Comparing classifications of death in the Mode Selection Trial: agreement and disagreement among site investigators and a clinical events committee.

Clinical events committees (CECs) are the current standard for endpoint adjudication in clinical trials. However, little data exist with which to compare CEC and site investigator determinations or to evaluate internal agreement among CEC members. Using data from the Mode Selection Trial in Sinus Node Dysfunction (MOST), we analyzed classifications of death in order to compare internal agreement among CEC physician reviewers and agreement between the CEC and site investigators. Death was classified at 2 levels: by major cause (cardiac, noncardiac, or unknown) and by minor subclassification of the major classifications. Reviewer agreement was tabulated at the major and minor levels, and standard and weighted kappa statistics were calculated. Disagreement at both levels was also determined. Individual decision-making was tabulated in terms of frequency in classifying death as unknown. All 404 deaths were classified by the CEC. Site investigators determined major classifications in 382 cases and minor classification in 379 cases. The CEC and the site investigators disagreed in classifying 41 cases (10.7%) at the major level and 117 (30.9%) at the minor level. CEC reviewers disagreed internally at the major level in 64 cases (15.8%), at the minor level in 63 cases (15.6%), and at any level in 127 cases (31.4%) (kappa = 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.55, 0.66]; weighted kappa = 0.66, 95% CI [0.62, 0.75]). In resolving internal disagreements, the full CEC agreed with 1 of 2 CEC reviewers in 85.9% of cases. Disagreements occurred between site investigators and CEC reviewers in classifying deaths. Endpoint determination and decision-making varied among individual CEC reviewers, but second-tier reviews by the full CEC resolved all disagreements. These findings support continued use of CECs for endpoint adjudication in clinical trials.

Catheter cryoablation of supraventricular tachycardia: results of the multicenter prospective "frosty" trial.

OBJECTIVE: To study the safety, efficacy, and mapping utility of a new cryoablation catheter. BACKGROUND: The CryoCath Technologies Freezor catheter has been used successfully for cryoablation of supraventricular tachycardia (SVT), but has not been evaluated in a large clinical trial. METHODS: A multicenter clinical trial to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and cryomapping utility of this cryoablation catheter was conducted in 166 subjects. The target of ablation was the slow pathway in patients with SVT due to AV nodal reentry (AVNRT, n = 103), an accessory pathway in patients with AV reentrant SVT (AVRT, n = 51) and the AV junction in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF, n = 12). RESULTS: Acute procedural success (APS) was achieved in 83% of the overall group (95% CI, 76% to 88%). APS in the AVNRT group was 91% (98.3% CI, 82% to 97%), compared to 69% for AVRT (98.3% CI, 51% to 84%) and 67% for AF (98.3% CI, 29% to 93%), a highly significant difference (P < .001 by stepwise logistic regression). In patients with APS, long-term success after 6 months was 91% overall (95% CI, 86% to 96%) and 94% for AVNRT subjects (98.3% CI, 87% to 100%). None of the AVNRT or AVRT subjects required a permanent pacemaker. Cryomapping successfully identified ablation targets in 64% of patients in whom it was attempted. The electrophysiologic effects of cryomapping were completely reversible within minutes in 94% of such attempts. CONCLUSIONS: Catheter cryoablation of SVT is a safe alternative to RF ablation and is clinically effective in patients with AVNRT. Cryomapping can reversibly identify targets for ablation and can help minimize the risk of inadvertent AV block during ablation.

Increasing I(Ks) corrects abnormal repolarization in rabbit models of acquired LQT2 and ventricular hypertrophy.

Excessive action potential (AP) prolongation and early afterdepolarizations (EAD) are triggers of malignant ventricular arrhythmias. A slowly activating delayed rectifier K+ current (I(Ks)) is important for repolarization of ventricular AP. We examined the effects of I(Ks) activation by a new benzodiazepine (L3) on the AP of control, dofetilide-treated, and hypertrophied rabbit ventricular myocytes. In both control and hypertrophied myocytes, L3 activated I(Ks) via a negative shift in the voltage dependence of activation and a slowing of deactivation. L3 had no effect on L-type Ca(2+) current or other cardiac K+ currents tested. L3 shortened AP of control, dofetilide-treated, and hypertrophied myocytes more at 0.5 than 2 Hz. Selective activation of I(Ks) by L3 attenuates prolonged AP and eliminated EAD induced by rapidly activating delayed rectifier K+ current inhibition in control myocytes at 0.5 Hz and spontaneous EAD in hypertrophied myocytes at 0.2 Hz. Pharmacological activation of I(Ks) is a promising new strategy to suppress arrhythmias resulting from excessive AP prolongation in patients with certain forms of long QT syndrome or cardiac hypertrophy and failure.

Ventricular pacing or dual-chamber pacing for sinus-node dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: Dual-chamber (atrioventricular) and single-chamber (ventricular) pacing are alternative treatment approaches for sinus-node dysfunction that causes clinically significant bradycardia. However, it is unknown which type of pacing results in the better outcome. METHODS: We randomly assigned a total of 2010 patients with sinus-node dysfunction to dual-chamber pacing (1014 patients) or ventricular pacing (996 patients) and followed them for a median of 33.1 months. The primary end point was death from any cause or nonfatal stroke. Secondary end points included the composite of death, stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure; atrial fibrillation; heart-failure score; the pacemaker syndrome; and the quality of life. RESULTS: The incidence of the primary end point did not differ significantly between the dual-chamber group (21.5 percent) and the ventricular-paced group (23.0 percent, P=0.48). In patients assigned to dual-chamber pacing, the risk of atrial fibrillation was lower (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.66 to 0.94; P=0.008), and heart-failure scores were better (P<0.001). The differences in the rates of hospitalization for heart failure and of death, stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure were not significant in unadjusted analyses but became marginally significant in adjusted analyses. Dual-chamber pacing resulted in a small but measurable increase in the quality of life, as compared with ventricular pacing. CONCLUSIONS: In sinus-node dysfunction, dual-chamber pacing does not improve stroke-free survival, as compared with ventricular pacing. However, dual-chamber pacing reduces the risk of atrial fibrillation, reduces signs and symptoms of heart failure, and slightly improves the quality of life. Overall, dual-chamber pacing offers significant improvement as compared with ventricular pacing.