Corrigendum: Predictors of late arrhythmic events after generator replacement in Brugada syndrome treated with prophylactic ICD.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.964694.].

Predictors of late arrhythmic events after generator replacement in Brugada syndrome treated with prophylactic ICD.

Introduction: Predictors of late life-threatening arrhythmic events in Brugada syndrome (BrS) patients who received a prophylactic ICD implantation remain to be evaluated. The aim of the present long-term multicenter study was to assess the incidence and clinical-electrocardiographic predictors of late life-threatening arrhythmic events in BrS patients with a prophylactic implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and undergoing generator replacement (GR). Methods: The study population included 105 patients (75% males; mean age 45 ± 14years) who received a prophylactic ICD and had no arrhythmic event up to first GR. Results: The median period from first ICD implantation to last follow-up was 155 (128-181) months and from first ICD Implantation to the GR was 84 (61-102) months. During a median follow-up of 57 (38-102) months after GR, 10 patients (9%) received successful appropriate ICD intervention (1.6%/year). ICD interventions included shock on ventricular fibrillation (n = 8 patients), shock on ventricular tachycardia (n = 1 patient), and antitachycardia pacing on ventricular tachycardia (n = 1 patient). At survival analysis, history of atrial fibrillation (log-rank test; P = 0.02), conduction disturbances (log-rank test; P < 0.01), S wave in lead I (log-rank test; P = 0.01) and first-degree atrioventricular block (log-rank test; P = 0.04) were significantly associated with the occurrence of late appropriate ICD intervention. At Cox-regression multivariate analysis, S-wave in lead I was the only independent predictor of late appropriate ICD intervention (HR: 9.17; 95%CI: 1.15-73.07; P = 0.03). Conclusions: The present study indicates that BrS patient receiving a prophylactic ICD may experience late appropriate intervention after GR in a clinically relevant proportion of cases. S-wave in lead I at the time of first clinical evaluation was the only independent predictor of persistent risk of life-threatening arrhythmic events. These findings support the need for GR at the end of service regardless of previous appropriate intervention, mostly in BrS patients with conduction abnormalities.

Characteristics and hospital course of patients admitted for acute cardiovascular diseases during the coronavirus disease-19 outbreak.

INTRODUCTION: During the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) outbreak in spring 2020, people may have been reluctant to seek medical care fearing infection. We aimed to assess the number, characteristics and in-hospital course of patients admitted for acute cardiovascular diseases during the COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS: We enrolled all consecutive patients admitted urgently for acute myocardial infarction, heart failure or arrhythmias from 1 March to 31 May 2020 (outbreak period) and 2019 (control period). We evaluated the time from symptoms onset to presentation, clinical conditions at admission, length of hospitalization, in-hospital medical procedures and outcome. The combined primary end point included in-hospital death for cardiovascular causes, urgent heart transplant or discharge with a ventricular assist device. RESULTS: A similar number of admissions were observed in 2020 (N = 210) compared with 2019 (N = 207). Baseline characteristics of patients were also similar. In 2020, a significantly higher number of patients presented more than 6 h after symptoms onset (57 versus 38%, P < 0.001) and with signs of heart failure (33 versus 20%, P = 0.018), required urgent surgery (13 versus 5%, P = 0.004) and ventilatory support (26 versus 13%, P < 0.001). Hospitalization duration was longer in 2020 (median 10 versus 8 days, P = 0.03). The primary end point was met by 19 (9.0%) patients in 2020 versus 10 (4.8%) in 2019 (P = 0.09). CONCLUSION: Despite the similar number and types of unplanned admissions for acute cardiac conditions during the 2020 COVID-19 outbreak compared with the same period in 2019, we observed a higher number of patients presenting late after symptoms onset as well as longer and more complicated clinical courses.

Correction to: Clinical evaluation of two different protein content formulas fed to full-term healthy infants: a randomized controlled trial.

Following the publication of the original article [1], it was brought to our attention that the authors' names and surnames were erroneously interchanged.

Clinical evaluation of two different protein content formulas fed to full-term healthy infants: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: A high early protein intake is associated with rapid postnatal weight gain and altered body composition. We aimed to evaluate the safety of a low-protein formula in healthy full-term infants. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted. A total of 118 infants were randomized to receive two different protein content formulas (formula A or formula B (protein content: 1.2 vs. 1.7 g/100 mL, respectively)) for the first 4 months of life. Anthropometry and body composition by air displacement plethysmography were assessed at enrolment and at two and 4 months. The reference group comprised 50 healthy, exclusively breastfed, full-term infants. RESULTS: Weight gain (g/day) throughout the study was similar between the formula groups (32.5 ± 6.1 vs. 32.8 ± 6.8) and in the reference group (30.4 ± 5.4). The formula groups showed similar body composition but a different fat-free mass content from breastfed infants at two and 4 months. However, the formula A group showed a fat-free mass increase more similar to that of the breastfed infants. The occurrence of gastrointestinal symptoms or adverse events was similar between the formula groups. CONCLUSIONS: Feeding a low-protein content formula appears to be safe and to promote adequate growth, although determination of the long-term effect on body composition requires further study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The present study was retrospectively registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (trial number: NCT03035721 on January 18, 2017).

Is Fat Mass Accretion of Late Preterm Infants Associated with Insulin Resistance?

BACKGROUND: Late preterm infants show a major fat mass accretion from birth to term. The contribution of preterm birth to the development of the metabolic syndrome is still under investigation. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate body composition changes in late preterm infants during the first 3 months and to investigate their insulin sensitivity and resistance. METHODS: We conducted an observational, longitudinal study. A total of 216 late preterm infants underwent body composition assessment using an air displacement plethysmograph at term and at 3 months of corrected age. In a subgroup of infants (n = 48) the blood glucose and insulin concentration were determined at term and insulin resistance (homeostasis model assessment for insulin resistance; HOMA-IR) and sensitivity (quantitative insulin sensitivity check index; QUICKI) were then calculated. The reference group comprised 71 healthy term infants. RESULTS: The mean birth weight and gestational age were 2,390 ± 391 g and 35.2 ± 0.8 weeks, respectively. At term the fat mass index (kg/m2) of late preterm infants, born adequate for their gestational age and small for their gestational age, was higher than that of term infants (2.08 ± 0.82 vs. 1.62 ± 0.64 vs. 1.03 ± 0.36, p < 0.005, respectively), whereas at 3 months of corrected age no difference was found among the groups. The mean values of glucose, insulin, HOMA-IR, and QUICKI were within the 5th and 95th percentiles. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of these preliminary findings, fat mass accretion of late preterm infants appears not to be associated with perturbation of the glucose homeostasis.