Cardiac arrhythmias in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: A prospective observational study in the western United States.

Arrhythmias have been reported frequently in COVID-19 patients, but the incidence and nature have not been well characterized. Patients admitted with COVID-19 and monitored by telemetry were prospectively enrolled in the study. Baseline characteristics, hospital course, treatment and complications were collected from the patients' medical records. Telemetry was monitored to detect the incidence of cardiac arrhythmias. The incidence and types of cardiac arrhythmias were analyzed and compared between survivors and non-survivors. Among 143 patients admitted with telemetry monitoring, overall in-hospital mortality was 25.2% (36/143 patients) during the period of observation (mean follow-up 23.7 days). Survivors were less tachycardic on initial presentation (heart rate 90.6 ± 19.6 vs. 99.3 ± 23.1 bpm, p = 0.030) and had lower troponin (peak troponin 0.03 vs. 0.18 ng/ml. p = 0.004), C-reactive protein (peak C-reactive protein 97 vs. 181 mg/dl, p = 0.029), and interleukin-6 levels (peak interleukin-6 30 vs. 246 pg/ml, p = 0.003). Sinus tachycardia, the most common arrhythmia (detected in 39.9% [57/143] of patients), occurred more frequently in non-survivors (58.3% vs. 33.6% in survivors, p = 0.009). Premature ventricular complexes occurred in 28.7% (41/143), and non-sustained ventricular tachycardia in 15.4% (22/143) of patients, with no difference between survivors and non-survivors. Sustained ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation were not frequent (seen only in 1.4% and 0.7% of patients, respectively). Contrary to reports from other regions, overall mortality was higher and ventricular arrhythmias were infrequent in this hospitalized and monitored COVID-19 population. Either disease or management-related factors could explain this divergence of clinical outcomes, and should be urgently investigated.

Delayed pacemaker requirement after transcatheter aortic valve implantation with a new-generation balloon expandable valve: Should we monitor longer?

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the timing of appearance of conduction abnormalities (CAs) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), to identify predictors of delayed CAs requiring pacemaker (PM) implantation and to provide guidance regarding the duration of telemetry monitoring. BACKGROUND: How long patients remain at risk of development of CAs requiring PM implantation after TAVI and for how long they should be monitored remains unclear but is crucial when considering early discharge. METHODS: Development of CAs was studied in 701 consecutive patients treated with Edwards Sapien 3 valves and monitored with telemetry for 7 days in a single center. After excluding valve-in-valve procedures and patients with previous PM, 606 patients remained for analysis. Predictors of CAs requiring PM and the time of onset of CAs were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 606 patients 76 (12.5%) required a PM after TAVI. CAs requiring PM implantation occurred after 48 h in 22.4% (17 patients) and in 10.5% (8 patients) even after 5 days. Of the patients who developed high grade CAs requiring PM after 48 h, 47.1% had no CAs prior to TAVI, and 23.5% had neither pre-existing CAs nor new-developed CAs within the first 48 h after TAVI. CONCLUSION: After TAVI using a new-generation balloon-expandable valve, delayed development of CAs requiring PM implantation is not uncommon, even after 5 days. More importantly, 23.5% of patients eventually requiring a delayed PM implantation had still no CAs at 48 h after TAVI in this study. These results question the safety of early discharge and support ECG monitoring for a longer time period. The most optimal way to monitor these patients is yet to be determined.

Telemonitoring in heart failure patients treated by cardiac resynchronisation therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D): the TELECART Study.

AIM: Telemonitoring (TM) is a safe and efficient monitoring system for internal cardioverter defibrillator device (ICD) recipients. TM has been used to track info on the clinical status of heart failure patients treated by ICD and/or cardiac resynchronisation therapy defibrillator (CRT-D). The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of TM on clinical outcomes in a population of CRT-D patients with heart failure. METHODS: In a multicentre, randomised study, patients with chronic heart failure, New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class II or III, left bundle branch block, severe left ventricle ejection fraction reduction (LVEF < 35%) have been identified and screened. RESULTS: One hundred and ninety-one patients have been randomised to receive either a CRT-D with TM or a CRT-D with traditional ambulatory monitoring (control group) and completed the 12-month study follow-up. Primary endpoints were all cause death, cardiac death and hospital admission for heart failure. Secondary endpoints were atrial fibrillation, sustained episodes, non-sustained and self terminated ventricular tachyarrhythmia, sustained ventricular tachycardia, and ventricular fibrillation, ICD shocks and percentage of CRT-D responder patients. Univariate analysis identified the following factors predicting hospitalisation: TM, age, chronic kidney disease, hypercholesterolaemia, LVEF and NYHA class. At multivariate analysis, TM was the only factor predicting heart failure hospitalisation (hazard ratio 0.6, 0.42-0.79, 95% CI, p = 0.002), without affecting overall mortality and cardiac deaths events. CONCLUSIONS: Taken together, our data indicate the importance of TM in predicting heart failure hospitalisation in patients treated with CRT-D.