Richard I. Fogel

Differentiating junctional tachycardia and atrioventricular node re-entry tachycardia based on response to atrial extrastimulus pacing.

OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to differentiate non-re-entrant junctional tachycardia (JT) and typical atrioventricular node re-entry tachycardia (AVNRT). BACKGROUND JT may mimic AVNRT. Ablation of JT is associated with a lower success rate and a higher incidence of heart block. Electrophysiologic differentiation of these tachycardias is often difficult. METHODS We hypothesized that JT can be distinguished from AVNRT based on specific responses to premature atrial complexes (PACs) delivered at different phases of the tachycardia cycle: when a PAC is timed to His refractoriness, any perturbation of the subsequent His indicates that anterograde slow pathway conduction is involved and confirms a diagnosis of AVNRT. A PAC that advances the His potential immediately after it without terminating tachycardia indicates that retrograde fast pathway is not essential for the circuit and confirms a diagnosis of JT. This protocol was tested in 39 patients with 44 tachycardias suggesting either JT or AVNRT based on a short ventriculo-atrial interval and apparent AV node dependence. Tachycardias were divided into 3 groups: clinically obvious AVNRT, clinically obvious JT, and clinically indeterminate rhythm. RESULTS In the 26 cases of clinically obvious AVNRT, the sensitivity and specificity of the test were 61% and 100%, respectively. In the 9 cases of clinically obvious JT, the sensitivity and specificity were 100% and 100%, respectively. In the 9 cases of clinically indeterminate rhythm, the technique indicated AVNRT in 1 patient and JT in 7 patients, and the test was indeterminate in 1 patient. CONCLUSIONS The response to PACs during tachycardia can distinguish JT and AVNRT with 100% specificity in adult patients.

Ventricular arrhythmias in the absence of structural heart disease.

Ventricular arrhythmia (VA) in structurally normal hearts can be broadly considered under non-life-threatening monomorphic and life-threatening polymorphic rhythms. Monomorphic VA is classified on the basis of site of origin in the heart, and the most common areas are the ventricular outflow tracts and left ventricular fascicles. The morphology of the QRS complexes on electrocardiogram is an excellent tool to identify the site of origin of the rhythm. Although these arrhythmias are common and generally carry an excellent prognosis, rare sudden death events have been reported. Very frequent ventricular ectopy may also result in a cardiomyopathy in a minority of patients. Suppression of VA may be achieved using calcium-channel blockers, beta-adrenergic blockers, and class I or III antiarrhythmic drugs. Radiofrequency ablation has emerged as an excellent option to eliminate these arrhythmias, although certain foci including aortic cusps and epicardium may be technically challenging. Polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (VT) is rare and generally occurs in patients with genetic ion channel disorders including long QT syndrome, Brugada syndrome, catecholaminergic polymorphic VT, and short QT syndrome. Unlike monomorphic VT, these arrhythmic syndromes are associated with sudden death. While the cardiac gross morphology is normal, suggesting a structurally normal heart, abnormalities exist at the molecular level and predispose them to arrhythmias. Another fascinating area, idiopathic ventricular fibrillation and early repolarization syndrome, are undergoing research for a genetic basis.

Utility and Cost of Event Recorders in the Diagnosis of Palpitations, Presyncope, and Syncope

In 184 patients given an event recorder for the evaluation of palpitations, syncope or presyncope, we found that event recorders are useful and relatively inexpensive in the initial evaluation of patients with palpitations regardless of the presence of heart disease, and of syncopal or presyncopal patients without heart disease. In patients with presyncope or syncope who have heart disease and a negative electrophysiology evaluation, event recorders have less utility and are more costly.

Implantable defibrillator event rates in patients with unexplained syncope and inducible sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias: a comparison with patients known to have sustained ventricular tachycardia.

OBJECTIVES To assess the clinical significance of inducible ventricular tachyarrhythmias among patients with unexplained syncope. BACKGROUND Induction of sustained ventricular arrhythmias at electrophysiology study in patients with unexplained syncope and structural heart disease is usually assigned diagnostic significance. However, the true frequency of subsequent spontaneous ventricular tachyarrhythmias in the absence of antiarrhythmic medications is unknown. METHODS In a retrospective case-control study, the incidence of implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) therapies for sustained ventricular arrhythmias among patients with unexplained syncope or near syncope (syncope group, n = 22) was compared with that of a control group of patients (n = 32) with clinically documented sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT). Sustained ventricular arrhythmias were inducible in both groups and neither group received antiarrhythmic medications. All ICDs had stored electrograms or RR intervals. Clinical variables were similar between groups except that congestive cardiac failure was more common in the syncope group. RESULTS Kaplan-Meier analysis of the time to first appropriate ICD therapy for syncope and control groups produced overlapping curves (p = 0.9), with 57 +/- 11% and 50 +/- 9%, respectively, receiving ICD therapy by one year. In both groups, the induced arrhythmia was significantly faster than spontaneous arrhythmias, but the cycle lengths of induced and spontaneous arrhythmias were positively correlated (R = 0.6, p < 0.0001). During follow-up, three cardiac transplantations and seven deaths occurred in the syncope group, and two transplantations and five deaths occurred in the control group (36-month survival without transplant 52 +/- 11% and 83 +/- 7%, respectively, p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS In patients with unexplained syncope, structural heart disease and inducible sustained ventricular arrhythmias, spontaneous sustained ventricular arrhythmias occur commonly and at a similar rate to patients with documented sustained VT. Thus, electrophysiologic testing in unexplained syncope can identify those at risk of potentially life-threatening tachyarrhythmias, and aggressive treatment of these patients is warranted.

Clinical Experience with Dofetilide in the Treatment of Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

Introduction: Dofetilide is the newest drug approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Few data on the efficacy and safety of dofetilide in a diverse group of patients are available. The aim of this study was to evaluate the results of dofetilide in a consecutive series of 69 patients with AF.

Complications associated with generator replacement in response to device advisories.

Introduction: Device recalls create problems for patients and physicians, for the risks associated with replacement may be greater than the device failure rate. In 2005, Medtronic, Guidant, and St. Jude had implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) recalls on several of their devices. There were no national standards to guide physicians on the management of such patients. We report the reasons for and outcomes of ICD and pacemaker generator changes from our practice resulting from these advisories.

Ventricular arrhythmia in congestive heart failure

The importance of ventricular arrhythmia is based on its association with sudden death. In certain groups of patients, ventricular arrhythmia--primarily runs of nonsustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT)--is associated with an increased risk for sudden death. Although this relationship has been most often reported in patients with recent myocardial infarction, it has also been recognized in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy, regardless of etiology. Therefore, ventricular arrhythmia is common in patients with CHF due to cardiomyopathy. A number of studies have reported that 70-95% of patients with cardiomyopathy and congestive heart failure (CHF) have frequent ventricular premature beats, and 40-80% will manifest runs of NSVT. Many factors are responsible for ventricular arrhythmia in such patients, including structural abnormalities, electrolyte imbalance, hemodynamic impairment, activation of neurohormonal mechanisms, and pharmacologic therapy. Many studies have reported a high yearly mortality in patients with cardiomyopathy and CHF; greater than 40% of deaths are sudden, most often the result of sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmia. Most studies have noted an association between presence (and frequency) of NSVT and risk of sudden cardiac death in these patients. Unfortunately, other techniques--such as the signal-averaged electrocardiogram and electrophysiologic testing--are not helpful in identifying the individual at risk. Although several drug interventions will reduce mortality from progressive CHF, these drugs have not been shown to reduce sudden death and, indeed, have a variable effect on ventricular arrhythmia. Although NSVT is a marker for increased risk for sudden death, it is uncertain if antiarrhythmic drugs will prevent this outcome. Antiarrhythmic drugs have not been shown to be effective for preventing sudden death, although there are as yet no well-controlled randomized trials. Several studies suggest that amiodarone and beta blockers are beneficial, but this requires confirmation. For patients who have been resuscitated following an episode of sudden death due to a sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmia, antiarrhythmic therapy guided by invasive and noninvasive techniques appears to reduce risk of recurrent arrhythmia. However, the response rate to antiarrhythmic agents is low and side effects are common in patients with CHF. Especially important is the increased risk of precipitating CHF and aggravating the arrhythmia being treated. For many such patients who have had serious ventricular tachyarrhythmia, the automatic implantable cardioverter defibrillator may prove a better option. Other drugs used for management of CHF reduce overall mortality, but not risk of sudden death.

Progress toward the prevention and treatment of atrial fibrillation: A summary of the Heart Rhythm Society Research Forum on the Treatment and Prevention of Atrial Fibrillation, Washington, DC, December 9-10, 2013

The Heart Rhythm Society convened a research symposium on December 9–10, 2013, in Washington, DC, that focused on the prevention of atrial fibrillation (AF) as well as AF-related stroke and morbidity. Attendees sought to summarize advances in understanding AF since a 2008 National Institutes of Health (NIH) conference on this topic1 and to identify continued knowledge gaps and current research priorities. The research symposium also sought to identify key deficiencies and opportunities in research infrastructure, operations, and methodologies. The committee sought to identify both basic research targets and how clinical AF research could be improved in the current health care environment. This whitepaper summarizes our deliberations in an effort to accelerate progress toward preventing AF and its consequences. Although largely focused on primary prevention of AF, the paper also addresses some aspects of secondary prevention of recurrent AF due to the continuum of risk factors that contribute to arrhythmogenesis, permissive left atrial (LA) substrates, and the emergence of AF.

Recurrence of symptomatic ventricular arrhythmias in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillator after the first device therapy: Implications for antiarrhythmic therapy and driving restrictions

OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to investigate whether clinical or electrophysiologic characteristics could predict initial and subsequent implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy. BACKGROUND Identification of markers to predict subsequent ICD therapy and symptoms after the first event could affect patient management. METHODS We analyzed baseline and follow-up data on 125 ICD patients followed for 408+/-321 days. Medications and ICD programming were not changed after first ICD therapy. RESULTS Implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy occurred in 58 patients (46%). Clinical features were as follows: mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 29%+/-15%; coronary artery disease 84%; presenting arrhythmia with sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (SMVT) in 68%. In a multivariate analysis the relative risk for ICD therapy in patients presenting with SMVT versus cardiac arrest (CA) was 2.57 (range, 1.32 to 5.01), and for patients with LVEF < or =25%, 1.95 (1.11 to 3.45), respectively (p < 0.05). Implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy was not predicted by any other variable. Forty-six patients had second ICD therapy. Mean time to second ICD therapy was only 66+/-93 days compared with 138+/-168 days for first ICD therapy (p < 0.05). No predictor for second ICD therapy was found. Regarding symptoms, impaired consciousness during initial ICD therapy was predicted only by SMVT cycle length <250 ms at electrophysiologic testing. In contrast, symptoms were similar between first and second ICD therapy (p = 0.0001). Of note, ventricular tachycardia cycle length preceding first and second ICD therapy was similar (r = 0.76, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS First ICD therapy tends to occur in patients presenting with SMVT and LVEF < or =25%. Subsequent therapy occurs sooner and is unpredictable, suggesting that antiarrhythmic drug therapy should be considered after the first symptomatic ICD therapy. Symptoms during first ICD therapy predict subsequent symptoms, and patients presenting with SMVT and asymptomatic first ICD therapy are at very low risk for future syncopal ICD therapy.

Association Between Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Post-Cardiac Resynchronization Treatment and Subsequent Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Therapy for Sustained Ventricular Tachyarrhythmias

Background—Although cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) can improve left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), it is not known whether a specific level of improvement will predict future implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy. Methods and Results—CRT-defibrillator (CRT-D) was implanted in 423 patients at 1 institution between October 2, 2001 and January 19, 2007. A retrospective analysis was performed to evaluate the relationship between post–CRT-D LVEF and ICD therapy for ventricular tachyarrhythmias. A landmark population of 270 patients, with post–CRT-D LVEF measured and no ICD therapy within 1 year of device implantation, was followed for subsequent outcomes. Of these, 22 patients (8.2%) had subsequent appropriate ICD therapy over a median follow-up of 1.5 years. The estimated 2-year risk of appropriate ICD therapy is 3.0% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0%–6.3%), 2.1% (95% CI, 0%–5.0%), and 1.5% (95% CI, 0%–3.9%) for post–CRT-D LVEF of 45%, 50%, and 55%, respectively. In patients with a primary prevention indication for CRT-D, the estimated 2-year risk is 3.3% (95% CI, 0%–7.3%), 2.5% (95% CI, 0%–6.1%), and 1.9% (95% CI, 0%–5.1%) for post–CRT-D LVEF of 45%, 50%, and 55%, respectively. Conclusions—When a CRT responder demonstrates near normalization in LVEF to ≥45%, the incidence of ICD therapy for ventricular arrhythmias becomes low. Future studies are needed to determine whether an ICD is still needed in some of these patients at the time of generator replacement.