Search

Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.

Background: Class IC antiarrhythmic agents are effective for treating atrial tachyarrhythmias, but their use is restricted in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). Data on the safety of the use of IC agents in patients with CAD in the absence of recent acute coronary syndromes are lacking., Objectives: This study sought to evaluate the safety and feasibility of treatment with IC agents in patients with varying degrees of CAD in a large serial, real-world cohort., Methods: We retrospectively identified all patients at our institution from January 2005 to February 2021 on a IC agent (n = 3,445) and those on sotalol or dofetilide (n = 2,216) as controls, excluding those with a prior history of ventricular tachycardia, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator placement, or nonrevascularized myocardial infarction. Baseline clinical characteristics included degree of CAD (categorized as none, nonobstructive, or obstructive), other comorbid illness, and medication use. Clinical outcomes, including survival, were ascertained. We performed Cox regression analysis to evaluate the effect of IC use on event-free survival across varying degrees of CAD., Results: After adjustment for baseline characteristics, there was an independent association between IC use and improved mortality. However, there was an interaction between IC use and degree of CAD (compared to sotalol) demonstrating poorer event-free survival among those with obstructive coronary disease (HR: 3.80; 95% CI: 1.67-8.67; P = 0.002)., Conclusions: Among select patients with nonobstructive CAD and without a history of ventricular tachycardia, IC agents are not associated with increased mortality. Therefore, these agents may be an option for some patients in whom they are frequently restricted. Further prospective studies are warranted., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study sought to formulate a predictive model for describing the long-term electrical performance of Micra (Medtronic, Mounds View, Minnesota)., Background: The Micra leadless pacemaker is an alternative ventricular pacing option that avoids the pitfalls of transvenous leads. However, well-defined metrics to predict the long-term electrical performance of the device are lacking., Methods: We identified all patients who underwent successful Micra implantation enrolled in the investigational device exemption study, continued access study, or post-approval registry with complete 1-year post-implantation data or system revision due to elevated thresholds (N = 1,843). The analysis endpoint was an elevated pacing capture threshold (PCT) at ≥12 months post-implantation, defined as ≥2.0 V at 0.24 ms or an increase of ≥1.5 V from implantation or need for system revision due to elevated thresholds at ≤12 months post-implantation. We evaluated for univariate and multivariate associations between patient and device characteristics at implantation and for elevated thresholds at 12 months., Results: Among the total cohort, 75 patients (4.1%) had elevated thresholds at 12 months; of these, 13 required system revisions. Predictors associated with elevated thresholds in univariate analysis included the total number of deployments (excluded from the multivariable model), impedance and PCT at implantation, male sex, history of diabetes, and ischemic cardiomyopathy. Multivariable regression modeling found that male sex, history of diabetes, implantation PCT of ≥2 V, and impedance of <800 Ω were independent predictors of elevated PCT at 12 months (all p < 0.05)., Conclusion: A history of diabetes, male sex, elevated PCT, and low impedance at implantation were independent predictors of elevated thresholds at 12 months. These metrics represent the foundation of a simple tool to aid in procedural decision making., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Ms. Wallace is an employee and shareholder of Medtronic. Mr. Stromberg is an employee and shareholder of Medtronic. Dr. Piccini is supported by R01HL128595 from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; receives grants for clinical research from Abbott, the American Heart Association, Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation, Bayer, Boston Scientific, and Philips; and serves as a consultant to Abbott, Allergan, ARCA Biopharma, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, LivaNova, Medtronic, Milestone, Myokardia, Sanofi, Philips, and UpToDate. Dr. Roberts has received honoraria from Medtronic. Dr. El-Chami has served as a consultant for Medtronic and Boston Scientific. Dr. Soejima has received honoraria for lecturing with Medtronic, Japan and Abbott, Japan. Dr. Garweg has received research funding from Biotronik, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic; and has received speaker fees and consultancy fees from Medtronic; Boston Scientific, and Biotronik. Dr. Fagan is an employee and shareholder of Medtronic. Dr. Lloyd has provided consulting and research support to Medtronic; and has provided research support to Boston Scientific. Dr. Kiani has reported that he has no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study evaluated spontaneous arrhythmias and clinical outcomes in the S-ICD System PAS (Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Post Approval Study) cohort., Background: The U.S. S-ICD PAS trial patient population more closely resembles transvenous ICD cohorts than earlier studies, which included many patients with little structural heart disease and few comorbidities. Early outcomes and low peri-operative complication rates were demonstrated in the S-ICD PAS cohort, but there are no data detailing spontaneous arrhythmias and clinical outcomes., Methods: The S-ICD PAS prospective registry included 1,637 de novo patients from 86 U.S. centers. Descriptive statistics, Kaplan-Meier time to event, and multivariate logistic regression were performed using data out to 365 days., Results: Patients (68.5% men; mean ejection fraction of 32.0%; 42.9% ischemic; 13.4% on dialysis) underwent implantation for primary (76.6%) or secondary prevention indication. The complication-free rate was 92.5%. The appropriate shock (AS) rate was 5.3%. A total of 395 ventricular tachycardia (VT) or fibrillation (VF) episodes were appropriately sensed, with 131 (33.2%) self-terminating. First and final shock efficacy (up to 5 shocks) for the 127 discrete AS episodes were 91.3% and 100.0%, respectively. Discrete AS episodes included 67 monomorphic VT (MVT) and 60 polymorphic VT (PVT)/VF, with first shock efficacy of 95.2% and 86.7%, respectively. There were 19 storm events in 18 subjects, with 84.2% conversion success. Storm episodes were more likely PVT/VF (98 of 137)., Conclusions: In the first year after implantation, a predominantly primary prevention population with low ejection fraction demonstrated a high complication-free rate and spontaneous event shock efficacy for MVT and PVT/VF arrhythmias at rapid ventricular rates. (Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator System Post Approval Study [S-ICD PAS; NCT01736618)., Competing Interests: Author Relationship With Industry This study was supported by Boston Scientific. Dr. Burke has been a consultant and has received honoraria from Boston Scientific and AtaCor Medical; has received research grants from Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and St. Jude Medical; and holds equity in AtaCor Medical. Dr Aasbo has been a consultant and has received honoraria from Boston Scientific and Biotronik. Dr. El-Chami has received honoraria for consulting for Medtronic and Boston Scientific. Dr. Dinerman has received consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Abbott. Dr. Hanon has received compensation for services from Boston Scientific. Dr. Weiss has received honoraria for speaking and serving as a consultant from Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Biotronic, and Biosense Webster. Dr. Gold has received honoraria and consulting fees from Boston Scientific and Medtronic. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study sought to report periprocedural outcomes and intermediate-term follow-up of hemodialysis patients undergoing Micra implantation., Background: Leadless pacemakers may be preferred in patients with limited vascular access and high-infection risk, such as patients on hemodialysis., Methods: Patients on hemodialysis at the time of Micra implantation attempt (n = 201 of 2,819; 7%) from the Micra Transcatheter Pacing Study investigational device exemption trial, Micra Transcatheter Pacing System Continued Access Study Protocol, and Micra Transcatheter Pacing System Post-Approval Registry were included in the analysis. Baseline characteristics, periprocedural outcomes, and intermediate-term follow-up were summarized., Results: Patients on hemodialysis at the time of Micra implantation attempt were on average 70.5 ± 13.5 years of age and 59.2% were male. The dialysis patients commonly had hypertension (80%), diabetes (61%), coronary artery disease (39%), and congestive heart failure (27%), and 72% had a condition that the implanting physician felt precluded the use of a transvenous pacemaker. Micra was successfully implanted in 197 patients (98.0%). Reasons for unsuccessful implantation included inadequate thresholds (n = 2) and pericardial effusion (n = 2). The median implantation time was 27 min (interquartile range: 20 to 39 min). There were 3 procedure-related deaths: 1 due to metabolic acidosis following a prolonged procedure duration in a patient undergoing concomitant atrioventricular nodal ablation and 2 deaths occurred in patients who needed surgical repair after perforation. Average follow-up was 6.2 months (range 0 to 26.7 months). No patients had a device-related infection or required device removal because of bacteremia., Conclusions: Leadless pacemakers represent an effective pacing option in this challenging patient population on chronic hemodialysis. The risk of infection appears low with an acceptable safety profile. (Micra Transcatheter Pacing Study; NCT02004873; Micra Transcatheter Pacing System Continued Access Study Protocol; NCT02488681; Micra Transcatheter Pacing System Post-Approval Registry; NCT02536118)., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)