31 research outputs found

    2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS expert consensus statement on catheter ablation of ventricular arrhythmias: Executive summary

    Get PDF
    Ventricular arrhythmias are an important cause of morbidity and mortality and come in a variety of forms, from single premature ventricular complexes to sustained ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation. Rapid developments have taken place over the past decade in our understanding of these arrhythmias and in our ability to diagnose and treat them. The field of catheter ablation has progressed with the development of new methods and tools, and with the publication of large clinical trials. Therefore, global cardiac electrophysiology professional societies undertook to outline recommendations and best practices for these procedures in a document that will update and replace the 2009 EHRA/HRS Expert Consensus on Catheter Ablation of Ventricular Arrhythmias. An expert writing group, after reviewing and discussing the literature, including a systematic review and meta-analysis published in conjunction with this document, and drawing on their own experience, drafted and voted on recommendations and summarized current knowledge and practice in the field. Each recommendation is presented in knowledge byte format and is accompanied by supportive text and references. Further sections provide a practical synopsis of the various techniques and of the specific ventricular arrhythmia sites and substrates encountered in the electrophysiology lab. The purpose of this document is to help electrophysiologists around the world to appropriately select patients for catheter ablation, to perform procedures in a safe and efficacious manner, and to provide follow-up and adjunctive care in order to obtain the best possible outcomes for patients with ventricular arrhythmias

    Clinical decision tool for CRT-P vs. CRT-D implantation: Findings from PROSE-ICD.

    No full text
    Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices reduce mortality through pacing-induced cardiac resynchronization and implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy for ventricular arrhythmias (VAs). Whether certain factors can predict if patients will benefit more from implantation of CRT pacemakers (CRT-P) or CRT defibrillators (CRT-D) remains unclear.We followed 305 primary prevention CRT-D recipients for the two primary outcomes of HF hospitalization and ICD therapy for VAs. Serum biomarkers, electrocardiographic and clinical variables were collected prior to implant. Multivariable analysis using Cox-proportional hazards model was used to fit the final models. Among 282 patients with follow-up outcome data, 75 (26.6%) were hospitalized for HF and 31 (11%) received appropriate ICD therapy. Independent predictors of HF hospitalization were atrial fibrillation (HR = 1.8 (1.1,2.9)), NYHA class III/IV (HR = 2.2 (1.3,3.6)), ejection fraction 4.03pg/ml (HR = 1.7 (1.1,2.9)) and hemoglobin (20mg/dL (HR = 3.0 (1.3,7.1)), HS-CRP >9.42mg/L (HR = 2.3 (1.1,4.7)), no beta blocker therapy (HR = 3.2 (1.4,7.1)) and hematocrit ≥38% (HR = 2.7 (1.03,7.0)). Patients with 0-1 risk factors for appropriate therapy (IR 1 per 100 person-years) and ≥3 risk factors for HF hospitalization (IR 23 per 100-person-years) were more likely to die prior to receiving an appropriate ICD therapy.Clinical and biomarker data can risk stratify CRT patients for HF progression and VAs. These findings may help characterize subgroups of patients that may benefit more from the use of CRT-P vs. CRT-D systems.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00733590

    CinE caRdiac magneTic resonAnce to predIct veNTricular arrhYthmia (CERTAINTY)

    No full text
    International audienceBetter models to identify individuals at low risk of ventricular arrhythmia (VA) are needed for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) candidates to mitigate the risk of ICD-related complications. We designed the CERTAINTY study (CinE caRdiac magneTic resonAnce to predIct veNTricular arrhYthmia) with deep learning for VA risk prediction from cine cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). Using a training cohort of primary prevention ICD recipients (n = 350, 97 women, median age 59 years, 178 ischemic cardiomyopathy) who underwent CMR immediately prior to ICD implantation, we developed two neural networks: Cine Fingerprint Extractor and Risk Predictor . The former extracts cardiac structure and function features from cine CMR in a form of cine fingerprint in a fully unsupervised fashion, and the latter takes in the cine fingerprint and outputs disease outcomes as a cine risk score. Patients with VA (n = 96) had a significantly higher cine risk score than those without VA. Multivariate analysis showed that the cine risk score was significantly associated with VA after adjusting for clinical characteristics, cardiac structure and function including CMR-derived scar extent. These findings indicate that non-contrast, cine CMR inherently contains features to improve VA risk prediction in primary prevention ICD candidates. We solicit participation from multiple centers for external validation

    Clinical decision tool for CRT-P vs. CRT-D implantation: Findings from PROSE-ICD

    No full text
    <div><p>Background</p><p>Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices reduce mortality through pacing-induced cardiac resynchronization and implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy for ventricular arrhythmias (VAs). Whether certain factors can predict if patients will benefit more from implantation of CRT pacemakers (CRT-P) or CRT defibrillators (CRT-D) remains unclear.</p><p>Methods and results</p><p>We followed 305 primary prevention CRT-D recipients for the two primary outcomes of HF hospitalization and ICD therapy for VAs. Serum biomarkers, electrocardiographic and clinical variables were collected prior to implant. Multivariable analysis using Cox-proportional hazards model was used to fit the final models. Among 282 patients with follow-up outcome data, 75 (26.6%) were hospitalized for HF and 31 (11%) received appropriate ICD therapy. Independent predictors of HF hospitalization were atrial fibrillation (HR = 1.8 (1.1,2.9)), NYHA class III/IV (HR = 2.2 (1.3,3.6)), ejection fraction <20% (HR = 1.7 (1.1,2.7)), HS-IL6 >4.03pg/ml (HR = 1.7 (1.1,2.9)) and hemoglobin (<12g/dl) (HR = 2.2 (1.3,3.6)). Independent predictors of appropriate therapy included BUN >20mg/dL (HR = 3.0 (1.3,7.1)), HS-CRP >9.42mg/L (HR = 2.3 (1.1,4.7)), no beta blocker therapy (HR = 3.2 (1.4,7.1)) and hematocrit ≥38% (HR = 2.7 (1.03,7.0)). Patients with 0–1 risk factors for appropriate therapy (IR 1 per 100 person-years) and ≥3 risk factors for HF hospitalization (IR 23 per 100-person-years) were more likely to die prior to receiving an appropriate ICD therapy.</p><p>Conclusions</p><p>Clinical and biomarker data can risk stratify CRT patients for HF progression and VAs. These findings may help characterize subgroups of patients that may benefit more from the use of CRT-P vs. CRT-D systems.</p><p>Trial registration</p><p>ClinicalTrials.gov <a href="https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00733590" target="_blank">NCT00733590</a></p></div
    corecore