Search

Aim This clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients. Methods A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing randomized and nonrandomized trials, observational studies, registries, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered. Structure Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The “2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain” provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. This guideline presents an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated, and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

Aim This executive summary of the hypertrophic cardiomyopathy clinical practice guideline provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to diagnose and manage hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in adult and pediatric patients as well as supporting documentation to encourage their use. Methods A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 1, 2010, to April 30, 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Structure Many recommendations from the earlier hypertrophic cardiomyopathy guidelines have been updated with new evidence or a better understanding of earlier evidence. This summary operationalizes the recommendations from the full guideline and presents a combination of diagnostic work-up, genetic and family screening, risk stratification approaches, lifestyle modifications, surgical and catheter interventions, and medications that constitute components of guideline directed medical therapy. For both guideline-directed medical therapy and other recommended drug treatment regimens, the reader is advised to follow dosing, contraindications and drug-drug interactions based on product insert materials.

Transvenous neurostimulation of the phrenic nerve (PNS) is a potentially improved and unique approach to the treatment of central sleep apnea (CSA). There have been multiple studies with limited individuals evaluating the efficacy of PNS. Our aim was to review and pool those studies to better understand whether phrenic nerve stimulation is efficacious in the treatment of CSA. The initial search on Pubmed retrieved a total of 97 articles and after screening all articles, only 5 could be included in our quantitative analysis. Pooling of data from 5 studies with a total of 204 patients demonstrated a reduction of mean apnea hypopnea index with PNS compared to controls by -26.7 events/hour with 95% confidence interval and P value of [CI (-31.99, -21.46), I2 85, p 0.00]. The mean difference in central apnea index was -22.47 [CI (-25.19, -19.76), I2 0, p 0.00]. The mean reduction in the oxygen desaturation index of 4% or more demonstrated a decrease in PNS group by -24.16 events/hour [(CI -26.20, -22.12), I2 0, p 0.00] compared with controls. PNS resulted in mean reduction in arousal index of -13.77 [CI (-16.15, -11.40), I2 0, p 0.00]. The mean change in percent of time spent in rapid eye movement sleep demonstrated a nonsignificant increase in PNS group by 1.01 % [CI (-5.67, 7.86), I293, p 0.75]. In conclusion, PNS therapy for treating CSA demonstrated positive outcomes but larger randomized studies are needed to evaluate the safety and clinical outcomes.

Aim:This clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients.Methods:A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing randomized and nonrandomized trials, observational studies, registries, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered.Structure:Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The “2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain” provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. This guideline presents an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated, and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

Atrial fibrillation and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction are increasing in prevalence worldwide. Atrial fibrillation can precipitate and can be a consequence of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and cardiomyopathy. Atrial fibrillation and heart failure, when present together, are associated with worse outcomes. Together, these 2 conditions increase the risk of stroke, requiring oral anticoagulation in many or left atrial appendage closure in some. Medical management for rate and rhythm control of atrial fibrillation in heart failure remain hampered by variable success, intolerance, and adverse effects. In multiple randomized clinical trials in recent years, catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction has shown superiority in improving survival, quality of life, and ventricular function and reducing heart failure hospitalizations compared with antiarrhythmic drugs and rate control therapies. This has resulted in a paradigm shift in management toward nonpharmacological rhythm control of atrial fibrillation in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. The primary objective of this American Heart Association scientific statement is to review the available evidence on the epidemiology and pathophysiology of atrial fibrillation in relation to heart failure and to provide guidance on the latest advances in pharmacological and nonpharmacological management of atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. The writing committee’s consensus on the implications for clinical practice, gaps in knowledge, and directions for future research are highlighted.

Glenn N. Levine, MD, FACC, FAHA, Chair Patrick T. O’Gara, MD, MACC, FAHA, Chair-Elect Jonathan L. Halperin, MD, FACC, FAHA, Immediate Past Chair [‡‡][1] Sana M. Al-Khatib, MD, MHS, FACC, FAHA Joshua A. Beckman, MD, MS, FAHA Kim K. Birtcher, PharmD, MS, AACC Biykem Bozkurt, MD, PhD

Since 1980, the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and American Heart Association (AHA) have translated scientific evidence into clinical practice guidelines with recommendations to improve cardiovascular health [(1)][1]. These guidelines, based on systematic methods to evaluate and classify

Introduction Catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia (VT) can be an effective therapy to reduce VT burden, but often it is limited by the potential for hemodynamic instability. Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices (pLVADs) have been used to maintain hemodynamic support during VT ablation but the evidence regarding its clinical impact has been inconclusive. Methods and results We sought to assess the clinical impact of pLVAD when used in VT ablation by conducting a meta-analysis of the current evidence. We searched Pubmed and found nine observational studies that compared clinical outcomes of VT ablation in patients with pLVAD support to controls with no pLVAD support. The pooled data did not show a significant difference in mortality between both groups, nor a difference in acute procedural success or in recurrence of VT. There was also no difference in the number of patients receiving a cardiac transplant or being enrolled in the transplant list. Although there was no difference in the ablation time between the groups, patients in the pLVAD group had a longer total procedural time and more procedure-related adverse effects. Conclusion This meta-analysis did not show clinical benefits from using pLVAD support during VT ablation, whereas it was associated with longer procedure times and more complications. This study was, however, limited by the observational nature of the data. In view of these data, the risk and benefit of pLVAD support during VT ablation should be considered on an individual basis.

Glenn N. Levine, MD, FACC, FAHA, Chair Patrick T. O’Gara, MD, MACC, FAHA, Chair-Elect Jonathan L. Halperin, MD, FACC, FAHA, Immediate Past Chair [¶][1] Sana M. Al-Khatib, MD, MHS, FACC, FAHA Joshua A. Beckman, MD, MS, FAHA Kim K. Birtcher, MS, PharmD, AACC Biykem Bozkurt, MD, PhD, FACC

Glenn N. Levine, MD, FACC, FAHA, Chair Patrick T. O’Gara, MD, MACC, FAHA, Chair-Elect Jonathan L. Halperin, MD, FACC, FAHA, Immediate Past Chair [¶][1] Sana M. Al-Khatib, MD, MHS, FACC, FAHA Joshua A. Beckman, MD, MS, FAHA Kim K. Birtcher, MS, PharmD, AACC Biykem Bozkurt, MD, PhD, FACC

Orthotropic heart transplantation remains the most effective therapy for patients with end-stage heart failure, with a median survival of ≈13 years. Yet, a number of complications are observed after orthotropic heart transplantation, including atrial and ventricular arrhythmias. Several factors contribute to arrhythmias, such as autonomic denervation, effect of the surgical technique, acute and chronic rejection, and transplant vasculopathy among others. To minimize risk of future arrhythmias, the bicaval technique and minimizing ischemic time are current surgical standards. Sinus node dysfunction is the most common indication for early (within 30 days) pacemaker implantation, whereas atrioventricular block incidence increases as time from transplant increases. Atrial fibrillation can occur in the first few weeks following transplantation but is uncommon in the long term unless secondary to a precipitant such as acute rejection. The most common atrial arrhythmias are atrial flutters, which are mainly typical, but atypical circuits can be observed such as those that involve the remnant donor atrium in regions immediately adjacent to the atrioatrial anastomosis suture line. Choosing the appropriate pharmacological therapy requires careful consideration due to the potential interaction with immunosuppressive agents. Despite historical concerns, adenosine is effective and safe at reduced doses if administered under cardiac monitoring. Catheter ablation has emerged as an effective treatment strategy for symptomatic supraventricular tachycardias, including ablation of atypical flutter circuits. Cardiac allograft vasculopathy is an important risk factor for sudden cardiac death, yet the role of prophylactic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implant for sudden death prevention is unclear. Current indications for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation are as in the nontransplant population. A number of questions for future research are posed.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text., Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has led to over 1 million deaths worldwide and has been associated with cardiac complications including cardiac arrhythmias. The incidence and pathophysiology of these manifestations remain elusive. In this worldwide survey of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who developed cardiac arrhythmias, we describe clinical characteristics associated with various arrhythmias, as well as global differences in modulations of routine electrophysiology practice during the pandemic. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection worldwide with and without incident cardiac arrhythmias. Patients with documented atrial fibrillation, atrial flutter, supraventricular tachycardia, nonsustained or sustained ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation, atrioventricular block, or marked sinus bradycardia (heart rate

BackgroundCOVID-19 has led to over 1 million deaths worldwide and has been associated with cardiac complications including cardiac arrhythmias. The incidence and pathophysiology of these manifestations remain elusive. In this worldwide survey of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who developed cardiac arrhythmias, we describe clinical characteristics associated with various arrhythmias, as well as global differences in modulations of routine electrophysiology practice during the pandemic. MethodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection worldwide with and without incident cardiac arrhythmias. Patients with documented atrial fibrillation (AF), atrial flutter (AFL), supraventricular tachycardia (SVT), non-sustained or sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT), ventricular fibrillation (VF), atrioventricular block (AVB), or marked sinus bradycardia (HR ResultsData was collected for 4,526 patients across 4 continents and 12 countries, 827 of whom had an arrhythmia. Cardiac comorbidities were common in patients with arrhythmia: 69% had hypertension, 42% diabetes mellitus, 30% had heart failure and 24% coronary artery disease. Most had no prior history of arrhythmia. Of those who did develop an arrhythmia, the majority (81.8%) developed atrial arrhythmias, 20.7% developed ventricular arrhythmias, and 22.6% had bradyarrhythmia. Regional differences suggested a lower incidence of AF in Asia compared to other continents (34% vs. 63%). Most patients in in North America and Europe received hydroxychloroquine, though the frequency of hydroxychloroquine therapy was constant across arrhythmia types. Forty-three percent of patients who developed arrhythmia were mechanically ventilated and 51% survived to hospital discharge. Many institutions reported drastic decreases in electrophysiology procedures performed. ConclusionsCardiac arrhythmias are common and associated with high morbidity and mortality among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection. There were significant regional variations in the types of arrhythmias and treatment approaches.

Cardiac sarcoidosis is a component of an often multiorgan granulomatous disease of still uncertain cause. It is being recognized with increasing frequency, mainly as the result of heightened awareness and new diagnostic tests, specifically cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography scans. The purpose of this case-based review is to highlight the potentially life-saving importance of making the early diagnosis of cardiac sarcoidosis using these new tools and to provide a framework for the optimal care of patients with this disease. We will review disease mechanisms as currently understood, associated arrhythmias including conduction abnormalities, and atrial and ventricular tachyarrhythmias, guideline-directed diagnostic criteria, screening of patients with extracardiac sarcoidosis, and the use of pacemakers and defibrillators in this setting. Treatment options, including those related to heart failure, and those which may help clarify disease mechanisms are included.

Aim This executive summary of the hypertrophic cardiomyopathy clinical practice guideline provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to diagnose and manage hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in adult and pediatric patients as well as supporting documentation to encourage their use. Methods A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 1, 2010, to April 30, 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Structure Many recommendations from the earlier hypertrophic cardiomyopathy guidelines have been updated with new evidence or a better understanding of earlier evidence. This summary operationalizes the recommendations from the full guideline and presents a combination of diagnostic work-up, genetic and family screening, risk stratification approaches, lifestyle modifications, surgical and catheter interventions, and medications that constitute components of guideline directed medical therapy. For both guideline-directed medical therapy and other recommended drug treatment regimens, the reader is advised to follow dosing, contraindications and drug-drug interactions based on product insert materials.

Many widely used medications may cause or exacerbate a variety of arrhythmias. Numerous antiarrhythmic agents, antimicrobial drugs, psychotropic medications, and methadone, as well as a growing list of drugs from other therapeutic classes (neurological drugs, anticancer agents, and many others), can prolong the QT interval and provoke torsades de pointes. Perhaps less familiar to clinicians is the fact that drugs can also trigger other arrhythmias, including bradyarrhythmias, atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter, atrial tachycardia, atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia, monomorphic ventricular tachycardia, and Brugada syndrome. Some drug-induced arrhythmias (bradyarrhythmias, atrial tachycardia, atrioventricular node reentrant tachycardia) are significant predominantly because of their symptoms; others (monomorphic ventricular tachycardia, Brugada syndrome, torsades de pointes) may result in serious consequences, including sudden cardiac death. Mechanisms of arrhythmias are well known for some medications but, in other instances, remain poorly understood. For some drug-induced arrhythmias, particularly torsades de pointes, risk factors are well defined. Modification of risk factors, when possible, is important for prevention and risk reduction. In patients with nonmodifiable risk factors who require a potentially arrhythmia-inducing drug, enhanced electrocardiographic and other monitoring strategies may be beneficial for early detection and treatment. Management of drug-induced arrhythmias includes discontinuation of the offending medication and following treatment guidelines for the specific arrhythmia. In overdose situations, targeted detoxification strategies may be needed. Awareness of drugs that may cause arrhythmias and knowledge of distinct arrhythmias that may be drug-induced are essential for clinicians. Consideration of the possibility that a patient’s arrythmia could be drug-induced is important.

Background: Catheter ablation is an increasingly used treatment for symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF). However, there are limited prospective, nationwide data on patient selection and procedural characteristics. This study describes patient characteristics, techniques, treatment patterns, and safety outcomes of patients undergoing AF ablation. Methods: A total of 3139 patients undergoing AF ablation between 2016 and 2018 in the Get With The Guidelines-Atrial Fibrillation registry from 24 US centers were included. Patient demographics, medical history, procedural details, and complications were abstracted. Differences between paroxysmal and patients with persistent AF were compared using Pearson χ 2 and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Results: Patients undergoing AF ablation were predominantly male (63.9%) and White (93.2%) with a median age of 65. Hypertension was the most common comorbidity (67.6%), and patients with persistent AF had more comorbidities than patients with paroxysmal AF. Drug refractory, paroxysmal AF was the most common ablation indication (class I, 53.6%) followed by drug refractory, persistent AF (class I, 41.8%). Radiofrequency ablation with contact force sensing was the most common ablation modality (70.5%); 23.7% of patients underwent cryoballoon ablation. Pulmonary vein isolation was performed in 94.6% of de novo ablations; the most common adjunctive lesions included left atrial roof or posterior/inferior lines, and cavotricuspid isthmus ablation. Complications were uncommon (5.1%) and were life-threatening in 0.7% of cases. Conclusions: More than 98% of AF ablations among participating sites are performed for class I or class IIA indications. Contact force-guided radiofrequency ablation is the dominant technique and pulmonary vein isolation the principal lesion set. In-hospital complications are uncommon and rarely life-threatening.

BACKGROUND: Post-operative atrial fibrillation (POAF) is common after aortic valve replacement (AVR) and is associated with worse outcomes. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement (SAVR) and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) for incidence of POAF at 30 days. METHODS: We searched databases from 1/1/1990 to 1/1/2020 for randomized studies comparing TAVR and SAVR. POAF was defined as either worsening or new-onset atrial fibrillation. Random effects model was used to estimate the risk of POAF with TAVR vs SAVR in all trials, and in subgroups (low, intermediate, high risk, and in self-expandable vs balloon expandable valves). Sensitivity analysis was performed including only studies reporting new-onset atrial fibrillation. RESULTS: Seven RCTs were identified that enrolled 7,934 patients (3,999 to TAVR and 3,935 to SAVR). The overall incidence of POAF was 9.7% after TAVR and 33.3% after SAVR. TAVR was associated with a lower risk of POAF compared with SAVR (OR 0.21 [0.18-0.24]; P < 0.0001). Compared with SAVR, TAVR was associated with a significantly lower risk of POAF in the high-risk cohort (OR 0.37 [0.27-0.49]; P < 0.0001), in the intermediate-risk cohort (OR 0.23 [0.19-0.28]; P < 0.0001), low-risk cohort (OR 0.13 [0.10-0.16]; P < 0.0001). Sensitivity analysis of 4 trials including only new-onset POAF showed similar summary estimates (OR 0.21, 95% CI [0.18-0.25]; P< 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: TAVR is associated with a significantly lower risk of post-operative atrial fibrillation compared with SAVR in all strata. Further studies are needed to identify the contribution of post-operative atrial fibrillation to the differences in clinical outcomes after TAVR and SAVR.

Background: Palliative use of continuous IV inotrope therapy has shown to improve quality of life and reduce hospital readmissions for patients with end-stage heart failure (HF) who are otherwise ineligible to receive advanced therapies. Administration of home inotrope therapy generally requires a hospice or home-health agency, placing this option out of reach for patients who lack funding. As such, underinsured patients are relegated to the difficult choice of either remaining in the hospital to receive IV inotropes, or going home without the therapy for as long as their symptoms allow. To address this issue at our large county safety-net hospital, we developed and implemented a patient self-administered home inotrope therapy program. Methods: A multidisciplinary team of physicians, pharmacists, nurses, and social workers was assembled to pilot the program. Eligible patients were provided with a peripherally inserted central venous catheter (PICC) and a portable infusion pump. They were then instructed on proper use of the pump, medication administration, medication bag changes, and IV line care using a nursing teach-back technique. After proper understanding was demonstrated, patients were discharged home with weekly follow up in heart failure clinic for PICC-care and medication exchanges. Results: During the initial 12 months of the program, 5 patients were deemed eligible for enrollment. Total hospitalized days for these patients was 277 (mean = 55.4 days) in the one year prior to enrollment and 12 (mean = 2.4 days) while enrolled for a cumulative period of 288 days (Figure 1). One patient was able to secure funding for advanced therapies, two patients died while enrolled, and two patients are currently enrolled and alive. Discussion: A self-administered home IV inotrope therapy program is a feasible alternative for palliation in unfunded patients with end-stage HF who are otherwise not candidates for advanced therapies, allowing for more days at home in the end of life. Thus far, the cost impact of the program has been mitigated by the cost savings for inpatient hospitalizations. Studies to assess patient-centered outcomes, and overall cost savings are ongoing.

Key Points Question Is implementation of a novel high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T protocol in patients with chest pain associated with less resource use and within acceptable safety parameters? Findings This cohort study of 31 543 emergency department encounters found that implementation of the protocol was associated with a shorter length of stay in the emergency department and a higher proportion of patients discharged. There was no difference in the rate of 30-day hospitalization for myocardial infarction or death. Meaning This or similar protocols that rapidly rule out myocardial infarction have the potential to reduce emergency department overcrowding and improve health care quality., This cohort study of patients at a large US safety net hospital examines the safety of and resource use associated with a new protocol for excluding myocardial infarction from diagnosis of patients with chest pains through the use of high-sensitivity troponin., Importance High-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) protocols for the evaluation of chest pain in the emergency department (ED) may reduce unnecessary resource use and overcrowding. Objective To determine whether the implementation of a novel hs-cTnT protocol, which incorporated troponin values drawn at 0, 1, and 3 hours after ED presentation and the modified HEART score (history, electrocardiogram, age, risk factors), was associated with improvements in resource use while maintaining safety. Design, Setting, and Participants This retrospective cohort study from Parkland Health and Hospital System, a large safety net hospital in Dallas, Texas, included data on 31 543 unique ED encounters in which patients underwent electrocardiographic and troponin testing from January 1, 2017, to October 16, 2018. The hs-cTnT protocol was implemented in December 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures Resource use outcomes included trends in ED dwell time, troponin to disposition decision time (the difference between the first troponin draw time and the time an order was placed for inpatient admission, admission to observation, or discharge), and final patient disposition. Safety outcomes included readmission for myocardial infarction and death. Results In 31 543 encounters, mean (SD) patient age was 54 (14.4) years and 14 675 patients (48%) were female. Department dwell time decreased by a mean of −1.09 (95% CI, −2.81 to 0.64) minutes per month in the preintervention period. The decline was steeper after the intervention (−4.69 [95% CI, −9.05 to −0.33] minutes per month) (P for interaction = .007). The troponin to disposition time was increasing in the preintervention period by 1.72 (95% CI, 1.08 to 2.36) minutes per month; postintervention, the mean difference increased more slowly (0.37 [95% CI, −1.25 to 1.99 minutes per month; P value for interaction = .007]). The proportion of patients discharged from the ED increased after the intervention (48% vs 54%, P

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global pandemic that is wreaking havoc on the health and economy of much of human civilization. Electrophysiologists have been impacted personally and professionally by this global catastrophe. In this joint article from representatives of the Heart Rhythm Society, the American College of Cardiology, and the American Heart Association, we identify the potential risks of exposure to patients, allied healthcare staff, industry representatives, and hospital administrators. We also describe the impact of COVID-19 on cardiac arrhythmias and methods of triage based on acuity and patient comorbidities. We provide guidance for managing invasive and noninvasive electrophysiology procedures, clinic visits, and cardiac device interrogations. In addition, we discuss resource conservation and the role of telemedicine in remote patient care along with management strategies for affected patients.

Atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common sustained cardiac arrhythmia, is associated with substantial morbidity, mortality, and healthcare use. Great strides have been made in stroke prevention and rhythm control strategies, yet reducing the incidence of AF has been slowed by the increasing incidence and prevalence of AF risk factors, including obesity, physical inactivity, sleep apnea, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and other modifiable lifestyle-related factors. Fortunately, many of these AF drivers are potentially reversible, and emerging evidence supports that addressing these modifiable risks may be effective for primary and secondary AF prevention. A structured, protocol-driven multidisciplinary approach to integrate lifestyle and risk factor management as an integral part of AF management may help in the prevention and treatment of AF. However, this aspect of AF management is currently underrecognized, underused, and understudied. The purpose of this American Heart Association scientific statement is to review the association of modifiable risk factors with AF and the effects of risk factor intervention. Implementation strategies, care pathways, and educational links for achieving impactful weight reduction, increased physical activity, and risk factor modification are included. Implications for clinical practice, gaps in knowledge, and future directions for the research community are highlighted.

The widespread use of cardiac implantable electronic devices and wearable monitors has led to the detection of subclinical atrial fibrillation in a substantial proportion of patients. There is evidence that these asymptomatic arrhythmias are associated with increased risk of stroke. Thus, detection of subclinical atrial fibrillation may offer an opportunity to reduce stroke risk by initiating anticoagulation. However, it is unknown whether long-term anticoagulation is warranted and in what populations. This scientific statement explores the existing data on the prevalence, clinical significance, and management of subclinical atrial fibrillation and identifies current gaps in knowledge and areas of controversy and consensus.

Background Atrioventricular (AV) junction (AVJ) ablation is conventionally performed by localizing the His-bundle electrogram (HBE). Identification of HBE in the presence of atrial fibrillation (AF) can be difficult, and can make this simple procedure challenging. In this study, we describe our experience with an alternative approach to localize optimal ablation sites using His-bundle pacing (HBP). Methods Between 1/1/2014 and 12/31/2015, we performed 13 AVJ ablations using the standard electrogram-guided approach and 11 ablations using HBP. All cases utilized a long femoral guiding sheath and an 8-mm-tip electrode radiofrequency (RF) energy ablation catheter. Pacing was performed at high output (10 mA at 2 ms) to initially achieve right bundle branch capture. The catheter was withdrawn until a narrow QRS morphology and increased stim-to-QRS time were observed. HBP was confirmed when paced and native QRS were identical in morphology. RF energy was applied at the site of HBP capture until AV block was observed. Results Baseline characteristics of patients in each arm were not significantly different. Compared with the standard approach, HBP was associated with trends toward lower RF applications (3 vs. 2, P = 0.16) and shorter mean RF time (208 seconds vs. 128 seconds, P = 0.19). Conclusion HBP is an effective technique to identify optimal ablation sites during AVJ ablation and may shorten procedure time. HBP can be used to identify the AV node during AF without recording the His potential. Future studies with larger sample size are needed to better characterize the utility of this technique.

The results of the long-awaited Prospective Randomized Comparison of Subcutaneous and Transvenous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Therapy (PRAETORIAN) trial — a randomized, controlled trial ...

Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are an increasingly used strategy for the management of patients with advanced heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Although these devices effectively improve survival, atrial and ventricular arrhythmias are common, predispose these patients to additional risk, and complicate patient management. However, there is no consensus on best practices for the medical management of these arrhythmias or on the optimal timing for procedural interventions in patients with refractory arrhythmias. Although the vast majority of these patients have preexisting cardiovascular implantable electronic devices or cardiac resynchronization therapy, given the natural history of heart failure, it is common practice to maintain cardiovascular implantable electronic device detection and therapies after LVAD implantation. Available data, however, are conflicting on the efficacy of and optimal device programming after LVAD implantation. Therefore, the primary objective of this scientific statement is to review the available evidence and to provide guidance on the management of atrial and ventricular arrhythmias in this unique patient population, as well as procedural interventions and cardiovascular implantable electronic device and cardiac resynchronization therapy programming strategies, on the basis of a comprehensive literature review by electrophysiologists, heart failure cardiologists, cardiac surgeons, and cardiovascular nurse specialists with expertise in managing these patients. The structure and design of commercially available LVADs are briefly reviewed, as well as clinical indications for device implantation. The relevant physiological effects of long-term exposure to continuous-flow circulatory support are highlighted, as well as the mechanisms and clinical significance of arrhythmias in the setting of LVAD support.

A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines Endorsed by the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation, the American Geriatrics Society, the American Society of Preventive Cardiology, and the Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association

[Extract] Top 10 Take-Home Messages for the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease 1. The most important way to prevent atherosclerotic vascular disease, heart failure, and atrial fibrillation is to promote a healthy lifestyle throughout life. 2. A team-based care approach is an effective strategy for the prevention of cardiovascular disease. Clinicians should evaluate the social determinants of health that affect individuals to inform treatment decisions. 3. Adults who are 40 to 75 years of age and are being evaluated for cardiovascular disease prevention should undergo 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk estimation and have a clinician–patient risk discussion before starting on pharmacological therapy, such as antihypertensive therapy, a statin, or aspirin. In addition, assessing for other risk-enhancing factors can help guide decisions about preventive interventions in select individuals, as can coronary artery calcium scanning. 4. All adults should consume a healthy diet that emphasizes the intake of vegetables, fruits, nuts, whole grains, lean vegetable or animal protein, and fish and minimizes the intake of trans fats, red meat and processed red meats, refined carbohydrates, and sweetened beverages. For adults with overweight and obesity, counseling and caloric restriction are recommended for achieving and maintaining weight loss. 5. Adults should engage in at least 150 minutes per week of accumulated moderate-intensity physical activity or 75 minutes per week of vigorous-intensity physical activity. 6. For adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus, lifestyle changes, such as improving dietary habits and achieving exercise recommendations, are crucial. If medication is indicated, metformin is first-line therapy, followed by consideration of a sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor or a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist. 7. All adults should be assessed at every healthcare visit for tobacco use, and those who use tobacco should be assisted and strongly advised to quit. 8. Aspirin should be used infrequently in the routine primary prevention of ASCVD because of lack of net benefit. 9. Statin therapy is first-line treatment for primary prevention of ASCVD in patients with elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (≥190 mg/dL), those with diabetes mellitus, who are 40 to 75 years of age, and those determined to be at sufficient ASCVD risk after a clinician–patient risk discussion. 10. Nonpharmacological interventions are recommended for all adults with elevated blood pressure or hypertension. For those requiring pharmacological therapy, the target blood pressure should generally be

Objective To review the literature systematically to determine whether noninvasive or invasive risk stratification, such as with an electrophysiological study of patients with asymptomatic pre-excitation, reduces the risk of arrhythmic events and improves patient outcomes. Methods PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (all January 1, 1970, through August 31, 2014) were searched for randomized controlled trials and cohort studies examining noninvasive or invasive risk stratification in patients with asymptomatic pre-excitation. Studies were rejected for low-quality design or the lack of an outcome, population, intervention, or comparator of interest or if they were written in a language other than English. Results Of 778 citations found, 9 studies met all the eligibility criteria and were included in this paper. Of the 9 studies, 1 had a dual design–a randomized controlled trial of ablation versus no ablation in 76 patients and an uncontrolled prospective cohort of 148 additional patients–and 8 were uncontrolled prospective cohort studies (n=1,594). In studies reporting a mean age, the range was 32 to 50 years, and in studies reporting a median age, the range was 19 to 36 years. The majority of patients were male (range, 50% to 74%), and 250 ms) developed in 0% to 16%, malignant atrial fibrillation (shortest RR interval ≤250 ms) in 0% to 9%, and ventricular fibrillation in 0% to 2%, most of whom were children in the last case. Conclusions The existing evidence suggests risk stratification with an electrophysiological study of patients with asymptomatic pre-excitation may be beneficial, along with consideration of accessory-pathway ablation in those deemed to be at high risk of future arrhythmias. Given the limitations of the existing data, well-designed and well-conducted studies are needed.

Preamble e472 1. Introduction e473 2. General Principles e475 3. Sinus Tachyarrhythmias e480 4. Nonsinus Focal Atrial Tachycardia and MAT e481 5. Atrioventricular Nodal Reentrant Tachycardia e482 6. Manifest and Concealed Accessory Pathways e483 7. Atrial Flutter e485 8. Junctional Tachycardia e487 9. Special Populations e487

Jonathan L. Halperin, MD, FACC, FAHA, Chair Glenn N. Levine, MD, FACC, FAHA, Chair-Elect Jeffrey L. Anderson, MD, FACC, FAHA, Immediate Past Chair [¶][1] Nancy M. Albert, PhD, RN, FAHA[¶][1] Sana M. Al-Khatib, MD, MHS, FACC, FAHA Kim K. Birtcher, PharmD, AACC Biykem Bozkurt, MD, PhD, FACC

Two guidelines from the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), and collaborating societies address the risk of aortic dissection in patients with bicuspid aortic valves and severe aortic enlargement: the “2010 ACCF/AHA/AATS/ACR/ASA/SCA/SCAI/SIR/STS/SVM Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Thoracic Aortic Disease” (Circulation. 2010;121:e266–e369) and the “2014 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease” (Circulation. 2014;129:e521–e643). However, the 2 guidelines differ with regard to the recommended threshold of aortic root or ascending aortic dilatation that would justify surgical intervention in patients with bicuspid aortic valves. The ACC and AHA therefore convened a subcommittee representing members of the 2 guideline writing committees to review the evidence, reach consensus, and draft a statement of clarification for both guidelines. This statement of clarification uses the ACC/AHA revised structure for delineating the Class of Recommendation and Level of Evidence to provide recommendations that replace those contained in Section 9.2.2.1 of the thoracic aortic disease guideline and Section 5.1.3 of the valvular heart disease guideline.