[Holter monitoring]. / Das Langzeit-EKG.

Holter monitoring represents a valuable diagnostic tool to document intermittent arrhythmias in the work-up of, for example, syncope, presyncope, collapse, falls, dizziness, stroke, palpitations, and a rapid heartbeat. In addition, it may help in the diagnosis of intermittent ischemia and channelopathies, particularly in the form of 12-lead Holter monitoring. Continuous ECG registration typically lasts from 24-48 h. The use of Holter monitoring is limited in patients with rare symptoms (< 1â€¯× per month) and in recordings full of artifacts. The interpretation of a Holter recording combines an automatic analysis with a manual reassessment. The clinical relevance of many arrhythmias can only be considered together with symptoms and activity of the patient at the time of the event. Therefore, a patient diary accompanying the ECG recording is crucial. Systematic assessment of the ECG recording and knowledge about a number of pitfalls in Holter monitoring can optimize the interpretation of the recording.

Clinical Impact of Digitalis Therapy in a Large Multicenter Cohort of CRT-Recipients.

(1) Introduction: Digitalis use in patients with severe heart failure is controversial. We assessed the effects of digitalis therapy on mortality in a large, observational study in recipients of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). (2) Methods: Consecutive patients receiving a CRT-defibrillator in three European tertiary referral centers were enrolled and followed-up for a mean 37 months ± 28 months. Digitalis use was assessed at the time of CRT implantation. A multivariate Cox-regression model and propensity score matching were used to determine all-cause mortality as the primary endpoint. CRT-response (defined as improvement of ≥1 NYHA class), echocardiographic improvement (defined as improvement of LVEF of ≥ 5%) and incidence of ICD shocks and rehospitalization were assessed as secondary endpoints in a subgroup of patients. (3) Results: The study comprised 552 CRT-recipients with standard indications, including 219 patients (40%) treated with digitalis. Compared to patients without digitalis, they had more often atrial fibrillation, poorer LVEF and a higher NYHA class (all p ≤ 0.002). Crude analysis of all-cause mortality demonstrated a similar relative risk of death for patients with and without digitalis (HR = 1.14; 95% CI 0.88-1.5; p = 0.40). After adjustment for independent predictors of mortality, digitalis therapy did not alter the risk for death (adjusted HR = 1.04; 95% CI 0.75-1.45; p = 0.82). Furthermore, in comparison to 286 propensity-score-matched patients, mortality was not affected by digitalis intake (propensity-adjusted HR = 1.11; 95% CI 0.72-1.70; p = 0.64). A CRT-response was predominant in digitalis non-users, concerning both improvement of HF symptoms and LVEF (NYHA p < 0.01; LVEF p < 0.01), while patients on digitalis had more often ventricular tachyarrhythmias requiring ICD shock (p = 0.01); although, rehospitalization for cardiac reasons was significantly lower among digitalis users compared to digitalis non-users (HR = 0.58; 95% C. I. 0.40-0.85; p = 0.01). (4) Conclusions: Digitalis therapy had no effect on mortality, but was associated with a reduced response to CRT and increased susceptibility to ventricular arrhythmias requiring ICD shock treatment. Although, digitalis administration positively altered the likelihood for cardiac rehospitalization during follow-up.

Safety of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices and abandoned or epicardial leads: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: Persistent reluctance to perform magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with abandoned and/or epicardial leads of cardiac implantable electronic devices is related to in vitro studies reporting tip heating. While there is a plethora of data on the safety of MRI in conditional and non-conditional implantable devices, there is a clear lack of safety data in patients with abandoned and/or epicardial leads. METHODS AND RESULTS: Relevant literature was identified in Medline and CINAHL using the key terms 'magnetic resonance imaging' AND 'abandoned leads' OR 'epicardial leads'. Secondary literature and cross-references were supplemented. For reporting guidance, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 was used. International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) registration number 465530. Twenty-one publications with a total of 656 patients with 854 abandoned and/or epicardial leads and 929 MRI scans of different anatomical regions were included. No scan-related major adverse cardiac event was documented, although the possibility of under-reporting of critical events in the literature should be considered. Furthermore, no severe device dysfunction or severe arrhythmia was reported. Mainly transient lead parameter changes were observed in 2.8% in the subgroup of patients with functional epicardial leads. As a possible correlate of myocardial affection, subjective sensations occurred mainly in the subgroup with abandoned epicardial leads (4.0%), but no change in myocardial biomarkers was observed. CONCLUSION: Existing publications did not report any relevant adverse events for MRI in patients with abandoned and/or epicardial leads if performed according to strict safety guidelines. However, a more rigorous risk-benefit calculation should be made for patients with epicardial leads.

Efficacy and safety of novel left ventricular pacing leads: 1-year analysis of the NAVIGATOR trial.

OBJECTIVES: Assess safety and performance of novel quadripolar preshaped left ventricular (LV) leads: NAVIGO 4LV 2D ('S shaped') and NAVIGO 4LV ARC ('U shaped'). METHODS: Patients indicated for cardiac resynchronisation therapy were enrolled in a multicentre, prospective, controlled study (NAVIGATOR, NCT03279484). Patients were implanted with either a NAVIGO 4LV 2D or ARC lead, and assessed at 10 weeks, 6, 12 and 24 months post-implant. Co-primary safety and performance endpoints were assessed at 10 weeks. Safety endpoint was the patients' rate free from lead-related complications. Performance endpoint was the rate of patients with successful lead performance, defined as LV pacing threshold ≤2.5 V at 0.5 ms on at least one pacing vector, and the absence of phrenic nerve stimulation at the final programmed configuration. Lead-related complications and electrical parameters were monitored throughout study. RESULTS: A NAVIGO 4LV lead was successfully implanted in 211 out of 217 patients (97.2%). The safety endpoint was met, with 100% and 96.1% of patients free from complications for NAVIGO 4LV 2D and ARC, respectively. The performance endpoint was met with 98.1% and 98.9% of patients with a successful lead performance for NAVIGO 4LV 2D and ARC, respectively. Over 12 months, the global complication-free rate for both leads was 97.1% (95% CI: 93.71% to 98.70%), with a mean pacing capture threshold of 1.23 V±0.73 V and a mean impedance of 951 Ω±300.1 Ω. CONCLUSION: A high implantation success rate and low complication rate was reported for the novel NAVIGO 4LV 2D and ARC leads, along with successful performance up to 12 months.

World Stroke Organization Brain & hEart globAl iniTiative Program.

INTRODUCTION: The World Stroke Organization (WSO) Brain & Heart Task Force developed the Brain & hEart globAl iniTiative (BEAT), a pilot feasibility implementation program to establish clinical collaborations between cardiologists and stroke physicians who work at large healthcare facilities. METHODS: The WSO BEAT pilot project focused on atrial fibrillation (AF) and patent foramen ovale (PFO) detection and management, and poststroke cardiovascular complications known as the stroke-heart syndrome. The program included 10 sites from 8 countries: Brazil, China, Egypt, Germany, Japan, Mexico, Romania, and the USA The primary composite feasibility outcome was the achievement of the following 3 implementation metrics (1) developing site-specific clinical pathways for the diagnosis and management of AF, PFO, and the stroke-heart syndrome; (2) establishing regular Neurocardiology rounds (e.g., monthly); and (3) incorporating a cardiologist to the stroke team. The secondary objectives were (1) to identify implementation challenges to guide a larger program and (2) to describe qualitative improvements. RESULTS: The WSO BEAT pilot feasibility program achieved the prespecified primary composite outcome in 9 of 10 (90%) sites. The most common challenges were the limited access to specific medications (e.g., direct oral anticoagulants) and diagnostic (e.g., prolonged cardiac monitoring) or therapeutic (e.g., PFO closure devices) technologies. The most relevant qualitative improvement was the achievement of a more homogeneous diagnostic and therapeutic approach. CONCLUSION: The WSO BEAT pilot program suggests that developing neurocardiology collaborations is feasible. The long-term sustainability of the WSO BEAT program and its impact on quality of stroke care and clinical outcomes needs to be tested in a larger and longer duration program.

Alternative atrial pacing site to improve cardiac function: focus on Bachmann's bundle pacing.

Pacing from the right atrial appendage (RAA) prolongs the P wave duration and can induce interatrial and especially left-sided atrio-ventricular dyssynchrony. Pacing from Bachmann's bundle closely reproduces normal physiology and has the potential to avoid the electromechanical dysfunction associated with conventional RAA pacing. Interatrial conduction delay is associated with an increased risk of stroke, heart failure, and death. In addition to a reduction in atrial fibrillation, Bachmann's bundle pacing has emerging applications as a hemodynamic pacing modality. This review outlines the pathophysiology of atrial conduction disturbances and their potential remedies and provides the reader with a practical guide to implementing Bachmann's bundle pacing with an emphasis on the recapitulation of normal electrical and mechanical function.

Common misunderstandings of evidence-based medicine.

Currently, most evidence assessments in guidelines or health technology assessments (HTAs) rely on the assumption that a randomized controlled trial (RCT) is always the best source of evidence. However, if the outcome in a control group is certain, e.g. death within a short time with an almost 100% chance, or if an event can only occur in the treatment group, there is no need for a randomized control group; the evidence cannot be improved by a control group, nor by an RCT design. If a cause-effect relationship is certain ("primary or direct evidence"), a therapeutic effect can be diluted in the population of an RCT by cross-over, etc. This can lead to serious misinterpretations of the effect. While experts such as the GRADE group or Cochrane institutes recommend using all available evidence, the leading approach in many guidelines and HTAs is assessing "the best available trials", i.e. RCTs. But since RCTs only deliver probabilities of cause-effect relationships, it is not appropriate to demand RCTs for certain effects. A control group can only diminish the net value of a treatment since the outcome in the control group is subtracted from the outcome in the treatment group. Therefore, under identical circumstances, an RCT will always show lower effect rates compared to a single arm study of the same quality, for desired as well as for adverse effects. Considering these inconsistencies in evidence-based medicine interpretation, the evidence pyramid with RCTs at the top is not always a reliable indicator for the best quality of evidence.

EHRA clinical consensus statement on conduction system pacing implantation: endorsed by the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), Canadian Heart Rhythm Society (CHRS), and Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS).

Conduction system pacing (CSP) has emerged as a more physiological alternative to right ventricular pacing and is also being used in selected cases for cardiac resynchronization therapy. His bundle pacing was first introduced over two decades ago and its use has risen over the last five years with the advent of tools which have facilitated implantation. Left bundle branch area pacing is more recent but its adoption is growing fast due to a wider target area and excellent electrical parameters. Nevertheless, as with any intervention, proper technique is a prerequisite for safe and effective delivery of therapy. This document aims to standardize the procedure and to provide a framework for physicians who wish to start CSP implantation, or who wish to improve their technique.