Long-term outcomes of pediatric sinus bradycardia

Efficient Edge-AI Models for Robust ECG Abnormality Detection on Resource-Constrained Hardware

This study introduces two models, ConvLSTM2D-liquid time-constant network (CLTC) and ConvLSTM2D-closed-form continuous-time neural network (CCfC), designed for abnormality identification using electrocardiogram (ECG) data. Trained on the Telehealth Network of Minas Gerais (TNMG) subset dataset, both models were evaluated for their performance, generalizability capacity, and resilience. They demonstrated comparable results in terms of F1 scores and AUROC values. The CCfC model achieved slightly higher accuracy, while the CLTC model showed better handling of empty channels. Remarkably, the models were successfully deployed on a resource-constrained microcontroller, proving their suitability for edge device applications. Generalization capabilities were confirmed through the evaluation on the China Physiological Signal Challenge 2018 (CPSC) dataset. The models' efficient resource utilization, occupying 70.6% of memory and 9.4% of flash memory, makes them promising candidates for real-world healthcare applications. Overall, this research advances abnormality identification in ECG data, contributing to the progress of AI in healthcare.

Italian Cardiological Guidelines (COCIS) for Competitive Sport Eligibility in athletes with heart disease: update 2020

Since 1989, SIC Sport and a FMSI, in partnership with leading Italian Cardiological Scientific Associations (ANCE, ANMCO and SIC) have produced Cardiological Guidelines for Completive Sports Eligibility for athletes with heart disease (COCIS -- 1989, 1995, 2003, 2009 and 2017). The English version of the Italian Cardiological Guidelines for Competitive Sports Eligibility for athletes with heart disease was published in 2013 in this Journal. This publication is an update with respect to the document previously published in English in 2013. It includes the principal innovations that have emerged over recent years, and is divided into five main chapters: arrhythmias, ion channel disorders, congenital heart diseases, acquired valve diseases, cardiomyopathies, myocarditis and pericarditis and ischemic heart disease. Wherever no new data have been introduced with respect to the 2013 publication, please refer to the previous version. This document is intended to complement recent European and American guidelines but an important difference should be noted. The European and American guidelines indicate good practice for people engaging in physical activity at various levels, not only at the competitive level. In contrast, the COCIS guidelines refer specifically to competitive athletes in various sports including those with high cardiovascular stress. This explains why Italian guidelines are more restrictive than European and USA ones. COCIS guidelines address 'sports doctors' who, in Italy, must certify fitness to participate in competitive sports. In Italy, this certificate is essential for participating in any competition.

2021 PACES Expert Consensus Statement on the Indications and Management of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices in Pediatric Patients: Developed in collaboration with and endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC) Endorsed by the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS)

In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.

2021 PACES expert consensus statement on the indications and management of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in pediatric patients

In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.

2021 PACES Expert Consensus Statement on the Indications and Management of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices in Pediatric Patients

In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consenus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology, (ACC) and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate follow-up in pediatric patients.

2021 PACES Expert Consensus Statement on the Indications and Management of Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Devices in Pediatric Patients

In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.

Asystole due to stimulation of the supraorbital nerve: abrupt and potentially fatal presentation of the trigeminocardiac reflex

We present a case of sudden asystole that was elicited via the trigeminocardiac reflex in a patient undergoing surgery for a frontal sinus fracture. Asystole occurred after mild stimulation of the supraorbital nerve during dissection along the superior orbital rim. Anticholinergics were administered and lidocaine-soaked gauze was applied to the exposed wound. The patient was an athlete and had pre-existing sinus bradycardia. We hypothesise that the severe reflex response was associated with his underlying increased vagal tone. When performing surgery in patients with increased vagal tone, preventative measures to diminish the trigeminocardiac reflex are recommended. Further studies are needed.