Search

Introduction: The impact of atrial arrhythmias on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-associated outcomes are unclear. We sought to identify prevalence, risk factors and outcomes associated with atrial arrhythmias among patients hospitalized with COVID-19., Methods: An observational cohort study of 1053 patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection admitted to a quaternary care hospital and a community hospital was conducted. Data from electrocardiographic and telemetry were collected to identify atrial fibrillation (AF) or atrial flutter/tachycardia (AFL). The association between atrial arrhythmias and 30-day mortality was assessed with multivariable analysis., Results: Mean age of patients was 62 ± 17 years and 62% were men. Atrial arrhythmias were identified in 166 (15.8%) patients, with AF in 154 (14.6%) patients and AFL in 40 (3.8%) patients. Newly detected atrial arrhythmias occurred in 101 (9.6%) patients. Age, male sex, prior AF, renal disease, and hypoxia on presentation were independently associated with AF/AFL occurrence. Compared with patients without AF/AFL, patients with AF/AFL had significantly higher levels of troponin, B-type natriuretic peptide, C-reactive protein, ferritin and d-dimer. Mortality was significantly higher among patients with AF/AFL (39.2%) compared to patients without (13.4%; p < .001). After adjustment for age and co-morbidities, AF/AFL (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 1.93; p = .007) and newly detected AF/AFL (adjusted OR: 2.87; p < .001) were independently associated with 30-day mortality., Conclusion: Atrial arrhythmias are common among patients hospitalized with COVID-19. The presence of AF/AFL tracked with markers of inflammation and cardiac injury. Atrial arrhythmias were independently associated with increased mortality., (© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Introduction: The phase 3 EURIDIS and ADONIS studies evaluated dronedarone for atrial fibrillation (AF)/atrial flutter (AFL) recurrence in patients with nonpermanent AF. Here we assessed whether patient characteristics and/or treatment outcomes in these studies differed based on the need for cardioversion before randomization., Methods: Time to adjudicated first AF/AFL recurrence, symptomatic recurrence, cardiovascular hospitalization/death, and AF hospitalization, and safety were assessed by cardioversion status., Results: Of 1237 patients randomized (2:1 dronedarone:placebo), 364 required baseline cardioversion (dronedarone 243, placebo 121). Patients requiring cardioversion had a greater prevalence of cardiovascular comorbidities and shorter times to first AF/AFL recurrence compared with those not requiring cardioversion. Dronedarone was associated with longer median time to first AF/AFL recurrence vs placebo regardless of cardioversion status (cardioversion: 50 vs 15 days, hazard ratio [HR] 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-0.97; P = .02; non-cardioversion: 150 vs 77 days, HR 0.76; 95% CI, 0.64-0.90; P < .01). Dronedarone was similarly associated with prolonged median time to symptomatic recurrence vs placebo in the cardioversion (347 vs 87 days, HR 0.65; 95% CI, 0.49-0.87) and non-cardioversion (288 vs 120 days, HR 0.74; 95% CI, 0.62-0.90) populations. Risk of cardiovascular hospitalization/death and first AF hospitalization was lower with dronedarone vs placebo regardless of cardioversion status, but differences were not statistically significant. The safety of dronedarone was similar in both groups., Conclusion: Patients requiring baseline cardioversion represent a distinct population, having more underlying cardiovascular disease and experiencing a shorter time to AF/AFL recurrences. Dronedarone was associated with improved efficacy vs placebo regardless of cardioversion status., (© 2020 The Authors. Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Introduction: Indications for implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) in young patients have expanded and differ from those in older adults. We sought to provide descriptive characteristics and data regarding ICD therapy and outcomes among younger and older ICD recipients., Methods and Results: Demographics, device type and programming, remotely transmitted data, shock events, and survival were compared among younger (≤30 years) and older (>30 years) cohorts with ICDs from a single manufacturer followed on a remote network. The younger cohort included 904 patients (1.6% of all implants). This group had more females (46% vs. 25%; P < 0.01), single-coil leads (21% vs. 4%; P < 0.01), and single-chamber devices (46% vs. 34%; P < 0.01). Shock incidence was higher (40% younger vs. 32% older at 4 years; P < 0.01) and survival was better over comparable follow-up (88% vs. 72%; P < 0.01). Remote monitoring was associated with improved survival in both groups (93% vs. 86% ≤ 30 years, P < 0.01; 73% vs. 66% > 30 years, P < 0.01). Shock for polymorphic ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation (VT/VF) was more frequent in younger patients (12% vs. 5%; P < 0.01); 39% of all shocks were inappropriate. A 10-fold increased risk of mortality was seen among young patients with shocks for atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF/AFL)., Conclusions: Differences in survival, shock incidence, and prognostic significance of VT/VF and AF/AFL exist between younger and older ICD recipients. These suggest distinct differences in myocardial substrates and diseases that ultimately impact ICD management., (© 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Introduction: This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of a new dual-chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) to detect and treat atrial tachyarrhythmias in patients with drug-refractory atrial fibrillation (AF) and no indication for a ventricular ICD., Methods and Results: A dual-chamber ICD (Medtronic 7250 Jewel AF) was implanted in 144 of 146 patients. The device discriminates atrial tachycardia from AF based on cycle length and regularity, and uses atrial overdrive pacing as well as shocks to terminate tachyarrhythmia episodes. Patients were followed for an average of 12.6+/-6.2 months. Use of antiarrhythmic drugs was 63% at baseline and did not change over time. Kaplan-Meier estimates of 12-month complication-free survival, device therapy survival, and patient survival were 85%, 91%, and 98%, respectively. Positive predictive accuracy of spontaneous atrial tachyarrhythmia detection was 99%, while atrial overdrive pacing and shocks terminated 40% and 87% of treated episodes, respectively. Median duration of successfully treated episodes was 8.9 minutes versus 144 minutes for the therapy failures. There was no reduction in the use of patient-activated shock therapy over time; at the 12-month follow-up evaluation, 94% of patients were in sinus rhythm. Ventricular tachyarrhythmias (67 episodes) were detected and appropriately treated in 7.6% of patients., Conclusion: This dual-chamber ICD appears to be safe and well tolerated in patients with drug-refractory symptomatic atrial tachyarrhythmias. The device, used in combination with drugs, effectively treats atrial tachyarrhythmias with pacing and/or shock therapies and decreases the median episode duration. In addition, the device protects from ventricular tachyarrhythmias in patients with AF and structural heart disease.