Safety of catheter ablation in patients with recently implanted cardiac implantable electronic device: A 5-year experience.

INTRODUCTION: Catheter ablation (CA) can interfere with cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) function. The safety of CA in the 1st year after CIED implantation/lead revision is uncertain. METHODS: This single center, retrospective cohort included patients who underwent CA between 2012 and 2017 and had a CIED implant/lead revision within the preceding year. We assessed the frequency of device/lead malfunctions in this population. RESULTS: We identified 1810 CAs in patients between 2012 and 2017, with 170 CAs in 163 patients within a year of a CIED implant/lead revision. Mean age 68 ± 12 years (68% men). Time between the CIED procedure and CA was 158 ± 99 days. The CA procedures included AF ablation (n = 57, 34%), AV node ablation (n = 40, 24%), SVT ablation (n = 37, 22%), and PVC/VT ablations (n = 36, 21%). The cumulative frequency of lead dislodgement, significant CIED dysfunction, and/or CIED-related infection following CA was (n = 1/170, 0.6%). There was a single atrial lead dislodgement (0.6%). There were no instances of power-on-reset or CIED-related infection. Following CA, there was no significant difference in RA or RV lead sensing (p = 0.52 and 0.84 respectively) or thresholds (p = 0.94 and 0.17 respectively). The RA impedance slightly decreased post-CA from 474 ± 80 Ohms to 460 ± 73 Ohms (p = 0.002), as did the RV impedance (from 515 ± 111 Ohms to 497 ± 98 Ohms, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: CA can be performed within 1 year following CIED implantation/lead revision with a low risk of CIED/lead malfunction or lead dislodgement. The ideal time to perform CA after a CIED remains uncertain.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy for pacing induced cardiomyopathy: Role of baseline right ventricular pacing burden.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is indicated for patients with heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and chronic right ventricular (RV) pacing burden ≥40% (pacing-induced cardiomyopathy, PICM). It is uncertain whether baseline RV pacing burden impacts response to CRT. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of all CRT upgrades for PICM at our hospital from January 2017 to December 2018. Univariate and multivariable-adjusted changes in LVEF, and echocardiographic response (≥10% improvement in LVEF) at 3-12 months post-CRT upgrade were compared in those with RV pacing burden ≥90% versus <90%. RESULTS: We included 75 patients (age 74 ± 11 years, 71% male) who underwent CRT upgrade for PICM. The baseline RV pacing burden was ≥90% in 56 patients (median 99% [IQR 98%-99%]), and <90% in 19 patients (median 79% [IQR 73%-87%]). Improvement in LVEF was greater in those with baseline RV pacing burden ≥90% versus <90% (15.7 ± 9.3% vs. 7.5 ± 9.6%, p = .003). Baseline RV pacing burden ≥90% was a strong predictor of an improvement in LVEF ≥10% after CRT upgrade both in univariate and multivariate-adjusted models (p = .005 and .02, respectively). CONCLUSION: A higher baseline RV pacing burden predicts a greater improvement in LVEF after CRT upgrade for PICM.

Electrocardiographic Z-axis QRS-T voltage-time-integral in patients with typical right bundle branch block - Correlation with echocardiographic right ventricular size and function.

BACKGROUND: Right bundle branch block (RBBB) can be benign or associated with right ventricular (RV) functional and structural abnormalities. Our aim was to evaluate QRS-T voltage-time-integral (VTI) compared to QRS duration and lead V1 R' as markers for RV abnormalities. METHODS: We included adults with an ECG demonstrating RBBB and echocardiogram obtained within 3 months of each other, between 2010 and 2020. VTIQRS and VTIQRST were obtained for 12 standard ECG leads, reconstructed vectorcardiographic X, Y, Z leads and root-mean-squared (3D) ECG. Age, sex and BSA-adjusted linear regressions were used to assess associations of QRS duration, amplitudes, VTIs and lead V1 R' duration/VTI with echocardiographic tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE), RV tissue Doppler imaging S', basal and mid diameter, and systolic pressure (RVSP). RESULTS: Among 782 patients (33% women, age 71 ± 14 years) with RBBB, R' duration in lead V1 was modestly associated with RV S', RV diameters and RVSP (all p ≤ 0.03). QRS duration was more strongly associated with RV diameters (both p < 0.0001). AmplitudeQRS-Z was modestly correlated with all 5 RV echocardiographic variables (all p ≤ 0.02). VTIR'-V1 was more strongly associated with TAPSE, RV S' and RVSP (all p ≤ 0.0003). VTIQRS-Z and VTIQRST-Z were among the strongest correlates of the 5 RV variables (all p < 0.0001). VTIQRST-Z.√BSA cutoff of ≥62 µVsm had sensitivity 62.7% and specificity 65.7% for predicting ≥3 of 5 abnormal RV variables (AUC 0.66; men 0.71, women 0.60). CONCLUSION: In patients with RBBB, VTIQRST-Z is a stronger predictor of RV dysfunction and adverse remodeling than QRS duration and lead V1 R'.

Electrocardiographic prediction of left ventricular hypertrophy in women and men with left bundle branch block - Comparison of QRS duration, amplitude and voltage-time-integral.

BACKGROUND: Standard ECG criteria for left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy rely on QRS amplitudes. However, in the setting of left bundle branch block (LBBB), ECG correlates of LV hypertrophy are not well established. We sought to evaluate quantitative ECG predictors of LV hypertrophy in the presence of LBBB. METHODS: We included adult patients with typical LBBB having ECG and transthoracic echocardiogram performed within 3 months of each other in 2010-2020. Orthogonal X, Y, Z leads were reconstructed from digital 12­lead ECGs using Kors's matrix. In addition to QRS duration, we evaluated QRS amplitudes and voltage-time-integrals (VTIs) from all 12 leads, X, Y, Z leads and 3D (root-mean-squared) ECG. We used age, sex and BSA-adjusted linear regressions to predict echocardiographic LV calculations (mass, end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes, ejection fraction) from ECG, and separately generated ROC curves for predicting echocardiographic abnormalities. RESULTS: We included 413 patients (53% women, age 73 ± 12 years). All 4 echocardiographic LV calculations were most strongly correlated with QRS duration (all p < 0.00001). In women, QRS duration ≥ 150 ms had sensitivity/specificity 56.3%/64.4% for increased LV mass and 62.7%/67.8% for increased LV end-diastolic volume. In men, QRS duration ≥ 160 ms had a sensitivity/specificity 63.1%/72.1% for increased LV mass and 58.3%/74.5% for increased LV end-diastolic volume. QRS duration was best able to discriminate eccentric hypertrophy (area under ROC curve 0.701) and increased LV end-diastolic volume (0.681). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with LBBB, QRS duration (≥ 150 in women and ≥ 160 in men) is a superior predictor of LV remodeling esp. eccentric hypertrophy and dilation.

Multicenter assessment of the outcomes of subcutaneous ICD implantation in patients with prior or future sternotomy.

BACKGROUND: The subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) is a viable alternative to transvenous ICD and avoids intravascular complications in patients without a pacing indication. The outcomes of S-ICD implantation are uncertain in patients with prior sternotomy. OBJECTIVE: We aim to compare the implant techniques and outcomes with S-ICD implantation in patients with and without prior sternotomy. METHODS: Multicenter retrospective cohort study including adult patients with an S-ICD implanted between January 2014 and June 2020. Outcomes were compared between patients with and without prior sternotomy. RESULTS: Among the 212 patients (49 ± 15 years old, 43% women, BMI 30 ± 8 kg/m2 , 68% primary prevention, 30% ischemic cardiomyopathy, LVEF median 30% IQR 25%-45%) who underwent S-ICD implantation, 47 (22%) had a prior sternotomy. There was no difference in the sensing vector (57% vs. 53% primary, p = 0.55), laterality of the S-ICD lead to the sternum (94% vs. 96% leftward, p = 0.54), or the defibrillation threshold (65 ± 1.4 J vs. 65 ± 0.8 J, p = 0.76) with versus without prior sternotomy. The frequency of 30-day complications was similar with and without prior sternotomy (n = 3/47 vs. n = 15/165, 6% vs. 9%, p = 0.56). Over a median follow-up of 28 months (IQR 10-49 months), the frequency of inappropriate shocks was similar between those with and without prior sternotomy (n = 3/47 and n = 16/165, 6% vs. 10%, p = 0.58). CONCLUSION: Implantation of an S-ICD in patients with prior sternotomy is safe with a similar risk of 30-day complications and inappropriate ICD shocks as patients without prior sternotomy.

UltraSound Axillary Vein Access (USAA): Learning curve and randomized comparison to traditional venous access for cardiac device implantation.

BACKGROUND: Many techniques exist for venous access (VA) during cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the learning curve with ultrasound (US) guided axillary vein access (USAA). METHODS: Single-center prospective randomized controlled trial of patients undergoing CIED implantation. Patients were randomized in a 2:1 fashion to USAA versus conventional VA techniques. The primary outcomes were the success rates, VA times and 30-day complication rates. RESULTS: The study included 100 patients (age 68 ± 14 years, BMI 27 ± 4 kg/m2 ). USAA was successful in 66/70 implants (94%). Initial attempts at conventional VA included 47% axillary (n = 14), 30% (n = 9) cephalic, and 23% (n = 7) subclavian. The median access time was longer for USAA than conventional access (8.3 IQR 4.2-15.3 min vs. 5.2 IQR 3.4-8.6 min, p = .009). Among the five inexperienced USAA implanters, there was a significant improvement in median access time from first to last tertile of USAA implants (17.0 IQR 7.0-21.0 min to 8.6 IQR 4.5-10.8 min, p = .038). The experienced USAA implanter had similar access times with USAA compared with conventional access (4.0 IQR 3.3-4.7 min vs. 5.2 IQR 3.4-8.6 min, p = .15). Venograms were less common with USAA than conventional access (2% vs. 33%, p < .0001). The 30-day complication rate was similar with USAA (n = 4/70, 6%) versus conventional (n = 3/30, 10%, p = .44). CONCLUSION: Although the success rate with USAA was high, there was a significant learning curve. Once experienced with the USAA technique, there is the potential for reduced complications without adding to the procedure duration.

Impact of ultra-conservative ICD programming in patients with LVADs: Avoiding potentially unnecessary tachy-therapies.

BACKGROUND: Patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) often tolerate ventricular arrhythmias (VA). We aim to assess the frequency and outcomes of ICD therapies averted by ultraconservative ICD programming (UCP) in LVAD patients. METHODS: This single center, retrospective cohort study included patients with LVADs and ICDs implanted from 2015 to 2019 that had UCP. The aim for UCP was to maximally delay VA treatments and maximize anti-tachycardia pacing (ATP) prior to ICD shocks. VA events were reviewed after UCP and evaluated under prior conservative programming to assess for potentially averted events (that would have resulted in either ATP or defibrillation with prior programming). RESULTS: Fifty patients were included in the study with follow-up of median 16 ± 10.2 months after UCP. The median time from LVAD implantation to reprogramming was 7 days (IQR 5-9 days). Fourteen patients (28%) had potentially averted VA events that would have been treated with their prior ICD programming (82 total events, median two events per patient, IQR 1-10 events). Treated VA events occurred in 15 patients (30%). Eleven of the 14 patients with potentially averted VAs had treated events as well. Only one patient reported definitive symptoms of self-limited "dizziness" during a potentially averted event that did not result in hospitalization. No patients died of complications from or needed emergent care/hospitalization due a potentially averted VA. CONCLUSIONS: UCP in LVAD patients likely prevented unnecessary VA treatments in many patients with minimal reported symptoms during these potentially averted events. Prospective studies are necessary to confirm these findings.

Emerging Implantable-Device Technology for Patients at the Intersection of Electrophysiology and Heart Failure Interdisciplinary Care.

Cardiac implantable electronic devices, including implantable cardioverter-defibrillators and therapy, are part of guideline-indicated treatment for a subset of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Current technological advancements in cardiac implantable electronic devices have allowed the detection of specific physiological parameters that are used to forecast clinical decompensation through algorithmic, multiparameter remote monitoring. Other recent emerging technologies, including cardiac contractility modulation and baroreflex activation therapy, may provide symptomatic or physiological benefits in patients without indications for cardiac resynchronization. Our goal in this state-of-the-art review is to describe the new commercially available technologies, their purported mechanisms of action, and the evidence surrounding their clinical roles, limitations and future directions. Finally, we underline the need for standardized workflow and close interdisciplinary management of this population to ensure the delivery of high-quality care.

Electromagnetic interference from left ventricular assist devices detected in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators.

INTRODUCTION: Electromagnetic interference (EMI) from left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) can cause implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) oversensing. We sought to assess the frequency of inappropriate shocks/oversensing due to LVAD-related EMI and prospectively compare integrated (IB) versus dedicated bipolar (DB) sensing in patients with LVADs. METHODS: Single-center study in LVAD patients with Medtronic or Abbott ICDs between September 2017 and March 2020. We excluded patients that were pacemaker dependent. Measurements were obtained of IB and DB sensing and noise to calculate a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). Device checks were reviewed to assess appropriate and inappropriate sensing events. RESULTS: Forty patients (age 52 ± 14 years, 75% men, 38% ischemic cardiomyopathy) were included with the median time between LVAD implantation and enrollment of 6.7 months (2.3, 11.4 months). LVAD subtypes included: HeartWare (n = 22, 55%), Heartmate II (n = 10, 25%), and Heartmate III (n = 8, 20%). Over a follow-up duration of 21.6 ± 12.9 months after LVAD implantation, 5% of patients (n = 2) had oversensing of EMI from the LVAD (both with HeartWare LVADs and Abbott ICDs) at 4 days and 10.8 months after LVAD implantation. Both patients underwent adjustment of ventricular sensing with resolution of oversensing and no further events over 5 and 15 months of further follow-up. The SNR was similar between IB and DB sensing (50 [29-67] and 57 [41-69], p = 0.89). CONCLUSION: ICD oversensing of EMI from LVADs is infrequent and can be managed with reprogramming the sensitivity. There was no significant difference in the R-wave SNR with IB versus DB ICD leads.

Change in hospitalization rates following transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion.

Introduction: Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is recommended in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) who have contraindications to or are intolerant of long-term oral anticoagulants (OAC), but its impact on hospitalization rates has not been well described. The objective of our study is to describe the incidence of all-cause, bleeding-related, and thrombosis-related hospitalizations before and after LAAO. Material and methods: We used the Nationwide Readmission Database to include patients aged ≥ 18 years with a diagnosis of AF who underwent transcatheter LAAO during the months of February-November in each year between 2016 and 2018. Patients who died during the index procedure or had missing length of hospital stay or mortality information were excluded. Results: A total of 27,633 patients were included (median age: 77 years, 41% female) with an average pre- and post-LAAO monitoring period of 6.5 and 5.5 months respectively. Of these, 10,808 (39.1%) patients had one or more admissions prior to the procedure compared to 7,196 (26.0%) after the procedure. There was a 26% reduction in incidence of all-cause admissions (rate ratio (RR) = 0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.71-0.76; p < 0.001), 49% reduction in bleeding-related admissions (RR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.48-0.55; p < 0.001), and 71% reduction in thrombosis-related readmissions (RR = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.26-0.33; p < 0.001) after LAAO. Conclusions: In a contemporary, nationally representative dataset, we found that LAAO is associated with a significant decrease in all-cause, bleeding-related, and thrombosis-related admissions. These findings lend support to the current use of transcatheter LAAO in clinical practice for patients with contraindications to OAC and/or at high risk of bleeding.

Ultrasound guided axillary vein access: An alternative approach to venous access for cardiac device implantation.

INTRODUCTION: Ultrasound guided axillary vein access (UGAVA) is an emerging approach for cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation not widely utilized. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is a retrospective, age and sex-matched cohort study of CIED implantation from January 2017 to July 2019 comparing UGAVA before incision to venous access obtained after incision without ultrasound (conventional). The study population included 561 patients (187 with attempted UGAVA, 68 ± 13 years old, 43% women, body mass index (BMI) 30 ± 8 kg/m2 , 15% right-sided, 43% implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, 15% upgrades). UGAVA was successful in 178/187 patients (95%). In nine patients where UGAVA was abandoned, the vein was too deep for access before incision. BMI was higher in abandoned patients than successful UGAVA (38 ± 6 vs. 28 ± 6 kg/m2 , p < .0001). Median time from local anesthetic to completion of UGAVA was 7 min (interquartile range [IQR]: 4-10) and median procedure time 61 min (IQR: 50-92). UGAVA changed implant laterality in two patients (avoiding an extra incision in both) and could have prevented unnecessary incision in four conventional patients. Excluding device upgrades, there was reduced fluoroscopy time in UGAVA versus conventional (4 vs. 6 min; IQR: 2-5 vs. 4-9; p < .001). Thirty-day complications were similar in UGAVA versus conventional (n = 7 vs. 26, 4 vs. 7%; p = .13, p = .41 adjusting for upgrades), partly driven by a trend towards reduced pneumothorax (n = 0 vs. 3, 0 vs. 1%; p = .22). CONCLUSIONS: UGAVA is a safe approach for CIED implantation and helps prevent an extra incision if a barrier is identified changing laterality preincision.

Defining the substrate for ventricular tachycardia ablation: The impact of rhythm at the time of mapping.

BACKGROUND: Voltage mapping is critical to define substrate during ablation. In ventricular tachycardia, abnormal potentials may be targets. However, wavefront of activation could impact local signal characteristics. This may be particularly true when comparing sinus rhythm versus paced rhythms. We sought to determine how activation wavefront impacts electrogram characteristics. METHODS: Patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy, ventricular tachycardia, and without fascicular or bundle branch block were included. Point by point mapping was done and at each point, one was obtained during an atrial paced rhythm and one during a right ventricular paced rhythm. Signals were adjudicated after ablation to define late potentials, fractionated potentials, and quantify local voltage. Areas of abnormal voltage (defined as <1.5 mV) were also determined. RESULTS: 9 patients were included (age 61.3 ± 9.2 years, 56% male, mean LVEF 34.9 ± 8.6%). LV endocardium was mapped with an average 375 ± 53 points/rhythm. Late potentials were more frequent during right ventricular pacing (51 ± 21 versus 32 ± 15, p < 0.01) while overall scar area was higher during atrial pacing (22 ± 11% vs 13 ± 7%, p < 0.05). In 1/9 patients, abnormal potentials were seen during a right ventricular paced rhythm that were not apparent in an atrial paced rhythm, ablation of which resulted in non-inducibility. CONCLUSION: Rhythm in which mapping is performed has an impact on electrogram characteristics. Whether one rhythm is preferable to map in remains to be determined. However, it is possible defining local signals during normal conduction as well as variable paced rhythms may impart a greater likelihood of elucidating arrhythmogenic substrate.

Perioperative hematoma with subcutaneous ICD implantation: Impact of anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapies.

BACKGROUND: The safety of perioperative anticoagulation (AC) and antiplatelet (AP) therapy with subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) implantation is unknown. The purpose of this study was to identify the risk factors associated with hematoma complicating S-ICD implantation. METHODS: Records were retrospectively reviewed from 200 consecutive patients undergoing S-ICD implantation at two academic medical centers. A hematoma was defined as a device site blood accumulation requiring surgical evacuation, extended hospital stay, or transfusion. RESULTS: Among 200 patients undergoing S-ICD implantation (age 49 ± 17 years, 67% men), 10 patients (5%) had a hematoma, which required evacuation in six patients (3%). Warfarin was bridged or uninterrupted in 12 and 13 patients, respectively (6% and 6.5%). Four of 12 patients with warfarin and bridging AC (33%) and two of 13 patients with uninterrupted warfarin (15%) developed a hematoma. Neither of the two patients with uninterrupted DOAC had a hematoma. No patients on interrupted AC without bridging (n = 26, 13 with warfarin, 13 with DOAC) developed a hematoma. A hematoma was also more likely with the use of clopidogrel (n = 4/10 vs 10/190, 40% vs 5.3%, P < 0.0001) in combination with aspirin in 12/14 patients. Any bridging AC (odds ratio [OR] 10.3, 1.8-60.8, P = 0.01), clopidogrel (OR 10.0, 1.7-57.7, P = 0.01), and uninterrupted warfarin without bridging (OR 11.1, 1.7-74.3, P = 0.013) were independently associated with hematoma formation. CONCLUSION: AC and/or AP therapy with clopidogrel appears to increase the risk for hematoma following S-ICD implantation. Interruption of AC without bridging should be considered when it is an acceptable risk to hold AC.

Indication, Patient Selection, and Referral Pathways for Left Atrial Appendage Closure.

Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has emerged as a viable option for stroke prevention, especially in those intolerant of or not suitable for long-term oral anticoagulation therapy. This article describes the clinical characteristics, indications, and a proposed referral system for potential LAAC patients. Patient selection remains a challenge because of the paradox between the available randomized data on this intervention and the actual patient population who may gain maximum benefit. Further investigations comparing different LAAC devices with each other and with novel oral anticoagulants are needed. Also, the optimal antithrombotic regimen post-procedure has yet to be determined.

Management of cardiac implantable electronic devices in the presence of left ventricular assist devices.

Left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) are increasingly used in the management of patients with advanced heart failure. Many of these patients have or will be considered for a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) such as an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator or a cardiac resynchronization therapy device. Frequent interplay is often encountered due to the complexity of these devices and the underlying disease states. Proactive management strategies and an awareness of interactions may help reduce adverse events. Here we review the current literature, present management recommendations, and discuss potential future investigations for CIEDs in patients with LVADs.

Catheter ablation in patients with pleomorphic, idiopathic, premature ventricular complexes.

BACKGROUND: Premature ventricular complexes (PVCs) often originate from multiple locations. OBJECTIVE: The goals of this study were to assess characteristics of patients with pleomorphic, idiopathic PVCs and to determine the impact of pleomorphic PVCs on outcomes. METHODS: Records were collected from 153 consecutive patients referred for ablation of PVCs. Patients with structural heart disease (n = 34) or inadequate ambulatory electrocardiographic data (n = 19) were excluded. RESULTS: Among 100 consecutive patients (age 52 ± 15 years, 53% men, 31% pleomorphic vs 69% monomorphic) referred for ablation of idiopathic PVCs, the success rate was lower in patients with pleomorphic PVCs than in those with monomorphic PVCs (71% vs 90%, P = .017, overall 84%). The presence of pleomorphic PVCs was independently associated with unsuccessful ablation. A cutoff of ≥156 nonpredominant PVCs over 24 hours best differentiated successful from unsuccessful ablation procedures (area under the curve 0.64, sensitivity 56%, specificity 74%). Pleomorphic PVCs more often had an epicardial origin than did monomorphic PVCs (29% vs 9%, P = .008). Repeat ablation procedures were required in 20 patients (20%; 6 had pleomorphic PVCs). Of these 20 patients, 16 (80%) had recurrence of the former predominant PVC, 3 patients (15%) had an increase of a nonpredominant PVC, and 1 patient (5%) had a newly emerging PVC focus. CONCLUSION: The presence of pleomorphic PVCs affects ablation outcomes. Successful elimination of the predominant PVC often results in successful ablation, even if not all PVCs are targeted. Although pleomorphic PVCs infrequently require repeat ablation procedures, most recurrences are due to reemergence of the originally targeted predominant PVC morphology.