative awareness in one site using serial Brice questionnaires. RESULTS: Of 800 patients undergoing cardiac surgery during the trial period, 127/800 (15.9%) had delirium. Of these, 355/389 (91.3%) received benzodiazepines during the liberal benzodiazepine periods and 363/411 (88.3%) did not receive benzodiazepines during the restricted benzodiazepine periods. Amongst the 800 patients, 740 (92.5%) had ≥1 postoperative delirium assessment per day in the ICU. Of 521 patients screened for intraoperative awareness, one patient (0.2%), managed during the restricted benzodiazepine period (but who received benzodiazepine), experienced intraoperative awareness. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study demonstrates the feasibility of a large, multicentre, randomised, cluster crossover trial examining whether an institutional policy of restricted vs liberal benzodiazepine use during cardiac surgery will reduce postoperative delirium. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03053869.

Outcomes after Ross procedure in adult patients: A meta-analysis and microsimulation.

OBJECTIVE: We conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the risk of adverse events, life expectancy, and event-free life expectancy after the Ross procedure in adults. METHODS: We searched databases for reports evaluating the Ross procedure in patients aged more than or equal to 16 years of age. A microsimulation model was used to evaluate age- and gender-specific life expectancy for patients undergoing the Ross procedure. RESULTS: Data were pooled from 63 articles totaling 19 155 patients from 20 countries. Perioperative mortality was 2.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.9-3.1; N = 9978). We found a mortality risk of 5.9% (95% CI: 4.8-7.2) at a mean follow-up of 7.2 years (N = 7573). The rate of perioperative clinically significant bleeding was 1.0% (95% CI: 0.1-3.0); re-exploration for bleeding 4.6% (95% CI: 3.1-6.3); postoperative clinically significant bleeding from 30 days until a mean of 7.1 years was 0.5% (95% CI: 0.2-1.0). At a mean of 6.9 years of follow-up, reintervention rate of any operated valve was 7.9% (95% CI: 5.7-10.3). The risk of valve thrombosis was 0.3% (95% CI: 0.2-0.5) at 7.6 years; peripheral embolism 0.3% (95% CI: 0.2-0.4) at 6.4 years; stroke 0.9% (95% CI: 0.7-1.2) at 6.5 years; and endocarditis 2.1% (95% CI: 1.6-2.6) at 8.0 years. Microsimulation reported a 40-year-old undergoing the Ross procedure to have a life expectancy of 35.4 years and event-free life expectancy of 26.6 years. CONCLUSIONS: Ross procedure in nonelderly adults is associated with low mortality and low risk of adverse events both at short- and long-term follow-up. The surgical community must prioritize a large, expertize-based randomized controlled trial to definitively address the risks and benefits of the Ross procedure compared to conventional aortic valve replacement.

Association of Vasopressin Plus Catecholamine Vasopressors vs Catecholamines Alone With Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Distributive Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: Vasopressin is an alternative to catecholamine vasopressors for patients with distributive shock-a condition due to excessive vasodilation, most frequently from severe infection. Blood pressure support with a noncatecholamine vasopressor may reduce stimulation of adrenergic receptors and decrease myocardial oxygen demand. Atrial fibrillation is common with catecholamines and is associated with adverse events, including mortality and increased length of stay (LOS). Objectives: To determine whether treatment with vasopressin + catecholamine vasopressors compared with catecholamine vasopressors alone was associated with reductions in the risk of adverse events. Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were searched from inception to February 2018. Experts were asked and meta-registries searched to identify ongoing trials. Study Selection: Pairs of reviewers identified randomized clinical trials comparing vasopressin in combination with catecholamine vasopressors to catecholamines alone for patients with distributive shock. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two reviewers abstracted data independently. A random-effects model was used to combine data. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was atrial fibrillation. Other outcomes included mortality, requirement for renal replacement therapy (RRT), myocardial injury, ventricular arrhythmia, stroke, and LOS in the intensive care unit and hospital. Measures of association are reported as risk ratios (RRs) for clinical outcomes and mean differences for LOS. Results: Twenty-three randomized clinical trials were identified (3088 patients; mean age, 61.1 years [14.2]; women, 45.3%). High-quality evidence supported a lower risk of atrial fibrillation associated with vasopressin treatment (RR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.67 to 0.88]; risk difference [RD], -0.06 [95% CI, -0.13 to 0.01]). For mortality, the overall RR estimate was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.82 to 0.97; RD, -0.04 [95% CI, -0.07 to 0.00]); however, when limited to trials at low risk of bias, the RR estimate was 0.96 (95% CI, 0.84 to 1.11). The overall RR estimate for RRT was 0.74 (95% CI, 0.51 to 1.08; RD, -0.07 [95% CI, -0.12 to -0.01]). However, in an analysis limited to trials at low risk of bias, RR was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.53 to 0.92, P for interaction = .77). There were no significant differences in the pooled risks for other outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the addition of vasopressin to catecholamine vasopressors compared with catecholamines alone was associated with a lower risk of atrial fibrillation. Findings for secondary outcomes varied.

Hemodynamic outcomes of the Ross procedure versus other aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Life expectancy in young adults undergoing mechanical or bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement (AVR) may be reduced by up to 20 years compared to age matched controls. The Ross procedure is a durable, anticoagulation-sparing alternative. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the valve hemodynamics of the Ross procedure versus other AVR. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to February 2017 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies (n≥10 Ross). Independently and in duplicate, we performed title and abstract screening, full-text eligibility assessment, and data collection. We evaluated the risk of bias with the Cochrane and CLARITY tools, and the quality of evidence with the GRADE framework. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: We identified 2 RCTs and 13 observational studies that met eligibility criteria (N.=1412). In observational studies, the Ross procedure was associated with a lower mean aortic gradient at discharge (MD -9 mmHg, 95% CI: -13 to -5, P<0.0001, I2=97%) and latest follow-up (MD -5 mmHg, 95% CI: -7 to -3, P<0.0001, I2=92%). There was no significant difference in the incidence of severe aortic regurgitation at latest follow-up (RR 1.3, 95% CI: 0.3 to 5.8, P=0.70, I2=30%). In RCTs, the Ross procedure was associated with a lower mean gradient at latest follow-up (MD -15 mmHg, 95% CI: -32 to 2, P=0.08, I2=99%). The mean pulmonic gradient for the Ross procedure was 18.0 mmHg (95% CI: 16 to 20, P<0.0001) at latest follow-up. The evidence for all outcomes from observational studies was deemed to be of very low quality, while the evidence from RCTs was downgraded for imprecision and moderately serious risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to conventional AVR, the Ross procedure was associated with better aortic valve hemodynamics. Future studies should evaluate the impact of the Ross procedure on exercise capacity and quality of life.