Spontaneous episodes of atrial fibrillation after implantation of the Metrix Atrioverter: observations on treated and nontreated episodes. Metrix Investigators

Optoelectronic control of cardiac rhythm: Toward shock-free ambulatory cardioversion of atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most prevalent cardiac arrhythmia, progressive in nature, and known to have a negative impact on mortality, morbidity, and quality of life. Patients requiring acute termination of AF to restore sinus rhythm are subjected to electrical cardioversion, which requires sedation and therefore hospitalization due to pain resulting from the electrical shocks. However, considering the progressive nature of AF and its detrimental effects, there is a clear need for acute out-of-hospital (i.e., ambulatory) cardioversion of AF. In the search for shock-free cardioversion methods to realize such ambulatory therapy, a method referred to as optogenetics has been put forward. Optogenetics enables optical control over the electrical activity of cardiomyocytes by targeted expression of light-activated ion channels or pumps and may therefore serve as a means for cardioversion. First proof-of-principle for such light-induced cardioversion came from in vitro studies, proving optogenetic AF termination to be very effective. Later, these results were confirmed in various rodent models of AF using different transgenes, illumination methods, and protocols, whereas computational studies in the human heart provided additional translational insight. Based on these results and fueled by recent advances in molecular biology, gene therapy, and optoelectronic engineering, a basis is now being formed to explore clinical translations of optoelectronic control of cardiac rhythm. In this review, we discuss the current literature regarding optogenetic cardioversion of AF to restore normal rhythm in a shock-free manner. Moreover, key translational steps will be discussed, both from a biological and technological point of view, to outline a path toward realizing acute shock-free ambulatory termination of AF.

Mobile Single-Lead Electrocardiogram Technology for Atrial Fibrillation Detection in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients

(1) Background: AliveCor KardiaMobile (KM) is a portable electrocardiography recorder for detection of atrial fibrillation (AF). The aim of the study was to define the group of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients who can use the KM device and assess the diagnostic test accuracy. (2) Methods: the AIS patients were recruited to the study. Thirty-second single-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) usages were recorded on demand for three days using KM portable device. Each KM ECG record was verified by a cardiologist. The feasibility was evaluated using operationalization criteria. (3) Results: the recruitment rate among AIS patients was 26.3%. The withdrawal rate before the start of the intervention was 26%. The withdrawal rate after the start of the intervention was 6%. KM device detected AF in 2.8% of AIS patients and in 2.2% of ECG records. Cardiologist confirmed the AF in 0.3% AIS patients. Sensitivity and specificity of KM for AF was 100% and 98.3%, respectively. (4) Conclusions: the results of this study suggest that it is feasible to use KM device to detect AF in the selected AIS patients (younger and in better neurological condition). KM detected AF in the selected AIS patients with high specificity and sensitivity.

The RACE to the EAST. In pursuit of rhythm control therapy for atrial fibrillation-a dedication to Harry Crijns

The RACE trial was one of the first landmark trials to establish whether restoring and maintaining sinus rhythm could reduce morbidity and mortality in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Its neutral outcome shaped clinical decision-making for almost 20 years. However, there were two important treatment-related factors associated with mortality of rhythm control therapy at that time: One was safety of antiarrhythmic drug therapy, and the other one withdrawal of anticoagulation after restoration of sinus rhythm. Both concerns have been overcome, and, moreover, important knowledge considering the importance of time for the treatment of AF has been gained. These insights led to the concept of the EAST-AFNET 4 trial, and after more than two decades in the pursuit of ongoing therapeutic improvement, early rhythm control therapy has demonstrated to reduce a composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, and hospitalization for worsening of HF or acute coronary syndrome, by 21% (first primary outcome, absolute reduction 1.1 per 100 patient-years). For this entire period, Harry Crijns characterized the treatment of AF patients, and contributed decisively to realizing the benefit of rhythm control therapy. It is almost easier to list the clinical trials without Harry's involvement than to list those which he co-designed and led.

Clinical classification and the subclinical atrial fibrillation challenge: a position paper of the European Cardiac Arrhythmia Society

Symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) or clinical AF is associated with impaired quality of life, higher risk of stroke, heart failure, and increased mortality. Current clinical classification of AF is based on the duration of AF episodes and the recurrence over time. Appropriate management strategy should follow guidelines of Scientific Societies. The last decades have been marked by the advances in mechanism comprehension, better management of symptomatic AF, particularly regarding stroke prevention with the use of direct oral anticoagulants and a wider use of AF catheter or surgical ablations. The advent of new tools for detection of asymptomatic AF including continuous monitoring with implanted electronic devices and the use of implantable cardiac monitors and recently wearable devices or garments have identified what is called "subclinical AF" encompassing atrial high-rate episodes (AHREs). New concepts such as "AF burden" have resulted in new management challenges. Oral anticoagulation has proven to reduce substantially stroke risk in patients with symptomatic clinical AF but carries the risk of bleeding. Management of detected asymptomatic atrial arrhythmias and their relation to clinical AF and stroke risk is currently under evaluation. Based on a review of recent literature, the validity of current clinical classification has been reassessed and appropriate updates are proposed. Current evidence supporting the inclusion of subclinical AF within current clinical classification is discussed as well as the need for controlled trials which may provide responses to current therapeutic challenges particularly regarding the subsets of asymptomatic AF patients that might benefit from oral anticoagulation.

Towards Low Energy Atrial Defibrillation

A wireless powered implantable atrial defibrillator consisting of a battery driven hand-held radio frequency (RF) power transmitter (ex vivo) and a passive (battery free) implantable power receiver (in vivo) that enables measurement of the intracardiacimpedance (ICI) during internal atrial defibrillation is reported. The architecture is designed to operate in two modes: Cardiac sense mode (power-up, measure the impedance of the cardiac substrate and communicate data to the ex vivo power transmitter) and cardiac shock mode (delivery of a synchronised very low tilt rectilinear electrical shock waveform). An initial prototype was implemented and tested. In low-power (sense) mode, >5 W was delivered across a 2.5 cm air-skin gap to facilitate measurement of the impedance of the cardiac substrate. In high-power (shock) mode, >180 W (delivered as a 12 ms monophasic very-low-tilt-rectilinear (M-VLTR) or as a 12 ms biphasic very-low-tilt-rectilinear (B-VLTR) chronosymmetric (6ms/6ms) amplitude asymmetric (negative phase at 50% magnitude) shock was reliably and repeatedly delivered across the same interface; with >47% DC-to-DC (direct current to direct current) power transfer efficiency at a switching frequency of 185 kHz achieved. In an initial trial of the RF architecture developed, 30 patients with AF were randomised to therapy with an RF generated M-VLTR or B-VLTR shock using a step-up voltage protocol (50–300 V). Mean energy for successful cardioversion was 8.51 J ± 3.16 J. Subsequent analysis revealed that all patients who cardioverted exhibited a significant decrease in ICI between the first and third shocks (5.00 Ω (SD(σ) = 1.62 Ω), p < 0.01) while spectral analysis across frequency also revealed a significant variation in the impedance-amplitude-spectrum-area (IAMSA) within the same patient group (|∆(IAMSA_S1-IAMSA_S3)[1 Hz − 20 kHz] = 20.82 Ω-Hz (SD(σ) = 10.77 Ω-Hz), p < 0.01); both trends being absent in all patients that failed to cardiovert. Efficient transcutaneous power transfer and sensing of ICI during cardioversion are evidenced as key to the advancement of low-energy atrial defibrillation.

Rate Control Strategy Elevated To Primary Treatment For Atrial Fibrillation: Has The Last Word Already Been Spoken?

In the last decade, we were able to see the light shed by several trials and observational studies that dealt with the appropriate manner of treating patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Recently the AF management by cardiologists has become more aggressive, in part because of an improved comprehension of this rhythm disturbance, as well as, the availability of new treatment strategies. Increasing awareness of AF as a disease rather than as an acceptable alternative to sinus rhythm has led to search for clear arguments to support a certain strategy as a gold standard. In this respect, the decision of whether to restore sinus rhythm, or to control the ventricular rate and allow AF to persist is of critical importance. The results of randomized, controlled trials addressing this matter shed some light on the proper way of treatment for these AF patients. The AFFIRM and RACE trials and their respective sub-studies showed surprising results. The vast majority of physicians were surprised to learn that the rate control strategy was elevated to the position of primary treatment for the AF management instead of the all-time recognized rhythm control approach to restoration and maintenance of sinus rhythm. The use of anticoagulants in the trials was different in the treatment strategies. There was a greater anticoagulant use in the rate control arm because of the belief that anticoagulation can be discontinued in the rhythm control arm when sinus rhythm was restored and maintained for one month. On the other hand, only pharmacological agents were used to maintain sinus rhythm in those trials, however, there is increasing evidence that AF ablation can restore and maintain sinus rhythm in a great proportion of patients. Indeed, there are some limitations and several interesting aspects of these trials and other studies that will be discussed. The last word has not been spoken yet.

Predictors of long-term maintenance of normal sinus rhythm after successful electrical cardioversion

Electrical cardioversion (EC) for atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common procedure performed in an attempt to restore normal sinus rhythm (NSR). Many factors predict long-term maintenance of NSR and the risk of AF recurrence. The duration of AF, cardiac size and function, rheumatic heart disease, significant mitral valve disease, left atrial enlargement, and older age are among the most common recognized factors. A number of interventions can potentially decrease the AF recurrence rate. Identifying and treating reversible causes and the use of antiarrhythmic medications in certain situations can help decrease the risk of AF recurrence. The role of the newer anticoagulants is expanding, and wider application is expected in the near future. We hope that this summary will serve as a guide to physicians and healthcare providers to address the question of who should undergo cardioversion, as there are patients who are most likely to benefit from this procedure and others that will revert back into AF within a short period. To identify who would benefit most from EC and have a reasonable chance of long-term maintenance of NSR, a thorough evaluation of each individual patient should be performed to tailor the best therapy to each individual.

Atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation is the most common arrhythmia affecting patients today. Disease prevalence is increasing at an alarming rate worldwide, and is associated with often catastrophic and costly consequences, including heart failure, syncope, dementia, and stroke. Therapies including anticoagulants, anti-arrhythmic medications, devices, and non-pharmacologic procedures in the last 30 years have improved patients' functionality with the disease. Nonetheless, it remains imperative that further research into AF epidemiology, genetics, detection, and treatments continues to push forward rapidly as the worldwide population ages dramatically over the next 20 years.

How, why, and when may atrial defibrillation find a specific role in implantable devices? A clinical viewpoint

This viewpoint article discusses the potential for incorporation of atrial defibrillation capabilities in modern multi-chamber devices. In the late 1990s, the possibility of using shock-only therapy to treat selected patients with recurrent atrial fibrillation (AF) was explored in the context of the stand-alone atrial defibrillator. The failure of this strategy can be attributed to the technical limitations of the stand-alone device, low tolerance of atrial shocks, difficulties in patient selection, a lack of predictive knowledge about the evolution of AF, and, last but not least, commercial considerations. An open question is how atrial defibrillation capability may now assume a specific new role in devices implanted for sudden death prevention or cardiac resynchronization. For patients who already have indications for implantable devices, device-based atrial defibrillation appears attractive as a "backup" option for managing AF when preventive pharmacological/electrical measures fail. This and several other personalized hybrid therapeutic approaches await exploration, though assessment of their efficacy is methodologically challenging. Achievement of acceptance by patients is an essential premise for any updated atrial defibrillation strategy. Strategies that are being investigated to improve patient tolerance include waveform shaping, pharmacologic modulation of pain, and patient-activated defibrillation (patients might also perceive the problem of discomfort somewhat differently in the context of a backup therapy). The economic impact of implementing atrial defibrillation features in available devices is progressively decreasing, and financial feasibility need not be a major issue. Future studies should examine clinically relevant outcomes and not be limited (as occurred with stand-alone defibrillators) to technical or other soft endpoints.

Nonpharmacologic Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation in Elderly Persons

In recent years, new nonpharmacologic possibilities have emerged for the treatment of atrial fibrillation. The roles of surgery, radiofrequency catheter ablation, pacing, and atrial defibrillation in the treatment of atrial fibrillation are discussed. This text focuses on the interaction between different treatment modalities and the pathophysiologic mechanisms of atrial fibrillation and on the available data about the effectiveness in elderly persons.

Physiologic Pacing for Atrial Fibrillation Prevention in Sinus Node Disease: Long-Term Results

BACKGROUND

Physiologic pacing has been demonstrated to be effective in preventing atrial fibrillation recurrences in patients with sinus bradycardia. Aim of the study was to evaluate long-term incidence of atrial fibrillation in a large population of patients affected by sinus node disease receiving physiologic pacing. Furthermore, predictors of arrhythmia recurrence and effect of pacing mode were investigated.

POPULATION

Four hundred twenty-five patients (220 Male, 77 +/- 9 years) were retrospectively analyzed: implanted system was AAI in 20.5% and DDD in 79.5%. Thirty-four percent had atrial fibrillation before implant.

RESULTS

Follow-up lasted on average 51 +/- 36 months (median 42, range 1 month-18 years). Sixty-six percent were on antiarrhythmic drug therapy. After 5 years, 89% survived, 74.5% had at least one episode of atrial fibrillation, 39.9% were submitted to electrical cardioversion, 67.2% were hospitalized because of cardiac causes, 33.3% developed permanent atrial fibrillation. Primary conduction system disease and valvular heart disease were independent predictors for atrial fibrillation recurrence. Preimplant atrial fibrillation predicted arrhythmia recurrence during the follow-up, but it did not predict development of permanent atrial fibrillation. AAI pacing, when compared with DDD, was associated to a lower rate of atrial fibrillation recurrences (AAI 28.7%, DDD 53.3%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In spite of expected benefits of physiologic pacing, the development of atrial fibrillation and permanent atrial fibrillation were quite common. The additional benefits of multifunction pacemakers designed to prevent and treat atrial fibrillation should be evaluated in controlled studies.

Internal defibrillation: where we have been and where we should be going?

Internal cardioversion has been developed as an alternative technique for patients who are resistant to external DC cardioversion of atrial fibrillation (AF) and was found to be associated with higher success rates. It used initially high energies (200-300 J) delivered between an intracardiac catheter and a backplate. Subsequent studies have shown that it is possible to terminate with energies of 1 to 6 Joules, paroxysmal or induced AF in 90 percent of patients and persistent AF in 75 percent of patients, using biphasic shocks delivered between a right atrium-coronary sinus vectors. Consequently, internal atrial defibrillation can be performed under sedation only without the need for general anesthesia. Recently developed external defibrillators, capable of delivering biphasic shocks, have increased the success rates of external cardioversion and reduced the need for internal cardioversion. However, internal defibrillation is still useful in overweight or obese patients, in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or asthma who are more difficult to defibrillate, and in patients with implanted devices which may be injured by high energy shocks. Low energy internal defibrillation has also proven to be safe and this has prompted the development of implantable devices for terminating AF. The first device used was the Metrix system, a stand-alone atrial defibrillator (without ventricular defibrillation) which was found to be safe and effective in selected groups of patients. Unfortunately, this device is no longer being marketed. Only double chamber defibrillators with pacing capabilities are presently available: the Medtronic GEM III AT, an updated version of the Jewel AF and the Guidant PRIZM AVT. These devices can be patient-activated or programmed to deliver automatically ounce atrial tachyarrhythmias are detected, therapies including pacing or/and shocks. Attempts to define the group of patients who might benefit from these devices are described but the respective role of atrial defibrillators versus other non-pharmacologic therapies for AF, such as surgery and radiofrequency catheter ablation, remains to be determined. Advantages and limitations or atrial defibrillators and approaches to reduce shock related discomfort which may be a concern in some patients, are reviewed. Studies have shown that despite shock discomfort, quality of life was improved in patients with atrial defibrillators and the need for repeated hospitalizations was reduced. The cost of these devices remains a concern for the treatment of a non-lethal arrhythmia. Attention that atrial defibrillators will receive from cardiologists and from the industry in the future, will depend of the long-term results of other non-pharmacological options and of the identification of the group of AF patients which will require restoration and maintenance of sinus rhythm. But there is no doubt that selected subsets of patients with AF could benefit from atrial defibrillation.

Controversies in atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation is the most common sustained cardiac arrhythmia, and contributes greatly to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Many aspects of the management of atrial fibrillation remain controversial. We address nine specific controversies in atrial fibrillation management, briefly focusing on the relations between mechanisms and therapy, the roles of rhythm and rate control, the definition of optimum rate control, the need for early cardioversion to prevent remodelling, the comparison of electrical with pharmacological cardioversion, the selection of patients for long-term oral anticoagulation, the roles of novel long-term anticoagulation approaches and ablation therapy, and the potential usefulness of upstream therapy targeting substrate development. The background of every controversy is reviewed and our opinions expressed. Here, we hope to inform physicians about the most important controversies in this specialty and stimulate investigators to address unresolved issues.

Is Dual Defibrillator Better than Conventional DDD Pacing in Brady-Tachy Syndrome? Results of the ICARUS Trial (Internal Cardioversion Antitachypacing and Prevention: Resource Utilization Study)

AIM OF THE STUDY

To compare the impact of dual defibrillator versus conventional DDD pacing on quality of life and hospitalizations in patients with sinus node disease and recurrent symptomatic atrial fibrillation.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, parallel, controlled trial.

METHODS

Sixty-three patients (41 M, mean age 71 +/- 8 years) with sinus node disease and at least three symptomatic episodes of atrial fibrillation during the last year were enrolled. Thirty-one consecutive patients received a dual defibrillator (group A) and 32 standard DDD pacing (group B). In group A, 12 patients received an external remote-control device in order to shock themselves in case of atrial fibrillation, while 19 were scheduled for early in-hospital manual shock. Seventy-five percent had been hospitalized during the last year and 57% had required electrical cardioversion. Atrial fibrillation was persistent in 63.5% and paroxysmal in 37.5%. The follow-up lasted 1 year.

RESULTS

Atrial fibrillation recurred in 83.3% in group A and 79.3% in group B (p = ns). Electrical cardioversion was applied in 54.8% in group A and in 21.9% in group B (p < 0.05). On the whole, 89.5% of electrical cardioversions were delivered in the defibrillator group (p < 0.0001). In the whole population 27.0% patients had cardiac-related hospitalization (31.2% in the pacemaker group and 22.6% in the defibrillator group, p = n.s.). In patients with persistent atrial fibrillation, cardiac-related hospitalization rate was significantly lower in the group A (0% vs. 30%, p < 0.05). Considering Symptom Check List, symptoms significantly improved in the whole population, but symptom number and frequency improved significantly only in the group A. Similarly, SF-36 questionnaire scores showed a little higher quality of life improvement in the group A.

CONCLUSIONS

Dual defibrillator showed consistent trends toward a higher effectiveness when compared with standard DDD pacing. Dual defibrillator was associated to reduced in-patient cardioversions and to better quality of life. All-cause hospitalizations were reduced only in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation.

Atrial Fibrillation in Patients with a Dual Defibrillator: Characteristics of Spontaneous and Induced Episodes and Effect of Ventricular Tachyarrhythmia Induction

BACKGROUND

The pattern of FF intervals during atrial fibrillation (AF) has been analyzed in induced and spontaneous AF episodes, after the induction of ventricular fibrillation (VF) and after atrial shock, in order to suggest practical considerations for AF management in patients implanted with antitachycardia devices.

METHODS

In 13 patients implanted with a dual-chamber defibrillator, FF intervals were analyzed during two separate induced AF episodes, before and after VF induction over AF, as well as during spontaneous AF episodes and after unsuccessful atrial shocks. The following parameters were considered: mean atrial cycle length (CL), atrial CL stability, and standard deviation of the atrial cycle.

RESULTS

The AF pattern had comparable characteristics considering two separate inductions of AF, as well as spontaneous AF episodes. Ventricular tachyarrhythmia induction resulted in a shortening of atrial CL (P < 0.02) and in a less organized AF pattern (P < 0.005). Changes in the FF interval after ineffective shock therapy showed a shortening of AF cycles after shocks with energies far below the defibrillation threshold.

CONCLUSIONS

(a) The AF pattern is reproducible in separate inductions of sustained AF and in spontaneous episodes, (b) dynamic changes involving a shortening of the AF cycle and an evolution to a less homogeneous pattern occur after VF induction, revealing a complex interplay between AF and VF, and (c) FF interval analysis after ineffective shock delivery may allow the relationship between delivered shock energy and effective defibrillation energy to be estimated, thereby providing practical suggestions for step-up protocols in atrial cardioversion.

Device treatment of atrial tachycardia—minor additional effect of repeating pacing sequences

PURPOSE

Ramp and burst pacing as treatment for atrial tachycardia (AT), one known trigger mechanism of atrial fibrillation (AF) are available in permanent pacemakers to reduce the burden of AF. An analysis of the success rate of three consecutive antitachycardia pacing sequences is presented.

METHOD

The AT 500 (Medtronic) pacemaker was implanted in 36 patients (18 female, mean age 77+/-11 years) with pacemaker indication due to tachybrady arrhythmias (n=34), and other indications (n=2). A standardized AT treatment of 8 sequences of ramp followed by six and four sequences burst pacing was programmed on after 1 month of tachycardia detection only. 5 consecutive sinus beats or 3 min with atrial rhythm not classified as AF or AT defined treatment success and was registered at 3 months follow-up.

RESULTS

2979 episodes (mean 85+/-316) in 17 patients (7 female) were treated and analyzed. The overall treatment success increased from 42+/-27% to 44+/-31% and 45+/-31% during the consecutive ATP sequences (ns). The average ATP success of the first ramp pacing sequences was 95+/-10%, the second ramp ATP sequence was successful in 3+/-6%, and the last ramp ATP sequence in 2+/-5%.

CONCLUSION

95% of the 45% treatment success of a standard AT treatment was achieved by the first ramp pacing sequence. Further antitachycardia pacing sequences did not increase the success rate significantly.

Device-based therapies for atrial fibrillation

Ablation of the atrioventricular conduction system and pacemaker implantation is the preferred procedure for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in whom a rate control strategy has been selected but in whom rate-controlling medications are intolerable or ineffective. Selection of standard right ventricular (RV) pacing versus biventricular pacing is individualized, based on the degree and etiology of left ventricular dysfunction. Atrial-based pacing is clearly preferable to ventricular-based pacing in patients with sick sinus syndrome, because it leads to a reduction in the development of AF. Emerging evidence indicates that excess RV pacing is deleterious, increasing AF, heart failure, and possibly mortality. Therefore, physiologic pacing with minimization of RV pacing is desirable. Atrial pacing algorithms that increase the frequency of atrial pacing have shown modest efficacy in the prevention of AF. Use of atrial pacing algorithms is reasonable for patients with a history of AF and standard bradycardia indications for permanent pacing in whom maintenance of sinus rhythm is desirable. Studies assessing novel and multiple site atrial pacing therapies have mixed results, without compelling evidence of clinically important benefit. The exceptions are biatrial and right atrial overdrive pacing immediately after cardiac surgery. Several studies have shown effective suppression of postoperative AF with their use. Device therapy (eg, atrial antitachycardia pacing and defibrillation) for the termination of AF is effective in reducing arrhythmia burden. However, improvement in clinically relevant end points is not established and indications are not clearly defined. If a patient lacks an indication for an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, we do not offer atrial defibrillation as a treatment option. Atrial arrhythmias may be better prevented by programming to avoid ventricular pacing than by specific atrial interventions.

Reducing atrial tachycardia and atrial fibrillation episodes with a prevention and treatment device and tailored treatment

BACKGROUND

Pacemaker treatment of known trigger mechanisms for atrial tachyarrhythmias (AT) and atrial fibrillation (AF) has shown reduction in the incidence of AF. A new arrhythmia management device, which included storage of AT/AF (for tailoring treatment) and three prevention algorithms and one for treatment, was examined in order to identify the influence on arrhythmia episodes over a 12-month follow-up (FU) period.

METHODS

Twenty-three consecutive patients with known tachybradyarrhythmias were examined. Seven patients had to be excluded (two outliers, four developed permanent AF, one had no detection algorithm turned on at implantation). The remaining 16 patients showed 2723 episodes (675 treated episodes) for evaluation of the effect on episodes/month/patient (e/m/p), treatment success, duration of episodes, circadian distribution and quality of life.

RESULTS

The AT/AF e/m/p were reduced from 37 +/- 102 e/m/p at 1-month FU to 16 +/- 48 e/m/p at 3-month FU, 15 +/- 48 e/m/p at 6-month FU and 10 +/- 28 e/m/p at 12-month FU (p < 0.05), according to fewer subjective symptoms. Treatment success remained stable during the observation period (29-40%). Only minor changes in the duration of episodes and the distribution of start times were observed.

CONCLUSION

Tailoring treatment by the pacemaker examined with several prevention and treatment algorithms reduces e/m/p and might be a promising supplement in the treatment of selected patients with known AT/AF and bradycardia.

Dual defibrillator improves quality of life and decreases hospitalizations in patients with drug refractory atrial fibrillation

AIM OF THE STUDY

to evaluate the impact of dual defibrillator implantation on quality of life and resource utilization in patients with drug refractory atrial fibrillation (AF) without prior ventricular arrhythmias.

METHODS

Forty patients (28 M, mean age 64 +/- 10) received a dual defibrillator Medtronic 7250. AF was persistent in 60% and paroxysmal in 40%.

RESULTS

The follow-up lasted 15 +/- 4 months (range 12-30). Eighty-five percent of patients had atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrences. Among 1366 treated episodes, overall success rate was 60.1% for antitachy pacing and 88.2% for atrial shock. Within one year after implant, arrhythmia related hospitalization number decreased from 1.5 +/- 2.0 to 0.4 +/- 0.8 ( p < 0.01) and 77% of patients were free from hospitalization. As regard to quality of life, Symptom Checklist/Frequency and Severity Scale improved after implant for all items and SF-36 questionnaire showed significant improvements in physical activities because of health problems and social activities. The patients assigned to early delivery of atrial shock after AF onset, when compared with the patients who did not accept atrial shock, showed a significant reduction of AF burden, a higher reduction of hospitalization number and a greater improvement of quality of life.

CONCLUSION

Dual defibrillator improved quality of life and decreased resource utilization in patients with drug refractory AF. Early delivering of atrial shock seems to be the most effective option.

Future prospects for implantable devices for atrial defibrillation

The success of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) led to the concept of a device that would terminate atrial fibrillation (AF) using an implantable device. Implantable devices for AF are undergoing rapid evolution. Currently used devices combine pacing and cardioversion therapies to prevent and to treat AE Recent studies have shown that these devices are safe and can decrease the incidence of AF and improve quality of life significantly. Implantable devices for atrial defibrillation are likely to have an increasing role in the near future, particularly when they are used in combination with ICD and cardiac resynchronization therapy in which AF is both common and its termination is clinically beneficial.

Rapid atrial pacing does not decrease the atrial defibrillation threshold

The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of preshock atrial pacing on the atrial defibrillation threshold (DFT) during internal cardioversion of AF. The implantable atrial defibrillator has been added to the therapeutic options for patients with recurrent episodes of persistent AF. Although the device is efficient in restoring sinus rhythm, patient discomfort is a limitation. Methods that lower the ADFT are needed. Eleven patients with AF underwent internal cardioversion. In a randomized, crossover design, ADFT testing was performed, applying a step-up protocol starting at 100 V. Rapid atrial pacing was performed with a right atrial catheter for 20 seconds at 90% of the average cycle length of the fibrillatory waves and was immediately followed by a biphasic defibrillation shock. At each energy level, pacing + shock was compared to shock only, until the level at which sinus rhythm was restored by both modes. The step-up protocol was thereafter repeated using the inverse sequence of the two modes. A total of 19 ADFTs were obtained. For 10 the ADFT was lower with pacing + shock, in 4 equal and in 5 higher, than with shock only. The ADFT (mean +/- SD) with pacing + shock was 260 +/- 84 V(3.4 +/- 2.9 J) and did not differ from shock only: 268 +/- 85 V(3.8 +/- 3.0 J) (P > 0.05). The coefficient of variation and the coefficient of reproducibility for pacing + shock was 16% and 60 V, respectively, and for shock only 17% and 61 V. Rapid atrial pacing did not influence the internal ADFT in AF. The randomized, crossover protocol used was reproducible between different modes, and seems useful when testing the impact of different interventions on the ADFT.

Atrial high rate episodes detected by pacemaker diagnostics predict death and stroke: report of the Atrial Diagnostics Ancillary Study of the MOde Selection Trial (MOST)

BACKGROUND

Some current pacing systems can automatically detect and record atrial tachyarrhythmias that may be asymptomatic. We prospectively studied a 312-patient (pt) subgroup of MOST (MOde Selection Trial), a 2010-patient, 6-year randomized trial of DDDR versus VVIR pacing in sinus node dysfunction (SND). The purpose of the study was to correlate atrial high rate events (AHREs) detected by pacemaker diagnostics with clinical outcomes.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Pacemakers were programmed to log an AHRE when the atrial rate was >220 bpm for 10 consecutive beats. Analysis was confined to patients with at least 1 AHRE duration exceeding 5 minutes. The 312 patients were median age 74 years, 55% female, and 60% had a history of SVT. 160 of 312 (51.3%) patients enrolled had at least 1 AHRE >5 minutes duration over median follow-up of 27 months. Cox proportional hazards analysis assessed the relationship of AHREs with clinical events, adjusting for prognostic variables and baseline covariates. The presence of any AHRE was an independent predictor of the following: total mortality (hazard ratio AHRE versus no AHRE and 95% confidence intervals=2.48 [1.25, 4.91], P=0.0092); death or nonfatal stroke (2.79 [1.51, 5.15], P=0.0011); and atrial fibrillation (5.93 [2.88, 12.2], P=0.0001). There was no significant effect of pacing mode on the presence or absence of AHREs.

CONCLUSIONS

AHRE detected by pacemakers in patients with SND identify patients that are more than twice as likely to die or have a stroke, and 6 times as likely to develop atrial fibrillation as similar patients without AHRE.

Atrial pacing for the prevention and termination of atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) affects about 2% of the general population and 8%-11% of those older than 65 years. The demand for effective therapeutic strategies for AF is anticipated to increase substantially as the proportion of the elderly population increases. Atrioventricular nodal ablation accompanied by permanent pacemaker implantation is an established option in elderly patients with intractable arrhythmia and poor ventricular rate control. However, it renders most patients pacemaker dependent and does not eliminate symptoms associated with loss of atrial transport or reduce the risk of stroke. The considerable limitations of rhythm or rate control strategies prompted interest in preventative atrial pacing, which may reduce the incidence of AF by either eliminating the triggers and/or by modifying the substrate of AF. Atrial or dual-chamber pacing has been proven to prevent or delay progression to permanent AF in elderly patients with sinus node dysfunction as compared with ventricular pacing. Patients with advanced atrial conduction delay may benefit from atrial resynchronization pacing. There may be additional benefits associated with the use of particular sites of pacing, specific pacing algorithms designed to target potential triggers of AF, and pace-termination of atrial tachycardia. Preventive and antitachycardia pacing algorithms incorporated in implantable cardioverter-defibrillators and pacemakers are currently under investigation and may offer a valuable alternative to antiarrhythmic drug therapy in elderly patients with left ventricular dysfunction at high risk of proarrhythmia or worsening heart failure. The evolution of hybrid therapy, in which two or more different strategies are employed in the same patient, may be the most effective approach to management of AF.

Current clinical perspectives on implantable devices for atrial defibrillation

The role of devices that deliver shock therapy for atrial fibrillation is still debated. Following technical improvements in catheter-based atrial defibrillation, implantable devices have become available either in the form of stand-alone atrial defibrillators or in the form of dual defibrillators. Although preliminary results do not support their use as a single, unique treatment for atrial fibrillation patients, in combination with drugs, pacing or other treatments such as ablation, atrial defibrillators should help appropriately selected groups of patients.

"Pills and pulses": hybrid therapy for atrial fibrillation

Nonpharmacologic techniques are being increasingly applied to the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). None of these techniques (other than maze surgery) begins to approach 100% efficacy for long-term elimination of arrhythmia. This review examines the evidence for "hybrid" therapy, using combinations of drug and nonpharmacologic treatments. The immediate success rate of electrical cardioversion can be increased with amiodarone or ibutilide, and a number of drugs reduce the risk of AF recurrence. Preventing or reversing electrical atrial remodeling is an attractive strategy for maintenance of sinus rhythm. However, the available evidence (relating to the use of verapamil) is limited and conflicting. Ablation of the cavotricuspid isthmus is effective when antiarrhythmic drugs given for AF give rise to typical flutter. Isthmus and other right atrial linear lesions are poor as a sole therapy for AF, but better when drugs are added. Better still is the combination of left atrial linear lesions with drugs. In patients with AF recurrence following focal ablation/pulmonary vein isolation procedures, drugs are an alternative to extensive linear ablation. Some studies indicate that pacing to prevent AF may be effective, but rarely without continued antiarrhythmic drug therapy. This may represent a specific effect or simply improved drug tolerance. Drugs also might assist pacemaker therapy by increasing the proportion of atrial arrhythmias that are highly organized and thus amenable to antitachycardia pacing. This and other forms of hybrid therapy will remain the subject of conjecture in the absence of controlled clinical trials, which are urgently needed.

Nonpharmacological approaches to atrial fibrillation

The mainstay of managing atrial fibrillation (AF) is drug therapy. In some patients, drug therapy is ineffective or not tolerated. This article reviews the current status of various nonpharmacological options for the treatment of AF.