Catheter Ablation of Life-Threatening Ventricular Arrhythmias in Athletes

Subcutaneous versus transvenous implantable cardioverter defibrillators in children and young adults: A meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) has been demonstrated to successfully prevent sudden cardiac death (SCD) in children and young adults. A wide range of device-related complications/malfunctions have been described, which depend on the intrinsic design of the defibrillation system (transvenous-implantable cardioverter defibrillator [TV-ICD] vs. subcutaneous-implantable cardioverter defibrillator [S-ICD]).

OBJECTIVE

To compare the device-related complications and inappropriate shocks with TV-ICD versus S-ICD.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Electronic databases were queried for studies focusing on the prevention of SCD in children and young adults with TV-ICD or S-ICD. The effect size was estimated using a random-effect model as odds ratio (OR) and relative 95% confidence interval (CI). The primary endpoint was a composite of any device-related complications and inappropriate shocks. We identified a total of five studies including 236 patients (Group S-ICD: 76 patients; Group TV-ICD: 160 patients) with a mean follow-up time of 54.2 ± 24.9 months. S-ICD implantation contributed to a significant reduction in the risk of the primary endpoint of any device-related complications and inappropriate shocks (OR: 0.18; 95% CI: 0.05-0.73; p = .02). S-ICD was also associated with a significantly lower incidence of inappropriate shocks (OR: 0.28; 95% CI: 0.11-0.74; p = .01) and lead-related complications (OR: 0.18; 95% CI: 0.05-0.66; p = .01). A trend toward a higher risk of pocket complications (OR: 5.91; 95% CI: 0.98-35.63; p = .05) was recorded in patients with S-ICD.

CONCLUSION

Children and young adults undergoing S-ICD implantation may have a lower risk of a composite of device-related complications and inappropriate shocks, compared to TV-ICD patients.

A proposed strategy for anticoagulation therapy in noncompaction cardiomyopathy

Noncompaction cardiomyopathy (NCCM) is a rare condition characterized by prominent trabeculae, deep intertrabecular recesses, and a left ventricular myocardium with a two‐layered structure, characterized by a spongy endocardial layer and a thinner and compacted epicardial one. NCCM can be isolated or associated with other congenital heart diseases and complex syndromes involving neuromuscular disorders and facial dysmorphisms. To date, more than 40 genes coding for sarcomeric, cytoskeletal, ion channels, and desmosomal proteins have been identified. Clinical presentation is also highly variable, ranging from no symptoms to end‐stage heart failure (HF), lethal arrhythmias, sudden cardiac death, or thromboembolic events. In particular, the prevalence of thromboembolism in NCCM patients appears to be higher than that of a similar, age‐matched population without NCCM. Thromboembolism has a multifactorial aetiology, which is linked to genetic, as well as traditional cardiovascular risk factors. In previous studies, atrial fibrillation (AF) was observed in approximately 25–30% of adult NCCM patients and embolism had a cardiac source in ~63–69% of cases; therefore, AF represents a strong predictor of adverse events, especially if associated to HF and neuromuscular disorders. Left ventricular dysfunction is another risk factor for thromboembolism, as a result of blood stagnation and local myocardial injury. Moreover, it is not completely clarified if the presence of deep intertrabecular recesses causing stagnant blood flow can constitute per se a thrombogenic substrate even in absence of ventricular dysfunction. For the clinical management of NCCM patients, an appropriate stratification of the thromboembolic risk is of utmost importance for a timely initiation of anticoagulant therapy. The aim of the present study is to review the available literature on NCCM with particular attention on thromboembolic risk stratification and prevention and the current evidence for oral anticoagulation therapy. The use of direct oral anticoagulants vs. vitamin K antagonists is also discussed with important implications for patient treatment and prognosis.

Flecainide in Ventricular Arrhythmias: From Old Myths to New Perspectives

Flecainide is an IC antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) that received in 1984 Food and Drug Administration approval for the treatment of sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) and subsequently for rhythm control of atrial fibrillation (AF). Currently, flecainide is mainly employed for sinus rhythm maintenance in AF and the treatment of idiopathic ventricular arrhythmias (IVA) in absence of ischaemic and structural heart disease on the basis of CAST data. Recent studies enrolling patients with different structural heart diseases demonstrated good effectiveness and safety profile of flecainide. The purpose of this review is to assess current evidence for appropriate and safe use of flecainide, 30 years after CAST data, in the light of new diagnostic and therapeutic tools in the field of ischaemic and non-ischaemic heart disease.

Flecainide How and When: A Practical Guide in Supraventricular Arrhythmias

Transcatheter ablation was increasingly and successfully used to treat symptomatic drug refractory patients affected by supraventricular arrhythmias. Antiarrhythmic drug treatment still plays a major role in patient management, alone or combined with non-pharmacological therapies. Flecainide is an IC antiarrhythmic drug approved in 1984 from the Food and Drug Administration for the suppression of sustained ventricular tachycardia and later for acute cardioversion of atrial fibrillation and for sinus rhythm maintenance. Currently, flecainide is mostly used for sinus rhythm maintenance in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients without structural cardiomyopathy although recent studies enrolling different patient populations have demonstrated a good effectiveness and safety profile. How should we interpret the results of the CAST after the latest evidence? Is it possible to expand the indications of flecainide, and therefore, its use? This review aims to highlight the main characteristics of flecainide, as well as its optimal clinical use, delineating drug indications and contraindications and appropriate monitoring, based on the most recent evidence.