Long-term clinical effects of ventricular pacing reduction with a changeover mode to minimize ventricular pacing in a general pacemaker population

AIM: Right ventricular pacing (VP) has been hypothesized to increase the risk in heart failure (HF) and atrial fibrillation (AF). The ANSWER study evaluated, whether an AAI-DDD changeover mode to minimize VP (SafeR) improves outcome compared with DDD in a general dual-chamber pacemaker population. METHODS AND RESULTS: ANSWER was a randomized controlled multicentre trial assessing SafeR vs. standard DDD in sinus node disease (SND) or AV block (AVB) patients. After a 1-month run-in period, they were randomized (1 : 1) and followed for 3 years. Pre-specified co-primary end-points were VP and the composite of hospitalization for HF, AF, or cardioversion. Pre-specified secondary end-points were cardiac death or HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular hospitalizations. ANSWER enrolled 650 patients (52.0% SND, 48% AVB) at 43 European centres and randomized in SafeR (n = 314) or DDD (n = 318). The SafeR mode showed a significant decrease in VP compared with DDD (11.5 vs. 93.6%, P < 0.0001 at 3 years). Deaths and syncope did not differ between randomization arms. No significant difference between groups [HR = 0.78; 95% CI (0.48-1.25); P = 0.30] was found in the time to event of the co-primary composite of hospitalization for HF, AF, or cardioversion, nor in the individual components. SafeR showed a 51% risk reduction (RR) in experiencing cardiac death or HF hospitalization [HR = 0.49; 95% CI (0.27-0.90); P = 0.02] and 30% RR in experiencing cardiovascular hospitalizations [HR = 0.70; 95% CI (0.49-1.00); P = 0.05]. CONCLUSION: SafeR safely and significantly reduced VP in a general pacemaker population though had no effect on hospitalization for HF, AF, or cardioversion, when compared with DDD

Association of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation with mortality and stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Maintenance of sinus rhythm has been associated with lower mortality, but whether atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation per se benefits hard outcomes such as mortality and stroke is still debated. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether AF ablation is associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality and stroke compared with medical therapy alone. METHODS: Literature search looking for both randomized and observational studies comparing AF catheter ablation vs. medical management. Data pooled using random-effects. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) used as a measure of treatment effect. The primary and secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality and occurrence of cerebrovascular events during follow-up, respectively. RESULTS: Thirty studies were eligible for inclusion, comprising 78,966 patients (25,129 receiving AF ablation and 53,837 on medical treatment) and 233,990 patient-years of follow-up. The pooled data of studies revealed that ablation was associated with lower risk of all-cause mortality: 5.7% vs. 17.9%; RR = 0.44, 95% CI 0.32–0.62, p < 0.001. In a sensitivity analysis by study design, a survival benefit of AF ablation was seen in randomized studies, with no heterogeneity (mortality risk 4.2% vs. 8.9%; RR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.39–0.79, p = 0.001, I2= 0%), and also in observational studies, but with marked heterogeneity (6.1% vs. 18.3%; RR = 0.39, 95% CI 0.26–0.59, p < 0.001, I2= 95%). The mortality benefit in randomized studies was mainly driven by trials performed in patients with left ventricular (LV) dysfunction and heart failure. The pooled risk of a cerebrovascular event was lower in patients receiving AF ablation (2.3% vs. 5.5%; RR = 0.57, 95% CI 0.46–0.70, p < 0.001, I2= 62%), but no difference was seen in randomized trials (2.2% vs. 2.1%; RR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.46–1.94, p = 0.87, I2= 0%). CONCLUSIONS: Ablation of atrial fibrillation associates with a survival benefit compared with medical treatment alone, although evidence is restricted to the setting of heart failure and LV systolic dysfunction

Supraventricular cardiac conduction system exposure in breast cancer patients treated with radiotherapy and association with heart and cardiac chambers doses

Purpose: To assess sinoatrial node (SAN) and atrioventricular node (AVN) doses for breast cancer (BC) patients treated with 3D-CRT and evaluate whether “large” cardiac structures (whole heart and four cardiac chambers) would be relevant surrogates. Material and methods: This single center study was based on 116 BCE patients (56 left-sided, 60 right-sided) treated with 3D-CRT without respiratory gating strategies and few IMN irradiations from 2009 to 2013. The heart, the left and right ventricles (LV, RV), the left and right atria (LA, RA) were contoured using multi-atlases for auto-segmentation. The SAN and the AVN were manually delineated using a specific atlas. Based on regression analysis, the coefficients of determination (R2) were estimated to evaluate whether “large” cardiac structures were relevant surrogates (R2 > 0.70) of SAN and AVN doses. Results: For left-sided BC, mean doses were: 3.60 ± 2.28 Gy for heart, 0.47 ± 0.24 Gy for SAN and 0.74 ± 0.29 Gy for AVN. For right-sided BC, mean heart dose was 0.60 ± 0.25 Gy, mean SAN dose was 1.57 ± 0.63 Gy (>85 % of patients with SAN doses > 1 Gy) and mean AVN dose was 0.51 ± 0.14 Gy. Among all “large” cardiac structures, RA appeared as the best surrogate for SAN doses (R2 > 0.80). Regarding AVN doses, the RA may also be an interesting surrogate for left-sided BC (R2 = 0.78), but none of “large” cardiac structures appeared as relevant surrogates among right-sided BC (all R2 < 0.70), except the LA for patients with IMN (R2 = 0.83). Conclusions: In BC patients treated 10 years ago with 3D-CRT, SAN and AVN exposure was moderate but could exceed 1 Gy to the SAN in many right-sided patients with no IMN-inclusion. The RA appeared as an interesting surrogate for SAN exposure. Specific conduction nodes delineation remains necessary by using modern radiotherapy techniques

Impact of Type-2 Diabetes Mellitus on the Outcomes of Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation (European observational multicentre study)

Type-2 diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with an increased risk of atrial fibrillation (AF). It is unclear whether DM is a risk factor for arrhythmia recurrence following catheter ablation of AF. We performed a nonrandomised, observational study in 7 high-volume European centres. A total of 2,504 patients who underwent catheter ablation of AF were included, and procedural outcomes were compared among patients with or without DM. Patients with DM (234) accounted for 9.3% of the sample, and were significantly older, had a higher BMI and suffered more frequently from persistent AF. Arrhythmia relapses at 12 months after AF ablation occurred more frequently in the DM group (32.0% vs 25.3%, p = 0.031). After adjusting for type of AF (i.e., paroxysmal vs persistent), during a median follow-up of 17 ± 16 months, atrial arrhythmia free-survival was lower in the diabetics with persistent AF (log-rank p = 0.003), and comparable for paroxysmal AF (log-rank p = 0.554). These results were confirmed in a propensity-matched analysis, and DM was also an independent predictor of AF recurrence on the multivariate analysis (hazard ratio 1.39; 95% confidence interval 95%1.07 to 1.88; p = 0.016). There was no significant difference in the rate of periprocedural complications among DM and non-DM patients (3.8% vs 6.3%, p = 0.128). Efficacy and safety of cryoballoon ablation were comparable to radiofrequency ablation in both DM and no-DM groups. In conclusion, catheter ablation of AF appears to be safe in patients with DM. However, DM is associated with higher rate of atrial arrhythmia relapse, particularly for patients with persistent AF

Sex-specific efficacy and safety of cryoballoon versus radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation: An individual patient data meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a growing health burden, and pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) using cryoballoon (CB) or radiofrequency (RF) represents an attractive therapeutic option. Sex-specific differences in the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and clinical presentation of AF and PVI are recognized. OBJECTIVE: We aimed at comparing the efficacy, safety, and procedural characteristics of CB and RF in women and men undergoing a first PVI procedure. METHODS: We searched for randomized controlled trials and prospective observational studies comparing CB and RF ablation with at least 1 year of follow-up. After merging individual patient data from 18 data sets, we investigated the sex-specific (procedure failure defined as recurrence of atrial arrhythmia, reablation, and reinitiation of antiarrhythmic medication), safety (periprocedural complications), and procedural characteristics of CB vs RF using Kaplan-Meier and multilevel models. RESULTS: From the 18 studies, 4840 men and 1979 women were analyzed. An analysis stratified by sex correcting for several covariates showed a better efficacy of CB in men (hazard ratio for recurrence 0.88; 95% confidence interval 0.78-0.98, P = .02) but not in women (hazard ratio 0.98; 95% confidence interval 0.83-1.16; P = .82). For women and men, the energy source had no influence on the occurrence of at least 1 complication. For both sexes, the procedure time was significantly shorter with CB (-22.5 minutes for women and -27.1 minutes for men). CONCLUSION: CB is associated with less long-term failures in men. A better understanding of AF-causal sex-specific mechanisms and refinements in CB technologies could lead to higher success rates in women

Implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in the real world: Main findings from the French multicentre DAI-PP programme (pilot phase)

This review summarizes the main findings of the French multicentre DAI-PP pilot programme, and discusses the related clinical and research perspectives. This project included retrospectively (2002–2012 period) more than 5000 subjects with structural heart disease who received an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death, and were followed for a mean period of 3 years. The pilot phase of the DAI-PP programme has provided valuable information on several practical and clinically relevant aspects of primary prevention ICD implantation in the real-world population, which are summarized in this review. This pilot has led to a prospective evaluation that started in May 2018, assessing ICD therapy in primary and secondary prevention in patients with structural and electrical heart diseases, with remote monitoring follow-up using a dedicated platform. This should further enhance our understanding of sudden cardiac death, to eventually optimize the field of preventative actions

A Primary Prevention Clinical Risk Score Model for Patients With Brugada Syndrome (BRUGADA-RISK)

OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to develop a risk score model for patients with Brugada syndrome (BrS). BACKGROUND: Risk stratification in BrS is a significant challenge due to the low event rates and conflicting evidence. METHODS: A multicenter international cohort of patients with BrS and no previous cardiac arrest was used to evaluate the role of 16 proposed clinical or electrocardiogram (ECG) markers in predicting ventricular arrhythmias (VAs)/sudden cardiac death (SCD) during follow-up. Predictive markers were incorporated into a risk score model, and this model was validated by using out-of-sample cross-validation. RESULTS: A total of 1,110 patients with BrS from 16 centers in 8 countries were included (mean age 51.8 ± 13.6 years; 71.8% male). Median follow-up was 5.33 years; 114 patients had VA/SCD (10.3%) with an annual event rate of 1.5%. Of the 16 proposed risk factors, probable arrhythmia-related syncope (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.71; p < 0.001), spontaneous type 1 ECG (HR: 3.80; p < 0.001), early repolarization (HR: 3.42; p < 0.001), and a type 1 Brugada ECG pattern in peripheral leads (HR: 2.33; p < 0.001) were associated with a higher risk of VA/SCD. A risk score model incorporating these factors revealed a sensitivity of 71.2% (95% confidence interval: 61.5% to 84.6%) and a specificity of 80.2% (95% confidence interval: 75.7% to 82.3%) in predicting VA/SCD at 5 years. Calibration plots showed a mean prediction error of 1.2%. The model was effectively validated by using out-of-sample cross-validation according to country. CONCLUSIONS: This multicenter study identified 4 risk factors for VA/SCD in a primary prevention BrS population. A risk score model was generated to quantify risk of VA/SCD in BrS and inform implantable cardioverter-defibrillator prescription

Device complications with addition of defibrillation to cardiac resynchronisation therapy for primary prevention

Objective: In patients indicated for cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT), the choice between a CRT-pacemaker (CRT-P) versus defibrillator (CRT-D) remains controversial and indications in this setting have not been well delineated. Apart from inappropriate therapies, which are inherent to the presence of a defibrillator, whether adding defibrillator to CRT in the primary prevention setting impacts risk of other acute and late device-related complications has not been well studied and may bear relevance for device selection. // Methods: Observational multicentre European cohort study of 3008 consecutive patients with ischaemic or non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy and no history of sustained ventricular arrhythmias, undergoing CRT implantation with (CRT-D, n=1785) or without (CRT-P, n=1223) defibrillator. Using propensity score and competing risk analyses, we assessed the risk of significant device-related complications requiring surgical reintervention. Inappropriate shocks were not considered except those due to lead malfunction requiring lead revision. // Results: Acute complications occurred in 148 patients (4.9%), without significant difference between groups, even after considering potential confounders (OR=1.20, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.00, p=0.47). During a mean follow-up of 41.4±29 months, late complications occurred in 475 patients, giving an annual incidence rate of 26 (95% CI 9 to 43) and 15 (95% CI 6 to 24) per 1000 patient-years in CRT-D and CRT-P patients, respectively. CRT-D was independently associated with increased occurrence of late complications (HR=1.68, 95% CI 1.27 to 2.23, p=0.001). In particular, when compared with CRT-P, CRT-D was associated with an increased risk of device-related infection (HR 2.10, 95% CI 1.18 to 3.45, p=0.004). Acute complications did not predict overall late complications, but predicted device-related infection (HR 2.85, 95% CI 1.71 to 4.56, p<0.001). // Conclusions: Compared with CRT-P, CRT-D is associated with a similar risk of periprocedural complications but increased risk of long-term complications, mainly infection. This needs to be considered in the decision of implanting CRT with or without a defibrillator