Diagnosis and management of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator infections based on process mapping

Background: Infection is a well‐recognized complication of cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation, including the more recently available subcutaneous implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator (S‐ICD). Although the AHA/ACC/HRS guidelines include recommendations for S‐ICD use, currently there are no clinical trial data that address the diagnosis and management of S‐ICD infections. Therefore, an expert panel was convened to develop consensus on these topics. / Methods: A process mapping methodology was used to achieve a primary goal – the development of consensus on the diagnosis and management of S‐ICD infections. Two face‐to‐face meetings of panel experts were conducted to recommend useful information to clinicians in individual patient management of S‐ICD infections. / Results: Panel consensus of a stepwise approach in the diagnosis and management was developed to provide guidance in individual patient management. / Conclusion: Achieving expert panel consensus by process mapping methodology in S‐ICD infection diagnosis and management was attainable, and the results should be helpful in individual patient management

Device-related infection in de novo transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator Medicare patients

BACKGROUND: Cardiac device infection is a serious complication of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) placement and requires complete device removal with accompanying antimicrobial therapy for durable cure. Recent guidelines have highlighted the need to better identify patients at high risk of infection to assist in device selection. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of infection in de novo transvenous (TV) ICD implants and assess factors associated with infection risk in a Medicare population. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using 100% Medicare administrative and claims data to identify patients who underwent de novo TV-ICD implantation (7/2016-12/2017). Infection within 720 days of implantation was identified using ICD-10 codes. Baseline factors associated with infection were identified by univariable logistic regression analysis of all variables of interest, including conditions in Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidity indices, followed by stepwise selection criteria with a p≤0.25 for inclusion in a multivariable model and a backwards, stepwise elimination process with p≤0.1 to remain in the model. A time-to-event analysis was also conducted. RESULTS: Among 26,742 patients with de novo TV-ICD, 519 (1.9%) developed an infection within 720 days post-implant. While more than half (54%) of infections occurred during the first 90 days, 16% of infections occurred after 365 days. Multivariable analysis revealed several significant predictors of infection: age <70 years, renal disease with dialysis, and complicated diabetes mellitus. CONCLUSION: The rate of de novo TV-ICD infection was 1.9% and identified risk factors associated with infection may be useful in device selection

Primary Results From the Understanding Outcomes With the S-ICD in Primary Prevention Patients With Low Ejection Fraction (UNTOUCHED) Trial

BACKGROUND: The subcutaneous (S) implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is safe and effective for sudden cardiac death prevention. However, patients in previous S-ICD studies had fewer comorbidities, had less left ventricular dysfunction, and received more inappropriate shocks (IAS) than in typical transvenous ICD trials. The UNTOUCHED trial (Understanding Outcomes With the S-ICD in Primary Prevention Patients With Low Ejection Fraction) was designed to evaluate the IAS rate in a more typical, contemporary ICD patient population implanted with the S-ICD using standardized programming and enhanced discrimination algorithms. METHODS: Primary prevention patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% and no pacing indications were included. Generation 2 or 3 S-ICD devices were implanted and programmed with rate-based therapy delivery for rates ≥250 beats per minute and morphology discrimination for rates ≥200 and <250 beats per minute. Patients were followed for 18 months. The primary end point was the IAS-free rate compared with a 91.6% performance goal, derived from the results for the ICD-only patients in the MADIT-RIT study (Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial-Reduce Inappropriate Therapy). Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed to evaluate event-free rates for IAS, all-cause shock, and complications. Multivariable proportional hazard analysis was performed to determine predictors of end points. RESULTS: S-ICD implant was attempted in 1116 patients, and 1111 patients were included in postimplant follow-up analysis. The cohort had a mean age of 55.8±12.4 years, 25.6% were women, 23.4% were Black, 53.5% had ischemic heart disease, 87.7% had symptomatic heart failure, and the mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 26.4±5.8%. Eighteen-month freedom from IAS was 95.9% (lower confidence limit, 94.8%). Predictors of reduced incidence of IAS were implanting the most recent generation of device, using the 3-incision technique, no history of atrial fibrillation, and ischemic cause. The 18-month all-cause shock-free rate was 90.6% (lower confidence limit, 89.0%), meeting the prespecified performance goal of 85.8%. Conversion success rate for appropriate, discrete episodes was 98.4%. Complication-free rate at 18 months was 92.7%. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates high efficacy and safety with contemporary S-ICD devices and programming despite the relatively high incidence of comorbidities in comparison with earlier S-ICD trials. The inappropriate shock rate (3.1% at 1 year) is the lowest reported for the S-ICD and lower than many transvenous ICD studies using contemporary programming to reduce IAS. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02433379

Cardiac injuries in blunt chest trauma

Blunt chest traumas are a clinical challenge, both for diagnosis and treatment. The use of cardiovascular magnetic resonance can play a major role in this setting. We present two cases: a 12-year-old boy and 45-year-old man. Late gadolinium enhancement imaging enabled visualization of myocardial damage resulting from the trauma

Trial design: Computer guided normal-low versus normal-high potassium control in critically ill patients: Rationale of the GRIP-COMPASS study

Background: Potassium depletion is common in hospitalized patients and can cause serious complications such as cardiac arrhythmias. In the intensive care unit (ICU) the majority of patients require potassium suppletion. However, there are no data regarding the optimal control target in critically ill patients. After open-heart surgery, patients have a strongly increased risk of atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter (AFF). In a novel trial design, we examined if in these patients different potassium control-targets within the normal range may have different effects on the incidence of AFF. Methods/Design: The "computer-driven Glucose and potassium Regulation program in Intensive care Patients with COMparison of PotASSium targets within normokalemic range (GRIP-COMPASS) trial" is a single-center prospective trial in which a total of 1200 patients are assigned to either a potassium control-target of 4.0 mmol/L or 4.5 mmol/L in consecutive alternating blocks of 50 patients each. Potassium levels are regulated by the computer-assisted potassium suppletion algorithm called GRIP-II (Glucose and potassium regulation for Intensive care Patients). Primary endpoint is the in-hospital incidence of AFF after cardiac surgery. Secondary endpoints are: in-hospital AFF in medical patients or patients after non-cardiac surgery, actually achieved potassium levels and their variation, electrolyte and glucose levels, potassium and insulin requirements, cumulative fluid balance, (ICU) length of stay, ICU mortality, hospital mortality and 90-day mortality. Discussion: The GRIP-COMPASS trial is the first controlled clinical trial to date that compares potassium targets. Other novel methodological elements of the study are that it is performed in ICU patients where both targets are within the normal range and that a computer-assisted potassium suppletion algorithm is used

Efficacy and Safety of Appropriate Shocks and Antitachycardia Pacing in Transvenous and Subcutaneous Implantable Defibrillators: Analysis of All Appropriate Therapy in the PRAETORIAN Trial.

BACKGROUND: The PRAETORIAN trial (A Prospective, Randomized Comparison of Subcutaneous and Transvenous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Therapy) showed noninferiority of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (S-ICD) compared with transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillator (TV-ICD) with regard to inappropriate shocks and complications. In contrast to TV-ICD, S-ICD cannot provide antitachycardia pacing for monomorphic ventricular tachycardia. This prespecified secondary analysis evaluates appropriate therapy and whether antitachycardia pacing reduces the number of appropriate shocks. METHODS: The PRAETORIAN trial was an international, investigator-initiated randomized trial that included patients with an indication for implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy. Patients with previous ventricular tachycardia <170 bpm or refractory recurrent monomorphic ventricular tachycardia were excluded. In 39 centers, 849 patients were randomized to receive an S-ICD (n=426) or TV-ICD (n=423) and were followed for a median of 49.1 months. ICD programming was mandated by protocol. Appropriate ICD therapy was defined as therapy for ventricular arrhythmias. Arrhythmias were classified as discrete episodes and storm episodes (≥3 episodes within 24 hours). Analyses were performed in the modified intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: In the S-ICD group, 86 of 426 patients received appropriate therapy, versus 78 of 423 patients in the TV-ICD group, during a median follow-up of 52 months (48-month Kaplan-Meier estimates 19.4% and 17.5%; P=0.45). In the S-ICD group, 83 patients received at least 1 shock, versus 57 patients in the TV-ICD group (48-month Kaplan-Meier estimates 19.2% and 11.5%; P=0.02). Patients in the S-ICD group had a total of 254 shocks, compared with 228 shocks in the TV-ICD group (P=0.68). First shock efficacy was 93.8% in the S-ICD group and 91.6% in the TV-ICD group (P=0.40). The first antitachycardia pacing attempt successfully terminated 46% of all monomorphic ventricular tachycardias, but accelerated the arrhythmia in 9.4%. Ten patients with S-ICD experienced 13 electrical storms, versus 18 patients with TV-ICD with 19 electrical storms. Patients with appropriate therapy had an almost 2-fold increased relative risk of electrical storms in the TV-ICD group compared with the S-ICD group (P=0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, no difference was observed in shock efficacy of S-ICD compared with TV-ICD. Although patients in the S-ICD group were more likely to receive an ICD shock, the total number of appropriate shocks was not different between the 2 groups. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01296022

Device-related complications in the subcutaneous and transvenous ICD: a secondary analysis of the PRAETORIAN trial.

BACKGROUND: The subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) is developed to overcome lead-related complications and systemic infections, inherent to transvenous ICD (TV-ICD) therapy. The PRAETORIAN trial demonstrated that the S-ICD is non-inferior to the TV-ICD with regard to the combined primary endpoint of inappropriate shocks and complications. This prespecified secondary analysis evaluates all complications in the PRAETORIAN trial. METHODS: The PRAETORIAN trial is an international, multicenter, randomised trial in which 849 patients with an indication for ICD therapy were randomised to receive an SICD (N = 426) or TV-ICD (N = 423) and followed for a median of 49 months. Endpoints were device-related complications, lead-related complications, systemic infections and the need for invasive interventions. RESULTS: Thirty-six device-related complications occurred in 31 patients in the S-ICD group of which bleedings were the most frequent. In the TV-ICD group 49 complications occurred in 44 patients of which lead-dysfunction was most frequent (HR 0.69; P =0.11). In both groups half of all complications were within 30 days after implantation. Lead-related complications and systemic infections occurred significantly less in the S-ICD group compared to the TV-ICD group (P <0.001, P =0.03 respectively). Significantly more complications required invasive interventions in the TV-ICD group compared to the S-ICD group (8.3% vs. 4.3%, HR 0.59; P =0.047). CONCLUSIONS: This secondary analysis shows that, lead-related complications and systemic infections are more prevalent in the TV-ICD group compared to the S-ICD group. In addition, complications in the TV-ICD group were more severe as they required significantly more invasive interventions. This data contributes to shared decision making in clinical practice

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1.

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field