Search

Objectives: Atrial fibrillation (AF) screening may increase early detection and reduce complications of AF. European, Australian and World Heart Federation guidelines recommend opportunistic screening, despite a current lack of clear evidence supporting a net benefit for systematic screening. Where screening is implemented, the most appropriate approaches are unknown. We explored the views of European stakeholders about opportunities and challenges of implementing four AF screening scenarios., Design: Telephone-based semi-structured interviews with results reported using Consolidated criteria for Reporting Qualitative research guidelines. Data were thematically analysed using the framework approach., Setting: AF screening stakeholders in 11 European countries., Participants: Healthcare professionals and regulators (n=24) potentially involved in AF screening implementation., Intervention: Four AF screening scenarios: single time point opportunistic, opportunistic prolonged, systematic single time point/prolonged and patient-led screening., Primary Outcome Measures: Stakeholder views about the challenges and feasibility of implementing the screening scenarios in the respective national/regional healthcare system., Results: Three themes developed. (1) Current screening approaches: there are no national AF screening programmes, with most AF detected in symptomatic patients. Patient-led screening exists via personal devices, creating screening inequity. (2) Feasibility of screening: single time point opportunistic screening in primary care using single-lead ECG devices was considered the most feasible. Software algorithms may aid identification of suitable patients and telehealth services have potential to support diagnosis. (3) Implementation requirements: sufficient evidence of benefit is required. National screening processes are required due to different payment mechanisms and health service regulations. Concerns about data security, and inclusivity for those without primary care access or personal devices must be addressed., Conclusions: There is an overall awareness of AF screening. Opportunistic screening appears the most feasible across Europe. Challenges are health inequalities, identification of best target groups for screening, streamlined processes, the need for evidence of benefit and a tailored approach adapted to national realities., Competing Interests: Competing interests: RS has received speaker and advisory board honoraria by BMS/Pfizer outside this work. BF reports research grants to institution for investigator initiated studies from BMS/Pfizer alliance, and speaker fees and non-financial support from BMS/Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo and OMRON. GB reported speaker’s fees of small amount from Bayer, Boehringer, Boston, Biotronik and Medtronic. HH did receive personal fees from Biotronik and BMS/Pfizer. He received unconditional research grants through the University of Antwerp and/or the University of Hasselt from Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bracco Imaging Europe, Abbott, Medtronic, Biotronik, Daiichi Sankyo, BMS/Pfizer and Boston Scientific, all outside the scope of this work. SZD is a part-time employee of Vital Beats without relation to the current work. TSP: consultancy (no fee) and small speaker fee from Bayer and BMS/Pfizer outside this work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: High-risk patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) are identified by contemporary risk stratification and effectively treated with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). However, long-term HCM clinical course after ICD therapy for ventricular tachyarrhythmias is incompletely understood., Methods and Results: Cohort of 486 high-risk HCM patients with ICDs was assembled from 8 international centers. Clinical course and device interventions were addressed, and survey questionnaires assessed patient anxiety level and psychological well-being related to ICD therapy. Of 486 patients, 94 (19%) experienced appropriate ICD interventions terminating ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation, 3.7% per year for primary prevention, over 6.4±4.7 years. Of 94 patients, 87 were asymptomatic or only mildly symptomatic at the time of appropriate ICD interventions; 74 of these 87 (85%) remained in classes I/II without significant change in clinical status over the subsequent 5.9±4.9 years (up to 22). Among the 94 patients, there was one sudden death (caused by device failure; 1.1%); 3 patients died from other HCM-related processes unrelated to arrhythmic risk (eg, end-stage heart failure). Post-ICD intervention, freedom from HCM mortality was 100%, 97%, and 92% at 1, 5, and 10 years, distinctly lower than in ischemic or nonischemic cardiomyopathy ICD trials. HCM patients with ICD interventions reported heightened anxiety in expectation of future shocks, but with intact general psychological well-being and quality of life., Conclusions: In HCM, unlike ischemic heart disease, prevention of sudden death with ICD therapy is unassociated with significant increase in cardiovascular morbidity or mortality, or transformation to heart failure deterioration. ICD therapy does not substantially impair overall psychological and physical well-being., (© 2018 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Background: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) studies in patients with coronary artery disease report higher risk of ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation (VT/VF) early post-implant, potentially related to local proarrhythmic effects of ICD leads., Objective: To characterize early and long-term risk of ICD discharge for VT/VF in a large hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) cohort., Methods: By using HCM multicenter registry data, we compared long-term risk of VT/VF subsequent to an early post-implant period (a priori defined as within 3 months of implant) between patients with or without VT/VF within 3 months after ICD implantation., Results: Over a median follow-up of 4.3 years, 109 of 506 (22%) patients with HCM who received ICDs received at least 1 ICD discharge for VT/VF. Risk of first ICD discharge for VT/VF was highest in the first year post-implant (10.8% per person-year; 95% confidence interval 7.9-13.8) and particularly in the first 3 months (17.0% per person-year; 95% confidence interval 9.8-24.3). Patients with early VT/VF (≤3 months post-implant) were older, and more commonly had secondary prevention ICDs following cardiac arrest or systolic dysfunction (end-stage HCM with ejection fraction<50%). Only 2 of 247 (0.7%) patients with primary prevention ICDs and preserved systolic function had early VT/VF. Patients with VT/VF early post-implant (≤3 months) had more than 5-fold higher risk for future VT/VF during long-term follow-up compared with patients without early VT/VF (adjusted hazard ratio 5.4; 95% confidence interval 2.3-12.6)., Conclusions: High-risk patients with HCM and VT/VF early after ICD implantation are particularly prone to subsequent VT/VF throughout follow-up. Early ICD interventions for VT/VF are largely confined to patients with prior cardiac arrest or systolic dysfunction and therefore more likely driven by higher arrhythmic risk rather than lead-related proarrhythmia., (Copyright © 2013 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)