Pharmacological Management of Cardiac Arrhythmias in the Fetal and Neonatal Periods: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association: Endorsed by the Pediatric & Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES).

Disorders of the cardiac rhythm may occur in both the fetus and neonate. Because of the immature myocardium, the hemodynamic consequences of either bradyarrhythmias or tachyarrhythmias may be far more significant than in mature physiological states. Treatment options are limited in the fetus and neonate because of limited vascular access, patient size, and the significant risk/benefit ratio of any intervention. In addition, exposure of the fetus or neonate to either persistent arrhythmias or antiarrhythmic medications may have yet-to-be-determined long-term developmental consequences. This scientific statement discusses the mechanism of arrhythmias, pharmacological treatment options, and distinct aspects of pharmacokinetics for the fetus and neonate. From the available current data, subjects of apparent consistency/consensus are presented, as well as future directions for research in terms of aspects of care for which evidence has not been established.

Ectopic Atrial Tachycardia in Infants Following Congenital Heart Disease Surgery.

Although ectopic atrial tachycardia (EAT) is common following surgery for congenital heart disease (CHD), there are limited data regarding this arrhythmia. This study assessed risk factors and outcomes for patients less than one year of age with post-operative EAT. This was a retrospective analysis of infants undergoing CHD surgery from 2007 to 2020. Patients and surgeries with EAT were compared to controls without EAT. Out of 5372 infant CHD surgeries, EAT developed in 129 (2.5%). Compared to controls, the EAT cohort was younger (median 7 vs 85 days, p < 0.01), weighed less at time of surgery (3.3 vs 4.2 kg, p < 0.01), and was more likely to have DiGeorge syndrome (7.7% vs 3.0%, p < 0.01). Multivariate analysis revealed total anomalous venous connection (TAPVC) repair (odds ratio [OR] 2.8; 95% confidence interval 1.5-5.2), DiGeorge syndrome (OR 2.4; 1.1-5.2), Society of Thoracic Surgeons-European Association for Cardio-Thoracic surgery (STAT) category ≥ 4 (OR 2.1; 1.0-4.4), and longer cardiopulmonary bypass times (OR 1.1; 1.0-1.2) as independent risk factors for EAT. The onset of EAT occurred a median of 9 days (IQR 5-14 days) after CHD surgery. Antiarrhythmic treatment was initiated in 109/129 patients (84%) with propranolol (71%) and amiodarone (24%) the most commonly used medications. Although 15 (11.6%) patients did not survive to hospital discharge, EAT was not directly implicated in any deaths. EAT occurred after 2.5% of infant CHD surgeries. In addition to TAPVC repair, longer and more complex surgeries were associated with an increased the risk for the development of post-operative EAT.

Sudden cardiac death in congenital heart disease.

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) accounts for up to 25% of deaths in patients with congenital heart disease (CHD). To date, research has largely been driven by observational studies and real-world experience. Drawbacks include varying definitions, incomplete taxonomy that considers SCD as a unitary diagnosis as opposed to a terminal event with diverse causes, inconsistent outcome ascertainment, and limited data granularity. Notwithstanding these constraints, identified higher-risk substrates include tetralogy of Fallot, transposition of the great arteries, cyanotic heart disease, Ebstein anomaly, and Fontan circulation. Without autopsies, it is often impossible to distinguish SCD from non-cardiac sudden deaths. Asystole and pulseless electrical activity account for a high proportion of SCDs, particularly in patients with heart failure. High-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation is essential to improve outcomes. Pulmonary hypertension and CHD complexity are associated with lower likelihood of successful resuscitation. Risk stratification for primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) should consider the probability of SCD due to a shockable rhythm, competing causes of mortality, complications of ICD therapy, and associated costs. Risk scores to better estimate probabilities of SCD and CHD-specific guidelines and consensus-based recommendations have been proposed. The subcutaneous ICD has emerged as an attractive alternative to transvenous systems in those with vascular access limitations, prior device infections, intra-cardiac shunts, or a Fontan circulation. Further improving SCD-related outcomes will require a multidimensional approach to research that addresses disease processes and triggers, taxonomy to better reflect underlying pathophysiology, high-risk features, early warning signs, access to high-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation and specialized care, and preventive therapies tailored to underlying mechanisms.

Variations in cardiac implantable electronic device surveillance and ancillary testing in the paediatric and congenital heart disease population: an international multi-centre survey from the Paediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society.

BACKGROUND: Expert guidance from scientific societies and regulatory agencies recommend a framework of principles for frequency of in-person evaluations and remote monitoring for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices. However, there are limited data regarding adherence to recommendations among paediatric electrophysiologists, and there are no data regarding cardiac implantable electronic device-related ancillary testing. METHODS: To assess current clinical practices for cardiac implantable electronic device in-person evaluation, remote monitoring, and cardiac implantable electronic device-related ancillary testing, the Paediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society members were surveyed. The main outcome measures were variations in frequency of in person evaluation, frequency of remote monitoring, and cardiac implantable electronic device-related ancillary testing. RESULTS: All respondents performed in-person evaluation at least once a year, but <50% of respondents performed an in-person evaluation within 2 weeks of cardiac implantable electronic device implantation. Remote monitoring was performed every 3 months for pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators by 71 and 75% respondents, respectively. Follow-up echocardiography was performed every 2-3 years by 53% respondents for patients with >50% ventricular pacing. Majority of respondents (75%) did not perform either an exercise stress test or ambulatory Holter monitoring or chest X-ray (65%) after cardiac implantable electronic device implantation. CONCLUSION: This survey identified significant practice variations in cardiac implantable electronic device in- person evaluation, remote monitoring, and ancillary testing practices among paediatric electrophysiologists. Cardiac implantable electronic device management may be optimised by development of a paediatric-specific guidelines for follow-up and ancillary testing.

Third Trimester Fetal Heart Rates in Antibody-Mediated Complete Heart Block Predict Need for Neonatal Pacemaker Placement.

Congenital complete heart block (CCHB) affects 1 in 20,000 newborns. This study evaluates fetal and neonatal risk factors predictive of neonatal pacemaker placement in antibody-mediated complete heart block. The Children's Hospital Los Angeles institutional fetal, pacemaker, and medical record databases were queried for confirmed SSA/SSB cases of CCHB between January 2004 and July 2019. Cases excluded were those with a diagnosis beyond the neonatal period, diagnosis of a channelopathy, or if maternal antibody status was unknown. We recorded the gestational age (GA), birth weight (BW), fetal heart rates (FHRs) of the last echocardiogram before delivery, specific neonatal ECG and echocardiogram findings, age at pacemaker placement, and mortality. Of 43 neonates identified with CCHB, 27 had confirmed maternal antibody exposure. Variables associated with neonatal pacemaker implantation were FHRs < 50 bpm (p = 0.005), neonatal heart rates < 52 bpm (p = 0.015), and neonatal left ventricular fractional shortening (FS) percentages < 34% (p = 0.03). On multivariate analysis, FHR remained significant (p = 0.03) and demonstrated an increased risk of neonatal pacemaker placement by an odds ratio of 12.5 (95% CI 1.3-116, p = 0.05). The median GA at which the FHR was obtained was 34 weeks (IQR 26-35 weeks). Neonatal pacemaker placement was highly associated with a FHR < 50 bpm, neonatal HR < 52 bpm, and neonatal FS < 34%. FHRs at 34 weeks GA (IQR 26-35 weeks) correlated well with postnatal heart rates and were predictive of neonatal pacemaker placement.

2021 PACES Expert Consensus Statement on the Indications and Management of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices in Pediatric Patients: Developed in collaboration with and endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC) Endorsed by the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS).

In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.

2021 PACES expert consensus statement on the indications and management of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in pediatric patients.

In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.

2021 PACES Expert Consensus Statement on the Indications and Management of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices in Pediatric Patients.

In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.

2021 PACES expert consensus statement on the indications and management of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in pediatric patients: Executive summary.

Guidelines for the implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) have evolved since publication of the initial ACC/AHA pacemaker guidelines in 1984 [1]. CIEDs have evolved to include novel forms of cardiac pacing, the development of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) and the introduction of devices for long term monitoring of heart rhythm and other physiologic parameters. In view of the increasing complexity of both devices and patients, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. In 2018, the ACC/AHA/HRS published Guidelines on the Evaluation and Management of Patients with Bradycardia and Cardiac Conduction Delay [2], which were specific recommendations for patients >18 years of age. This age-specific threshold was established in view of the differing indications for CIEDs in young patients as well as size-specific technology factors. Therefore, the following document was developed to update and further delineate indications for the use and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, with recognition that there is often overlap in the care of patents between 18 and 21 years of age. This document is an abbreviated expert consensus statement (ECS) intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease/diagnostic categories. This document will also provide guidance regarding the management of lead systems and follow-up evaluation for pediatric patients with CIEDs. The recommendations are presented in an abbreviated modular format, with each section including the complete table of recommendations along with a brief synopsis of supportive text and select references to provide some context for the recommendations. This document is not intended to provide an exhaustive discussion of the basis for each of the recommendations, which are further addressed in the comprehensive PACES-CIED document [3], with further data easily accessible in electronic searches or textbooks.

2021 PACES expert consensus statement on the indications and management of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in pediatric patients.

In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.

Utility of Surveillance Ambulatory Rhythm Monitoring in the Pediatric Fontan Population.

Our institution established a Fontan surveillance plan, which included ambulatory rhythm monitoring (ARM) at 6, 10, 13, 16 and 19 years old, for early detection of Fontan-associated complications. We conducted a retrospective chart review of Fontan patients followed at our institution 2014-2018 to determine the utility of surveillance ARMs. 139 ARMs from 83 patients were included. ARMs with supraventricular tachycardia, sinus node dysfunction, accelerated junctional rhythm, > 1st degree atrioventricular block, and complex ventricular ectopy were classified as positive for arrhythmia. Arrhythmias were occult if detected on surveillance ARM. The ARM indication was surveillance in 78 (56%) and clinically indicated in 61 (44%). 52 (37%) ARMs in 27 (33%) patients had an arrhythmia. There was no difference in the age of patients with and without arrhythmias [median 10.9 (6.5, 17.1 years) vs. 8.8 (7, 13.6 years), p = 0.5]. Clinically indicated ARMs more frequently demonstrated arrhythmias than surveillance ARMs (52% vs. 26%, p < 0.01). Compared to patients without arrhythmias, those with arrhythmias were more likely to be female (48% vs. 23%, p = 0.02), have a single right ventricle (46% vs. 19%, p < 0.01) and longer QRS duration on ECG [100 (91, 116 ms) vs. 94 (84, 104 ms), p = 0.046]. Patients with occult arrhythmias were less likely to have moderate to severe atrioventricular valvar regurgitation (0% vs. 46%; p = 0.04) or ventricular dysfunction (0% vs. 46%; p = 0.04) than those with clinical arrhythmia(s). Arrhythmia findings resulted in change in management for 16/52 (31%) ARMs. The findings suggest the frequent presence of arrhythmias on periodic ARMs in patients following the Fontan procedure regardless of symptomatic status.

Characteristics of antegrade-only accessory pathways in children and adolescents.

There is minimal data regarding antegrade-only accessory pathways in young patients. Given evolving recommendations and treatments, retrospective analysis of the clinical and electrophysiologic properties of antegrade-only pathways in patients <21 years old was performed, with subsequent comparison of electrophysiology properties to age-matched controls with bidirectional pathways. Of 522 consecutive young patients with ventricular pre-excitation referred for electrophysiology study, 33 (6.3%) had antegrade-only accessory pathways. Indications included palpitations (47%), chest pain (25%), and syncope (22%). The shortest value for either the accessory pathway effective refractory period or the pre-excited R-R interval was taken for each patient, with the median of the antegrade-only group significantly greater than shortest values for the bidirectional group (310 [280-360] ms versus 270 [240-302] ms, p < 0.001). However, the prevalence of pathways with high-risk properties (effective refractory period or shortest pre-excited R-R interval <250 ms) was similar in both study patients and controls (13% versus 21%) (p = 0.55). Sixteen patients had a single antegrade-only accessory pathway and no inducible arrhythmia. Six patients had Mahaim fibres, all right anterolateral with inducible antidromic reciprocating tachycardia. However, 11 patients with antegrade-only accessory pathways and 3 with Mahaim fibres had inducible tachycardia due to a second substrate recognised at electrophysiology study. These included concealed accessory pathways (7), bidirectional accessory pathways (5), and atrioventricular node re-entry (2). Antegrade-only accessory pathways require comprehensive electrophysiology evaluation as confounding factors such as high-risk conduction properties or inducible Supraventricular Tachycardia (SVT) due to a second substrate of tachycardia are often present.

A comparison of oral flecainide and amiodarone for the treatment of recurrent supraventricular tachycardia in children.

BACKGROUND: Supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) in children can be difficult to treat when first-line therapies (beta-blockade or digoxin) are not effective. Both flecainide and amiodarone are used as second-line therapies. We sought to compare the efficacy and safety of flecainide and amiodarone in pediatric patients with recurrent SVT. METHODS: Pediatric patients treated with oral flecainide or oral amiodarone for SVT between 2006 and 2015 were studied. Tachycardia mechanisms included orthodromic reciprocating tachycardia (ORT), intra-atrial reentrant tachycardia (IART), and ectopic atrial tachycardia (EAT). Outcomes were classified as full success, partial success (requiring additional intervention), or failure. RESULTS: Seventy-four patients were included (median age 46 days, range 1 day to 19 years). Flecainide was used in 47 patients and amiodarone in 27 patients. Full success was achieved in 68% and 59%, respectively (P = 0.28). Partial success was achieved in 13% and 19%, respectively (P = 0.12). Treatment failed in 19% and 22%, respectively (P = 0.97). Ten crossover patients received the second medication after the first failed. Of five amiodarone-to-flecainide crossovers, four achieved success on flecainide alone. Of five flecainide-to-amiodarone crossovers, two achieved success. Minor adverse events occurred in 9% of flecainide and 22% of amiodarone patients (P = 0.16). No significant differences were seen by arrhythmia subtype (36 EAT, 28 ORT, 10 IART), congenital heart disease (n = 38), or age group (56 infants). CONCLUSIONS: Oral flecainide and amiodarone achieved meaningful arrhythmia control in 81% and 78% of pediatric patients with recurrent SVT, respectively. Those who failed amiodarone had encouraging outcomes when changed to flecainide.

Prenatal diagnosis and management of congenital complete heart block.

Congenital complete heart block (CCHB) is a life-threatening medical condition in the unborn fetus with insufficiently validated prenatal interventions. Maternal administration of medications aimed at decreasing the immune response in the fetus and beta-agonists intended to increase fetal cardiac output have shown only marginal benefits. Anti-inflammatory therapies cannot reverse CCHB, but may decrease myocarditis and improve heart function. Advances in prenatal diagnosis and use of strict surveillance protocols for delivery timing have demonstrated small improvements in morbidity and mortality. Ambulatory surveillance programs and wearable fetal heart rate monitors may afford early identification of evolving fetal heart block allowing for emergent treatment. There is also preliminary data suggesting a roll for prevention of CCHB with hydroxychloroquine, but the efficacy and safety is still being studied. To date, intrauterine fetal pacing has not been successful due to the high-risk invasive placement techniques and potential problems with lead dislodgement. The development of a fully implantable micropacemaker via a minimally invasive approach has the potential to pace fetal patients with CCHB and thus delay delivery and allow fetal hydrops to resolve. The challenge remains to establish accepted prenatal interventions capable of successfully managing CCHB in utero until postnatal pacemaker placement is successfully achieved.

Home use of a compact, 12­lead ECG recording system for newborns.

BACKGROUND: An easy-to-operate ECG recorder should be useful for newborn screening for heart conditions, by health care workers - or parents. We developed a one-piece electrode strip and a compact, 12­lead ECG recorder for newborns. METHOD: We enrolled 2582 newborns in a trial to assess abilities of parents to record a 12­lead ECG on their infants (2-4 weeks-old). Newborns were randomized to recordings by parents (1290) or our staff (1292 controls). Educational backgrounds of parents varied, including 64% with no more than a high school diploma. RESULTS: For newborns randomized to parent recorded ECGs, 94% of parents completed a 10-minute recording. However, 42.6% asked for verbal help, and 12.7% needed physical help. ECG quality was the same for recordings by parents versus staff. CONCLUSIONS: By use of a one-piece electrode strip and a compact recorder, 87% of parents recorded diagnostic quality ECGs on their newborn infants, with minimal assistance.