Wearable Cardioverter-Defibrillator after Myocardial Infarction

Protected risk stratification with the wearable cardioverter-defibrillator: results from the WEARIT-II-EUROPE registry

Background

The prospective WEARIT-II-EUROPE registry aimed to assess the value of the wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) prior to potential ICD implantation in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction considered at risk of sudden arrhythmic death.

Methods and results

781 patients (77% men; mean age 59.3 ± 13.4 years) with heart failure and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were consecutively enrolled. All patients received a WCD. Follow-up time for all patients was 12 months. Mean baseline LVEF was 26.9%. Mean WCD wearing time was 75 ± 47.7 days, mean daily WCD use 20.3 ± 4.6 h. WCD shocks terminated 13 VT/VF events in ten patients (1.3%). Two patients died during WCD prescription of non-arrhythmic cause. Mean LVEF increased from 26.9 to 36.3% at the end of WCD prescription (p < 0.01). After WCD use, ICDs were implanted in only 289 patients (37%). Forty patients (5.1%) died during follow-up. Five patients (1.7%) died with ICDs implanted, 33 patients (7%) had no ICD (no information on ICD in two patients). The majority of patients (75%) with the follow-up of 12 months after WCD prescription died from heart failure (15 patients) and non-cardiac death (15 patients). Only three patients (7%) died suddenly. In seven patients, the cause of death remained unknown.

Conclusions

Mortality after WCD prescription was mainly driven by heart failure and non-cardiovascular death. In patients with HFrEF and a potential risk of sudden arrhythmic death, WCD protected observation of LVEF progression and appraisal of competing risks of potential non-arrhythmic death may enable improved selection for beneficial ICD implantation.

Graphic abstract

Impact of wearable cardioverter-defibrillator compliance on outcomes in the VEST trial: As-treated and per-protocol analyses

BACKGROUND

Vest Prevention of Early Sudden Death Trial did not demonstrate a significant reduction in arrhythmic death with the wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD), but compliance with the device may have substantially affected the results. ThePletcher influence of WCD compliance on outcomes has not yet been fully evaluated.

METHODS

Using linear and pooled logistic models, we performed as-treated analyses omitting person-time in the hospital and adjusted for correlates of WCD compliance. To assess the impact of early stopping of WCD, we performed a per-protocol Kaplan-Meier analysis, censoring after the last day the WCD was worn. Interactions of potential effect modifiers with treatment assignment and WCD compliance on outcomes were investigated. Finally, we used linear models to identify predictors of WCD compliance.

RESULTS

A per-protocol analysis demonstrated a significant reduction in total (P < .001) and arrhythmic (P = .001) mortality. Better WCD compliance was independently predicted by cardiac arrest during index myocardial infarction (MI), higher Cr, diabetes, prior heart failure, EF ≤ 25%, Polish enrolling center and number of WCD alarms, while worse compliance was predicted by being divorced, Asian race, higher body mass index, prior percutaneous coronary intervention, or any WCD shock. Neither excluding time in hospital from the as-treated analysis nor adjustment for factors affecting WCD compliance materially changed the results. No variable demonstrated a significant interaction in either the intention-to-treat or as-treated analysis.

CONCLUSION

Robust sensitivity analyses of as-treated and per-protocol analyses suggest that the WCD is protective in compliant patients with ejection fraction less than or equal to 35% during the first 3 months post-MI.

ACC/AHA Versus ESC Guidelines on Heart Failure: JACC Guideline Comparison

The 2013 (with updates in 2016 and 2017) American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association and 2016 European Society of Cardiology guidelines provide practical evidence-based clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of both acute and chronic heart failure (HF). Both guidelines address noninvasive and invasive testing to establish the diagnosis of HF with reduced ejection fraction and HF with preserved ejection fraction. Extensive trial evidence supports the use of guideline-directed medical therapy and device-based therapies for the optimal management of patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction. Specific recommendations are also provided for HF with preserved ejection fraction although the evidence is substantially weaker. Management of medical comorbidities is now addressed in both guidelines. Acute HF and end-stage disease requiring advanced therapies are also discussed. This review compares specific recommendations across the spectrum of HF phenotypes and disease severity, highlights areas where differences exist, and lists consequential studies published since the latest guidelines.

The Wearable Cardioverter-Defibrillator: Experience in 153 Patients and a Long-Term Follow-Up

Background: The wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) is available for patients at high risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD) when immediate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation is not possible or indicated. Patient selection remains challenging especially in primary prevention. Long-term data on these patients is still lacking.

METHODS

153 patients were included in this study. They were prescribed the WCD between April 2012 and March 2019 at the University Medical Center, Mannheim, Germany. The mean follow-up period was 36.2 ± 15.6 months. Outcome data, including all-cause mortality, were analyzed by disease etiology and ICD implantation following WCD use.

RESULTS

We analyzed 56 patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy, 70 patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, 16 patients with prior need for ICD/CRT-D (device for cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator) explanation, 8 patients with acute myocarditis and 3 patients with congenital diseases. 58% of the patients did not need ICD/CRT-D implantation after WCD use. 4% of all patients suffered from appropriate WCD shocks. 2 of these patients (33%) experienced appropriate ICD shocks after implantation due to ventricular tachyarrhythmias. Long-term follow-up shows a good overall survival. All-cause mortality was 10%. There was no significant difference between patients with or without subsequent ICD implantation (p = 0.48). Patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy numerically showed a higher long-term mortality than patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (14% vs. 6%, p = 0.13) and received significantly more ICD shocks after implantation (10% of ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) patients versus 3% of non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) patients, p = 0.04). All patients with ventricular tachyarrhythmias during WCD use or after ICD implantation survived the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

Following WCD use, ICD implantation could be avoided in 58% of patients. Long-term follow-up shows good overall survival. The majority of all patients did not suffer from WCD shocks nor did receive ICD shocks after subsequent implantation. Patient selection regarding predictive conditions on long-term risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias needs further risk stratification.

Wearable cardioverter-defibrillators: A review of evidence and indications

The wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) was first approved for clinical use in 2002, and is routinely used in select populations at high risk for sudden cardiac death. WCDs are frequently considered as a bridge to definitive therapy or in circumstances where insertion of conventional implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) is temporarily contraindicated. In this review, we summarize the literature on WCDs. From prospective trials to the first randomized controlled trial with WCD, there is a growing body of evidence that suggests that the WCD is safe and effective. In the first randomized controlled trial of the WCD (VEST Trial), there was no reduction in arrhythmia death but there was a reduction in all-cause mortality. We discuss the mortality impact, rate of inappropriate shocks, compliance, and potential quality of life implications with the WCD. Finally, we present the evidence for WCD use in select populations (e.g., post-myocardial infarction, device extraction), and the current guideline recommendations for WCD use.

Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Therapy in Heart Failure

The population of patients with heart failure continues to grow, which introduced significant challenges in clinical practice related to the management of cardiac arrhythmia and advanced heart failure syndromes. Device therapy has increasingly become essential in the management of life-threatening arrhythmia and clinical heart failure in this population. This review will discuss the use of cardiac implantable electronic devices in heart failure with primary focus on sudden cardiac death prevention and cardiac resynchronization, including published evidence and evolving technologies.

Single-center experience with wearable cardioverter-defibrillator as a bridge before definitive ICD implantation

BACKGROUND

The wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) has been approved for patients with poor left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) who are at risk of sudden arrhythmic death for a limited period but are not candidates for a definitive implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). The present study sought to retrospectively analyse our single-centre experience.

METHODS AND RESULTS

All consecutive WCDs applied between April 2017 and September 2018 in our centre were enrolled. An exercise test was performed in all patients in order to evaluate the absence of false detection of ventricular arrhythmias by the device. A total of 16 patients (57.7 ± 14.8 years old; 75% males) were taken into consideration for the analysis. Mean LVEF was 32 ± 11% at diagnosis and 42 ± 10% at last follow-up (mean, 3.1 ± 1.7 months; median, 3 months). At the end of the "wearing period" 11/16 patients (69%) did not have ICD implant indications and only 5 (31%) underwent ICD implantation. Neither appropriate nor appropriate shocks occurred during the follow up.

CONCLUSIONS

The WCD represents a useful tool to bridge a temporarily increased risk for sudden cardiac death. The proportion of patients with an improvement of LVEF> 35% beyond the WCD-application period was considerable.

Wearable Cardioverter Defibrillator - Initial Experience in the Outpatient Setting in Japan

Background: The wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) has been available since 2014 in Japan, and its benefit in the in-hospital acute phase at high risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmia (VTA) has been established, but its clinical use in the outpatient setting remains unclear, especially in Japan.

Methods and Results: The subjects consisted of 43 consecutive patients with WCD use in the outpatient setting from April 2014 to October 2019 at the present institute. Event alerts and wearing compliance were checked via the remote monitoring system, and a dedicated WCD training team contacted the patients if necessary. The median observation period was 51 days (IQR, 37–68 days) and the median daily wearing time was 23.1 h/day (IQR, 22.0–23.6 h/day). WCD was prescribed for primary prevention of VTA in 7 patients (16%), and for secondary prevention in 36 (84%). The common reason for WCD use was preventive therapy and/or clinical observation. Two appropriate and one inappropriate shock were observed. Eleven patients were not indicated for ICD because of successful catheter ablation optimal medical therapy, VTA in early onset of heart disease and refusal. The remaining 32 patients, however, underwent ICD implantation.

Conclusions: In the present real-world study, the WCD wearing compliance was well-maintained in the outpatient setting. WCD is useful for patients at high risk of VTA.

Sub-acute cardiac magnetic resonance to predict irreversible reduction in left ventricular ejection fraction after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: A DANAMI-3 sub-study

AIMS

To predict irreversible reduction in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) during admission for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) using cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) in addition to classical clinical parameters. Irreversible reduction in LVEF is an important prognostic factor after STEMI which necessitates medical therapy and implantation of prophylactic implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD).

METHODS AND RESULTS

A post-hoc analysis of DANAMI-3 trial program (Third DANish Study of Optimal Acute Treatment of Patients With ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction) which recruited 649 patients who had CMR performed during index hospitalization and after 3 months. Patients were divided into two groups according to CMR-LVEF at 3 months: Group 1 with LVEF≤35% and Group 2 with LVEF>35%. Group 1 included 15 patients (2.3%) while Group 2 included 634 patients (97.7%). A multivariate analysis showed that: Killip class >1 (OR 7.39; CI:1.47-36.21, P = 0.01), symptom onset-to-wire ≥6 h (OR 7.19; CI 1.07-50.91, P = 0.04), LVEF≤35% using index echocardiography (OR 7.11; CI: 1.27-47.43, P = 0.03), and infarct size ≥40% of LV on index CMR (OR 42.62; CI:7.83-328.29, P < 0.001) independently correlated with a final LVEF≤35%. Clinical models consisted of these parameters could identify 7 out of 15 patients in Group 1 with 100% positive predictive value.

CONCLUSION

Together with other clinical measurements, the assessment of infarct size using late Gadolinium enhancement by CMR during hospitalization is a strong predictor of irreversible reduction in CMR_LVEF ≤35. That could potentially, after validation with future research, aids the selection and treatment of high-risk patients after STEMI, including implantation of prophylactic ICD during index hospitalization.

[Diagnostics and treatment of chronic heart failure : Update 2020]

Heart failure is a systemic disease. As populations are aging worldwide, the prevalence and importance of comorbidities as major determinants of heart failure symptoms, disease progression and prognosis are increasing. Since the last version of the European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of heart failure was published in 2016, promising novel pharmacotherapies for chronic heart failure and its comorbidities and new device-based treatment and monitoring options have become available; however, the broad range of therapeutic options as well as the diagnostic and therapeutic implications of comorbidities render the treatment of heart failure increasingly more complex. This review aims to provide practical guidance for a rational up-to-date approach to the evidence-based management of heart failure.

Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2020 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association

BACKGROUND

The American Heart Association, in conjunction with the National Institutes of Health, annually reports on the most up-to-date statistics related to heart disease, stroke, and cardiovascular risk factors, including core health behaviors (smoking, physical activity, diet, and weight) and health factors (cholesterol, blood pressure, and glucose control) that contribute to cardiovascular health. The Statistical Update presents the latest data on a range of major clinical heart and circulatory disease conditions (including stroke, congenital heart disease, rhythm disorders, subclinical atherosclerosis, coronary heart disease, heart failure, valvular disease, venous disease, and peripheral artery disease) and the associated outcomes (including quality of care, procedures, and economic costs).

METHODS

The American Heart Association, through its Statistics Committee, continuously monitors and evaluates sources of data on heart disease and stroke in the United States to provide the most current information available in the annual Statistical Update. The 2020 Statistical Update is the product of a full year's worth of effort by dedicated volunteer clinicians and scientists, committed government professionals, and American Heart Association staff members. This year's edition includes data on the monitoring and benefits of cardiovascular health in the population, metrics to assess and monitor healthy diets, an enhanced focus on social determinants of health, a focus on the global burden of cardiovascular disease, and further evidence-based approaches to changing behaviors, implementation strategies, and implications of the American Heart Association's 2020 Impact Goals.

RESULTS

Each of the 26 chapters in the Statistical Update focuses on a different topic related to heart disease and stroke statistics.

CONCLUSIONS

The Statistical Update represents a critical resource for the lay public, policy makers, media professionals, clinicians, healthcare administrators, researchers, health advocates, and others seeking the best available data on these factors and conditions.

Key components of a community response to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) remains a leading cause of death worldwide, with substantial geographical, ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in outcome. Successful resuscitation efforts depend on the 'chain of survival', which includes immediate recognition of cardiac arrest and activation of the emergency response system, early bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) with an emphasis on chest compressions, rapid defibrillation, basic and advanced emergency medical services and integrated post-cardiac arrest care. Well-orchestrated telecommunicator CPR programmes can improve rates of bystander CPR - a critical link in the chain of survival. High-performance CPR by emergency medical service providers includes minimizing interruptions in chest compressions and ensuring adequate depth of compressions. Developing local, regional and statewide systems with dedicated high-performing cardiac resuscitation centres for post-resuscitation care can substantially improve survival after OHCA. Innovative digital tools for recognizing cardiac arrest where and when it occurs, notifying potential citizen rescuers and providing automated external defibrillators at the scene hold the promise of improving survival after OHCA. Improved implementation of the chain of survival can save thousands of lives each year.

Predictors of sudden cardiac death in high-risk patients following a myocardial infarction

AIMS

To develop a risk model for sudden cardiac death (SCD) in high-risk acute myocardial infarction (AMI) survivors.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Data from the Effect of Carvedilol on Outcome After Myocardial Infarction in Patients With Left Ventricular Dysfunction trial (CAPRICORN) and the Valsartan in Acute Myocardial Infarction Trial (VALIANT) were used to create a SCD risk model (with non-SCD as a competing risk) in 13 202 patients. The risk model was validated in the Eplerenone Post-AMI Heart Failure Efficacy and Survival Study (EPHESUS). The rate of SCD was 3.3 (95% confidence interval 3.0-3.5) per 100 person-years over a median follow-up of 2.0 years. Independent predictors of SCD included age > 70 years; heart rate ≥ 70 bpm; smoking; Killip class III/IV; left ventricular ejection fraction ≤30%; atrial fibrillation; history of prior myocardial infarction, heart failure or diabetes; estimated glomerular filtration rate < 60 mL/min/1.73 m² ; and no coronary reperfusion or revascularisation therapy for index AMI. The model was well calibrated and showed good discrimination (C-statistic = 0.72), including in the early period after AMI. The observed 2-year event rates increased steeply with each quintile of risk score (1.9%, 3.6%, 6.2%, 9.0%, 13.4%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

An easy to use SCD risk score developed from routinely collected clinical variables in patients with heart failure, left ventricular systolic dysfunction or both, early after AMI was superior to left ventricular ejection fraction. This score might be useful in identifying patients for future trials testing treatments to prevent SCD early after AMI.

The AngelMed Guardian® System in the Detection of Coronary Artery Occlusion: Current Perspectives

Total ischemic time, which specifies the time from the onset of chest pain to initiation of reperfusion during percutaneous coronary intervention, consists of two intervals: symptom to door time and door to balloon time. A door to balloon time of 90 mins or less has become a quality-of-care metric in the management of ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). While national efforts made by the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and American Heart Association (AHA) have curtailed in-hospital door to balloon time over the years, a reduction in pre-hospital symptoms to door time presents a challenge in modern interventional Cardiology. Early and complete revascularization has been associated with improved clinical outcomes in MI and strategies that may help reduce symptom to door time, and thus the total ischemic time, are crucial. Rapidly evolving ST-segment changes commonly develop prior to ischemia-related symptom onset, and are detectable even in patients with clinically unrecognized silent MIs. Therefore, a highly intelligent ischemia detection system that alerts patients of ST segment deviation may allow for rapid identification of acute coronary occlusion. The AngelMed Guardian^® System is a cardiac activity monitoring and alerting system designed for rapid identification of intracardiac ST-segment changes among patients at a high risk for recurrent ACS events. This article reviews the clinical studies evaluating the design, safety and efficacy of the AngelMed Guardian System and discusses the clinical implications of the device.

Absence of left bundle branch block and blood urea nitrogen predict improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction in patients with cardiomyopathy and wearable cardioverter defibrillators

Objective

To identify predictors of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) improvement in patients with newly detected cardiomyopathy using wearable cardioverter defibrillators (WCDs).

Background

WCDs are useful in preventing sudden cardiac death in patients with reduced LVEF <35% while awaiting implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) placement. In many patients, LVEF improves and an ICD is not indicated.

Methods

Patients who received WCDs from November 2013 to November 2015 were identified and followed over a period of 2 years. Clinical variables were examined. The primary outcome was improvement in LVEF ≥35%. Predictors of outcome were determined using a multivariate logistic regression model.

Results

A total of 179 patients were followed. Median age was 65 (interquartile range [IQR]: 56, 73) years, 69.3% were men. Median baseline LVEF was 20% (IQR: 15, 30). LVEF improved ≥35% in 47.5% patients, with patients being younger (62 vs 68.5 years, P = .006), having lower blood urea nitrogen (BUN) (19 vs 24 mg/dL, P = .002), fewer left bundle branch block (LBBB 9.5% vs 25.8%, P = .004), shorter QRS duration (98 vs 112 ms, P < .001), and higher use of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) (92.9% vs 74.4%, P = .001) compared to those without LVEF improvement. Absence of LBBB (odds ratio [OR] 0.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.11‐0.70), lower BUN (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02‐0.76), and ACEI/ARB use (OR 3.53, 95% CI 1.28‐9.69) were identified as independent predictors. Ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation was observed in three patients, all of whom received successful WCD shocks.

Conclusion

Absence of LBBB, lower BUN, and ACEI/ARB use predicts LVEF improvement. WCDs help treat arrhythmic events.

Characterization of cardiac acoustic biomarkers in patients with heart failure

Background

The wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) records electrocardiograms and cardiohemic vibrations that can be algorithmically combined to provide cardiac acoustic biomarkers (CABs). We characterized CAB variability, diurnal variations, and changes over time among heart failure patients.

Methods

Wearable cardioverter defibrillator heart failure patients who had CAB recordings from March 2015 to July 2017 were included. CAB parameters included: electromechanical activation time (EMAT), EMATc (EMAT/RR interval), left ventricular systolic time (LVST), LVSTc (LVST/RR interval), S3 and S4 strengths, and systolic dysfunction index (SDI). Descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, and analysis of variance were used to report temporal and clinical associations.

Results

One thousand and sixty‐six WCD patients met the study criteria. Diastolic CAB parameters showed significantly greater intra‐subject variability than systolic CAB parameters (>29% vs. <15%, p < .01). CAB parameters varied very little with age, gender, and ejection fraction (R² = 0.004 to 0.06) in this heart failure population. Similarly, all CABs except SDI (R² = 0.58) were independent of QRS duration, (R² = −0.01 to 0.58). Heart rate had a more of significant influence on the systolic CABs than the diastolic CABs (p < .05). CABs were significantly different when measured at daytime versus nighttime (p < .01) and were significantly lower at the end of WCD wear compared with the beginning of wear (p < .05).

Conclusions

Noninvasive CABs offer the possibility to assess parameters associated with LV function, clinical status, and other aspects of cardiovascular physiology that differ between normal and heart failure states. The present study provides critical information about typical values in heart failure patients, intra‐subject variability, circadian rhythms, and changes over time of these parameters.

Avoiding implantation of a cardioverter-defibrillator by bridging with wearable defibrillator vest

BACKGROUND

Patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35% should be protected from sudden cardiac death with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). The onset of the effect of optimal medical therapy (OMT) is unclear, and a wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) can bridge this period.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Our study analyzed 104 patients (age, 68.9 ± 11.7 years; 81% [84/104] male) whose first diagnosis included an LVEF <35%. After exclusion of reversible causes for LVEF reduction and initiation/adjustment of the OMT, the WCD was employed. The LVEF and indication for ICD were re-evaluated after 62 ± 36 days. The LVEF development and implantation rate were correlated with underlying disease (ischemic [ICM] or nonischemic cardiomyopathy [NICM]), comorbidities, and age/gender.

RESULTS

The wearing time of the WCD was 22.8 ± 1.9 h/day. An LVEF improvement from 28.5 ± 6.4% to 40 ± 11.7% was achieved through OMT (p < 0.0001). An improvement in LVEF of up to more than 35% was achieved in 66 of 104 patients (63%), and only 37% of patients were subsequently given an ICD. This affected 41% of patients with ICM and 30% of patients with NICM (p = 0.205). Notably, no ICD interventions were observed over 362 ± 89.5 days after implantation in the ICD-receiver group.

CONCLUSION

The indication for ICD can be re-evaluated after 2 months. Patients with NICM respond better to OMT compared with ICM patients. The LVEF recovered to >35% in >60% of cases.

Who Should Receive a Wearable Defibrillator Vest at Hospital Discharge?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To discuss the role of wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) vests in preventing sudden cardiac death (SCD) in at-risk populations.

RECENT FINDINGS

The impact of randomized-controlled trials with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) therapy is well established in randomized clinical trials in ischemic cardiomyopathy. Although the benefits are not as clear in non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, meta-analyses show significant mortality benefits from immediate electrical cardioversion strategies. The role of WCDs in at-risk populations in whom ICD therapy is temporarily not indicated is not as well-established. Smaller cohort trials have shown efficacy in patients with newly-diagnosed cardiomyopathy, requiring temporary ICD explantation, and others with less common indications for WCD therapy. The Vest Prevention of Early Sudden Death Trial was a landmark randomized control study seeking to examine the benefits of WCD therapy in at-risk population, and although the primary endpoint of reducing arrhythmic death was not reached, the structure of the trial and significant differences in total mortality make a compelling case for continued use of WCD therapies in our healthcare systems.

Eplerenone in patients with myocardial infarction and "mid-range" ejection fraction: An analysis from the EPHESUS trial

Background

Trials using mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) in myocardial infraction (MI) without heart failure (HF) or systolic impairment have been underpowered to assess morbidity‐mortality benefit. In EPHESUS 6632 patients were included, of whom 11% had an ejection fraction (EF) of 40% and HF or diabetes. We aim to assess the potential benefit of MRAs in MI with EF of 40%.

Methods

Cox models with interaction term for EF. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for cardiovascular reasons.

Hypothesis

Patients with an EF of 40% benefit similarly from MRA therapy to those with an EF <40%.

Results

In EPHESUS, 753 patients had an EF = 40% and 5864 an EF < 40%. Patients with an EF = 40% were younger (63 vs 64 years), had lower heart rate (73 vs 75 bpm), less atrial fibrillation (10% vs 14%), previous MI (21% vs 28%), HF hospitalization (5% vs 8%), and had more often reperfusion therapy and/or revascularization (55% vs 44%). The mean EF was 40.0 ± 0.3% in those with EF = 40% vs 32.2 ± 5.9% in those with EF < 40%. The primary outcome occurred in 13.3% (10 events per 100 py) of the patients with EF = 40% vs 22.9% (19 events per 100 py) in those with EF < 40%; adjusted HR for EF = 40% vs <40% = 0.65 (0.53‐0.81). Eplerenone reduced the event‐rate homogenously regardless of EF (interaction_p EF = 40% vs EF < 40% = 0.21). Similar findings were observed for cardiovascular and all‐cause death.

Conclusion

Eplerenone reduces hospitalizations and mortality in patients with MI and EF = 40% similarly to patients with EF < 40%. These findings suggest that MI patients with EF in the “mid‐range zone” may also benefit from MRA therapy which might help clinicians in their treatment decisions.

Clinical practice update on heart failure 2019: pharmacotherapy, procedures, devices and patient management. An expert consensus meeting report of the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology

The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) has published a series of guidelines on heart failure (HF) over the last 25 years, most recently in 2016. Given the amount of new information that has become available since then, the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC recognized the need to review and summarise recent developments in a consensus document. Here we report from the HFA workshop that was held in January 2019 in Frankfurt, Germany. This expert consensus report is neither a guideline update nor a position statement, but rather a summary and consensus view in the form of consensus recommendations. The report describes how these guidance statements are supported by evidence, it makes some practical comments, and it highlights new research areas and how progress might change the clinical management of HF. We have avoided re-interpretation of information already considered in the 2016 ESC/HFA guidelines. Specific new recommendations have been made based on the evidence from major trials published since 2016, including sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors in type 2 diabetes mellitus, MitraClip for functional mitral regurgitation, atrial fibrillation ablation in HF, tafamidis in cardiac transthyretin amyloidosis, rivaroxaban in HF, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in non-ischaemic HF, and telemedicine for HF. In addition, new trial evidence from smaller trials and updated meta-analyses have given us the chance to provide refined recommendations in selected other areas. Further, new trial evidence is due in many of these areas and others over the next 2 years, in time for the planned 2021 ESC guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure.

Advances in Clinical Cardiology 2018: A Summary of Key Clinical Trials

INTRODUCTION

Many important clinical trials in cardiology were published or presented at major international meetings throughout 2018. This paper aims to offer a concise overview of these significant advances and to put them into clinical context.

METHODS

Trials presented at the major international cardiology meetings during 2018 were reviewed including The American College of Cardiology, EuroPCR, The European Society of Cardiology, PCR London Valves, Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics, and the American Heart Association. In addition to this a literature search identified several other publications eligible for inclusion based on their relevance to clinical cardiology, their potential impact on clinical practice and on future guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 78 trials met the inclusion criteria. New interventional and structural data include trials examining novel stent designs (Biofreedom™, COMBO), use of drug-coated balloons in patients with high bleeding risk, intervention in stable coronary artery disease, revascularisation strategy in ST elevation myocardial infarction, transcatheter aortic valve replacement in low-risk patients, and percutaneous mitral or tricuspid valve interventions. Preventative cardiology data included the use of sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (empagliflozin, dapagliflozin, canagliflozin), proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors (alirocumab) and approaches of hypertension management. Antiplatelet data included trials evaluating both the optimal length of course and combination of antiplatelet agents. Heart failure data included trials of sacubitril-valsartan during acute hospital admission and the management of chemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity. Electrophysiology data included trials examining atrial fibrillation ablation, wearable cardiac defibrillators (LifeVest) and His-bundle pacing.

CONCLUSION

This article presents key clinical trials completed during 2018 and should be valuable to both cardiology clinicians and researchers.

Refining the World Health Organization Definition: Predicting Autopsy-Defined Sudden Arrhythmic Deaths Among Presumed Sudden Cardiac Deaths in the POST SCD Study

BACKGROUND

Conventional definitions of sudden cardiac death (SCD) presume cardiac cause. We studied the World Health Organization-defined SCDs autopsied in the POST SCD study (Postmortem Systematic Investigation of SCD) to determine whether premortem characteristics could identify autopsy-defined sudden arrhythmic death (SAD) among presumed SCDs.

METHODS

Between January 2, 2011, and January 4, 2016, we prospectively identified all 615 World Health Organization-defined SCDs (144 witnessed) 18 to 90 years in San Francisco County for medical record review and autopsy via medical examiner surveillance. Autopsy-defined SADs had no extracardiac or acute heart failure cause of death. We used 2 nested sets of premortem predictors-an emergency medical system set and a comprehensive set adding medical record data-to develop Least Absolute Selection and Shrinkage Operator models of SAD among witnessed and unwitnessed cohorts.

RESULTS

Of 615 presumed SCDs, 348 (57%) were autopsy-defined SAD. For witnessed cases, the emergency medical system model (area under the receiver operator curve 0.75 [0.67-0.82]) included presenting rhythm of ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation and pulseless electrical activity, while the comprehensive (area under the receiver operator curve 0.78 [0.70-0.84]) added depression. If only ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation witnessed cases (n=48) were classified as SAD, sensitivity was 0.46 (0.36-0.57), and specificity was 0.90 (0.79-0.97). For unwitnessed cases, the emergency medical system model (area under the receiver operator curve 0.68 [0.64-0.73]) included black race, male sex, age, and time since last seen normal, while the comprehensive (area under the receiver operator curve 0.75 [0.71-0.79]) added use of β-blockers, antidepressants, QT-prolonging drugs, opiates, illicit drugs, and dyslipidemia. If only unwitnessed cases <1 hour (n=59) were classified as SAD, sensitivity was 0.18 (0.13-0.22) and specificity was 0.95 (0.90-0.97).

CONCLUSIONS

Our models identify premortem characteristics that can better specify autopsy-defined SAD among presumed SCDs and suggest the World Health Organization definition can be improved by restricting witnessed SCDs to ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation or nonpulseless electrical activity rhythms and unwitnessed cases to <1 hour since last normal, at the cost of sensitivity.

Appropriateness of Prescription and Safety of Wearable Cardioverter Defibrillators: A Single-center Experience

Introduction Wearable cardioverter defibrillators (WCD) are recommended for patients with a high risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) secondary to arrhythmia that have not qualified for placement of an implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD). This study provides insights into a single-center experience with WCD in terms of its usage and safety. Materials and methods We studied all patients that were prescribed a WCD in the Fairview Hospital in Cleveland Clinic Health System, from January 2014 to June 2016. Institutional Review Board of the Cleveland Clinic approved the study. A retrospective chart review was performed to collect data regarding demographics and baseline comorbidities including age, gender, history of hypertension, diabetes, coronary artery disease, and chronic kidney disease. The patients that were lost to follow up in our electronic medical record (EMR) were excluded. Ejection fraction (EF) at the time of diagnosis and follow-up was recorded. The primary outcome was ICD placement at follow up focusing on appropriate use while the secondary outcome was delivery of shock (appropriate or inappropriate) focusing on efficacy and safety of the device. Patients were stratified based on ICD placement. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), version 23 (IBM Corp., NY, USA) was used for the statistical analysis. Results We identified 73 patients with WCD placement. After the exclusion of 23/73 (31.5%) patients due to loss of follow-up, 50 patients were included in the study (n=50). Clinical characteristics showed 66% patients were males, 76% had hypertension, 40% had diabetes, 34% had chronic kidney disease, 56% patient had a New York Heart Association functional status of >II and 34% were on anti-arrhythmic medication. Indication for WCD use was ischemic cardiomyopathy in 23/50 (46%) patients and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy in 27/50 (54%) patients. No ICD was placed in 39/50 (78%) patients and ICD was placed in 11/50 (22%) patients at end time of follow up. Mean age was 59.9 years (95% confidence interval (CI), 55.9 - 63.9 years) in the group with no ICD placement and 63.5 years (95% CI, 56.5 - 70.6 years) in the group with ICD placement. Mean EF in the group with no ICD placement at the time of diagnosis was 25.8% (95% CI, 23.8% - 27.9%) which improved by 18.8% to a mean EF of 44.6% (41.1% - 48.1%) at the follow-up. Mean EF in the group with ICD placement was 32.7% (95% CI, 27.6% - 37.9%) which reduced by 4.1% to mean EF of 28.6% (95% CI, 12.2% - 44.9%) which was statistically significant (p<0.0001). Patients who had no ICD placement were followed for an average of 162 days and with ICD placement for 78 days. There was no difference between ischemic or nonischemic groups in getting the ICD. There were no shocks delivered whether appropriate or inappropriate in our population. Conclusion Almost a quarter of the patients that were prescribed WCD in our center ended up with an implanted device which demonstrates appropriate use. Equally important was the observed safety of WCDs as a treatment modality with no inappropriate shocks recorded in the followed cohort.

The wearable cardioverter-defibrillator vest: Indications and ongoing questions

Multiple clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) for the prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD) among specific high-risk populations. However, it remains unclear how to optimally treat those patients who are at elevated risk of cardiac arrest but are not among the presently identified groups proven to benefit from an ICD, are unable to tolerate surgical device implantation, or refuse invasive therapies. The wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) is an alternative antiarrhythmic device that provides continuous cardiac monitoring and defibrillation capabilities through a noninvasive, electrode-based system. The WCD has been shown to be highly effective at restoration of sinus rhythm in patients with a ventricular tachyarrhythmia, and one randomized trial using the WCD in patients with recent myocardial infarction at elevated risk for arrhythmic death reported a decrease in overall mortality despite no SCD mortality benefit. The current clinical indications for WCD use are varied and continue to evolve as experience with this technology increases.

What Cannot be Missed: Must-read Papers, 2018

Collapse

Use of wearable cardioverter-defibrillator in association with catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation-related tachycardiomyopathy

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is an effective therapy in patients known to be at high risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD). Nevertheless, ICD implantation is not indicated in transient or reversible causes of SCD. Wearable cardioverter-defibrillator is increasingly used for SCD prevention in patients with a transient risk of ventricular arrhythmia.

Nine contemporary therapeutic directions in heart failure

The global burden of heart failure has continued to increase dramatically with 26 million people affected and an estimated health expenditure of $31 billion worldwide. Several practice-influencing studies were reported recently, bringing advances along many frontiers in heart failure, particularly heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. In this article, we discuss nine distinct therapeutic areas that were significantly influenced by this scientific progress. These distinct areas include the emergence of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors, broadening the application of angiotensin-neprilysin inhibition, clinical considerations in therapy withdrawal in those patients with heart failure that 'recover' myocardial function, benefits of low-dose direct oral anticoagulants in sinus rhythm, targeted therapy for treating cardiac amyloidosis, usefulness of mitral valve repair in heart failure, the advent of newer left ventricular assist devices for advanced heart failure, the role of ablation in atrial fibrillation in heart failure, and finally the use of wearable defibrillators to address sudden death.

Risk factors for sudden cardiac death to determine high risk patients in specific patient populations that may benefit from a wearable defibrillator

BACKGROUND

There is a high risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD) in certain patient groups that would not meet criteria for implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy. In conditions such as hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) there are clear risk scores that help define patients who are high risk for SCD and would benefit from ICD therapy. There are however many areas of uncertainty such as certain patients post myocardial infarction (MI). These patients are high risk for SCD but there is no clear tool for risk stratifying such patients.

AIM

To assess risk factors for sudden cardiac death in major cardiac disorders and to help select patients who might benefit from Wearable cardiac defibrillators (WCD).

METHODS

A literature search was performed looking for risk factors for SCD in patients post-MI, patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD), HCM, long QT syndrome (LQTS). There were 41 studies included and risk factors and the relative risks for SCD were compiled in table form.

RESULTS

We extracted data on relative risk for SCD of specific variables such as age, gender, ejection fraction. The greatest risk factors for SCD in post MI patients was the presence of diabetes [Hazard ratio (HR) 1.90-3.80], in patient with LVSD was ventricular tachycardia (Relative risk 3.50), in LQTS was a prolonged QTc (HR 36.53) and in patients with HCM was LVH greater than 20 mm (HR 3.10). A proportion of patients currently not suitable for ICD might benefit from a WCD

CONCLUSION

There is a very high risk of SCD post MI, in patients with LVSD, HCM and LQTS even in those who do not meet criteria for ICD implantation. These patients may be candidates for a WCD. The development of more sensitive risk calculators to predict SCD is necessary in these patients to help guide treatment.

Management of asymptomatic arrhythmias: a European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) consensus document, endorsed by the Heart Failure Association (HFA), Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), Cardiac Arrhythmia Society of Southern Africa (CASSA), and Latin America Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS)

Asymptomatic arrhythmias are frequently encountered in clinical practice. Although studies specifically dedicated to these asymptomatic arrhythmias are lacking, many arrhythmias still require proper diagnostic and prognostic evaluation and treatment to avoid severe consequences, such as stroke or systemic emboli, heart failure, or sudden cardiac death. The present document reviews the evidence, where available, and attempts to reach a consensus, where evidence is insufficient or conflicting.

Prognostic impact of recurrences of ventricular tachyarrhythmias and appropriate ICD therapies in a high-risk ICD population

PURPOSE

The study sought to evaluate the prognostic impact of recurrences of ventricular tachyarrhythmias in consecutive ICD recipients with ventricular tachyarrhythmias on admission.

METHODS

All consecutive patients surviving at least one episode of ventricular tachyarrhythmias from 2002 to 2016 and discharged with an ICD (pre-existing ICD or ICD implantation at index hospitalization) were included. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality according to the presence or absence of recurrences of ventricular tachyarrhythmias at 5 years. Secondary endpoints comprised the impact of different types of recurrences, appropriate ICD therapies, as well as predictors of recurrences and appropriate ICD therapies. Kaplan-Meier, multivariable Cox regression and propensity score matching analyses were applied.

RESULTS

A total of 592 consecutive ICD recipients was included (44% with recurrences of ventricular tachyarrhythmias and 56% without). Recurrences of ventricular tachyarrhythmias were associated with increased all-cause mortality at 5 years (HR = 1.498; 95% CI = 1.052-2.132; p = 0.025). Worst survival was observed in patients with sustained VT or VF as first recurrences compared to non-sustained VT, as well as in patients with cumulative recurrences of non-sustained or sustained VT plus VF, whereas mortality was not affected by the number of recurrences of ventricular tachyarrhythmias (> 4 vs. ≤ 4). Moreover, appropriate ICD therapies were associated with increased all-cause mortality (HR = 1.874; 95% CI = 1.318-2.666; p = 0.001), mainly attributed to secondary preventive ICDs. Finally, atrial fibrillation, LVEF < 35% and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy were identified as predictors of recurrences of ventricular tachyarrhythmias and appropriate ICD therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

Recurrences of ventricular tachyarrhythmias and recurrent appropriate ICD therapies are associated with increased long-term all-cause mortality in consecutive ICD recipients. Non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, AF and LVEF < 35% revealed to be significant predictors of both endpoints.

Wearable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Therapy for the Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to synthesize the available evidence on the use of the wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD).

BACKGROUND

Observational WCD studies for the prevention of sudden cardiac death have provided conflicting data. The VEST (Vest Prevention of Early Sudden Death) trial was the first randomized controlled trial (RCT) showing no reduction in sudden cardiac death as compared to medical therapy only.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Google Scholar for studies reporting on the outcomes of patients wearing WCDs from January 1, 2001, through March 20, 2018. Rates of appropriate and inappropriate WCD therapies were pooled. Estimates were derived using DerSimonian and Laird's method.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies were included (N = 33,242; 27 observational, 1 RCT-WCD arm). The incidence of appropriate WCD therapy was 5 per 100 persons over 3 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.0 to 6.0, I2 = 93%). In studies on ischemic cardiomyopathy, the appropriate WCD therapy incidence was lower in the VEST trial (1 per 100 persons over 3 months; 95% CI: 1.0 to 2.0) as compared with observational studies (11 per 100 persons over 3 months; 95% CI: 11.0 to 20.0; I2 = 93%). The incidence of inappropriate therapy was 2 per 100 persons over 3 months (95% CI: 1.0 to 3.0; I2 = 93%). Mortality while wearing WCD was rare at 0.7 per 100 persons over 3 months (95% CI: 0.3 to 1.7; I2 = 94%).

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of appropriately treated WCD patients over 3 months of follow-up was substantial; higher in-observational studies as compared with the VEST trial. There was significant heterogeneity. More RCTs are needed to justify continued use of WCD in primary prevention.

Update on heart failure management and future directions

Heart failure (HF) is an important cardiovascular disease because of its increasing prevalence, significant morbidity, high mortality, and rapidly expanding health care cost. The number of HF patients is increasing worldwide, and Korea is no exception. There have been marked advances in definition, diagnostic modalities, and treatment of HF over the past four decades. There is continuing effort to improve risk stratification of HF using biomarkers, imaging and genetic testing. Newly developed medications and devices for HF have been widely adopted in clinical practice. Furthermore, definitive treatment for end-stage heart failure including left ventricular assist device and heart transplantation are rapidly evolving as well. This review summarizes the current state-of-the-art management for HF and the emerging diagnostic and therapeutic modalities to improve the outcome of HF patients.

Role of the Wearable Defibrillator in Newly Diagnosed Heart Failure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The wearable defibrillator (WCD) was shown to be safe and effective in detecting and terminating ventricular tachyarrhythmias and therefore allows temporary protection from sudden cardiac death. This review gives an overview of the current data on WCD in newly diagnosed cardiomyopathy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Patients with newly diagnosed heart failure and reduced LVEF appear to have an increased risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias, which may decrease over time when heart failure medication is optimized and left ventricular function improves. This was shown to apply for patients with ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, including peripartum cardiomyopathy. Prolongation of the WCD period may support to further optimization of heart failure medication, by protecting the patient from sudden cardiac death during this time and to avoid untimely ICD implantation. The WCD should be considered in structured patient management for newly diagnosed heart failure during the early phase of the disease. Careful patient selection, structured patient management, and patient's compliance is crucial for a successful WCD strategy.

Extended Use of the Wearable Cardioverter-Defibrillator: Which Patients Are Most Likely to Benefit?

BACKGROUND

Wearable cardioverter-defibrillators (WCD, LifeVest, ZOLL) can protect from sudden cardiac death bridging a vulnerable period until a decision on implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation can be reached. WCD is commonly used for 3 months or less. It is unknown, which patients use WCD longer and which patients are most likely to benefit from it.

HYPOTHESIS

Extended use of WCD is reasonable in selected cases based on underlying heart disease and overall patient risk profile.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic and comprehensive research of all published clinical studies on PubMed reporting on the use of the WCD. Only original articles reporting on wear times and time to appropriate shocks were included in our analysis.

RESULTS

The search resulted in 127 publications. 14 parameters were reported necessary for inclusion in our analysis. Median wear times ranged from 16 to 394 days. The median wear time was especially long for patients suffering from nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) (range: 50-71 days) and specifically peripartum cardiomyopathy (PPCM) (120 days) and for heart transplant candidates. There was a large variation of appropriate shocks according to indication for WCD use. In contrast to NICM in general, the number of appropriate shocks was particularly high in patients with PPCM (0 in 254 patients and 5 in 49 patients, respectively). The median and maximal time periods to the first appropriate shock were longest in patients with PPCM (median time to the first appropriate shock: 68 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Prolonged use of WCD is not uncommon in available literature. Patients suffering from NICM and specifically PPCM seem most likely to have longer therapy duration with WCD with success. Careful patient selection for prolonged use may decrease the need for ICD implantation in the future; however, prospective data are needed to confirm this hypothesis.