Risk factors and prognostic role of an electrical storm in patients after myocardial infarction with an implanted ICD for secondary prevention

Clinical and Laboratory Predictors of Long-Term Outcomes after Catheter Ablation for a Ventricular Electrical Storm

Background

Ventricular electrical storm (VES) is characterized by the occurrence of multiple episodes of sustained ventricular arrhythmias (VA) over a short period of time. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has been reported as an effective treatment in patients with ventricular tachycardia (VT).

Objective

The aim of the present study was to indicate the short-term and long-term predictors of recurrent VA after RFA was performed due to VES.

Methods

A retrospective, single-centre study included patients, who had undergone RFA due to VT between 2012 and 2021. In terms of the short-term (at the end of RFA) effectiveness of RFA, the following scenarios were distinguished: complete success: inability to induce any VT; partial success: absence of clinical VT; failure: inducible clinical VT. In terms of the long-term (12 months) effectiveness of RFA, the following scenarios were distinguished: effective ablation: no recurrence of any VT; partially successful ablation: VT recurrence; ineffective ablation: VES recurrence.

Results

The study included 62 patients. Complete short-term RFA success was obtained in 77.4% of patients. The estimated cumulative VT-free survival and VES-free survival were, respectively, 28% and 33% at the 12-month follow-up. Ischemic cardiomyopathy and complete short-term RFA success were predictors of long-term RFA efficacy. Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and GFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 were associated with VES recurrence. NLR ≥2.95 predicted VT and/or VES recurrence with a sensitivity of 66.7% and specificity of 72.2%.

Conclusion

Ischemic cardiomyopathy and short-term complete success of RFA were predictors of no VES recurrence during the 12-month follow-up, while NLR and GFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m2 were associated with VES relapse.

Post-Myocardial Revascularization: As a Nidus for an Electrical Storm!

Electrical storm (ES) is a critical and potentially life-threatening cardiac rhythm disorder. It is characterized by the presence of three or more distinct episodes of sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) that necessitate appropriate termination. ES may occur in the setting of acute myocardial infarction or following myocardial reperfusion. An urgent treatment approach is necessary for better outcomes. We represent a case of a 64-year-old patient who presented with sudden chest pain and an episode of palpitations related to non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), who has undergone percutaneous coronary intervention of the stenotic epicardial artery, but subsequently experienced an ES in the absence of stent thrombosis. ES presented in the form of sustained monomorphic VT that required synchronous direct current cardioversion, anti-arrhythmic drugs, deep sedation, and endotracheal intubation with a favorable course, with the patient being discharged after 14 days hospital stay. The practitioner should be mindful of the potential occurrence of ES following myocardial revascularization and should tailor the management approach.

Recent insights into mechanisms and clinical approaches to electrical storm

Electrical storm, characterized by repetitive ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation (VT/VF) over a short period, is becoming commoner with widespread use of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy. Electrical storm, sometimes called "arrhythmic storm" or "VT-storm", is usually a medical emergency requiring hospitalization and expert management, and significantly affects short- and long-term outcomes. This syndrome typically occurs in patients with underlying structural heart disease (ischemic or non-ischemic cardiomyopathy) or inherited channelopathies. Triggers for electrical storm should be sought but are often unidentifiable. Initial management is dictated by the hemodynamic status, while subsequent management typically involves ICD interrogation and reprogramming to reduce recurrent shocks, identification/management of triggers like electrolyte abnormalities, myocardial ischemia, or decompensated heart failure, and antiarrhythmic-drug therapy or catheter ablation. Sympathetic nervous system activation is central to the initiation and maintenance of arrhythmic storm, so autonomic modulation is a cornerstone of management. Sympathetic inhibition can be achieved with medications (particularly beta-adrenoreceptor blockers), deep sedation, or cardiac sympathetic denervation. More definitive management targets the underlying ventricular arrhythmia substrate to terminate and prevent recurrent arrhythmia. Arrhythmia targeting can be achieved with antiarrhythmic medications, catheter ablation or more novel therapies such as stereotactic radiation therapy that targets the arrhythmic substrate. Mechanistic studies point to adrenergic activation and other direct consequences of ICD-shocks in promoting further arrhythmogenesis and hypocontractility. Here, we review the pathophysiologic mechanisms, clinical features, prognosis, and therapeutic options for electrical storm. We also outline a clinical approach to this challenging and complex condition, along with its mechanistic basis.

Clinical management of electrical storm: a current overview

The number of patients affected by electrical storm has been continuously increasing in emergency departments. Patients are often affected by multiple comorbidities requiring multidisciplinary interventions to achieve a clinical stability. Careful reprogramming of cardiac devices, correction of electrolyte imbalance, knowledge of underlying heart disease and antiarrhythmic drugs in the acute phase play a crucial role. The aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive overview of pharmacological treatment, latest transcatheter ablation techniques and advanced management of patients with electrical storm.

Mortality Risk Increases With Clustered Ventricular Arrhythmias in Patients With Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to examine the adverse prognosis associated with ventricular arrhythmia clusters that falls outside the current electrical storm definition.

BACKGROUND

Electrical storm is most frequently defined as a cluster of ≥3 episodes of ventricular arrhythmia (VA) in a 24-h period. This definition has been associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes and mortality, but the effect of lesser and greater clustering of arrhythmias has not been described.

METHODS

Among all patients in the Resynchronization in Ambulatory Heart Failure trial, 14,515 implantable cardioverter-defibrillator-detected events with data available were rigorously adjudicated in blinded fashion. Arrhythmia incidence was examined for clustering, defined as 2 or more VA events occurring within 3 months. The prognostic importance of clustering was analyzed by varying the cluster length and number of events used to define a cluster. Mortality rates of groups with clustered arrhythmias were compared to patients with no arrhythmia or with unclustered arrhythmia.

RESULTS

The trial included 1,764 patients, among whom 465 patients had two or more VA episodes within 3 months, whereas 406 had unclustered arrhythmias. Compared to patients with no arrhythmia, patients experiencing unclustered VA had increased risk of death (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.45; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.09 to 1.93; p = 0.011), whereas the risk was even higher in patients with clustered arrhythmia (HR: 2.68; 95% CI: 2.13 to 3.36; p < 0.0001). Mortality risk increased with higher VA burden (number of VAs in a cluster) and shorter cluster length. This was observed in all groups tested, including the cluster with the least VA burden in the longest cluster length tested (2 VA episodes occurring within 3 months) (mortality HR: 2.85; 95% CI: 1.95 to 4.17; p < 0.0001). Although clustered arrhythmias terminated with antitachycardia pacing were associated with increased mortality, clusters terminated with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks were associated with still higher mortality risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant adverse prognostic association of clustered VAs is observable with even 2 VA events within 3 months and increases with higher cluster density.