Explore the vast range of titles available.

Smartwatch and fitness band wearable consumer electronics can passively measure pulse rate from the wrist using photoplethysmography (PPG). Identification of pulse irregularity or variability from these data has the potential to identify atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter (AF, collectively). The rapidly expanding consumer base of these devices allows for detection of undiagnosed AF at scale. The Apple Heart Study is a prospective, single arm pragmatic study that has enrolled 419,093 participants (NCT03335800). The primary objective is to measure the proportion of participants with an irregular pulse detected by the Apple Watch (Apple Inc, Cupertino, CA) with AF on subsequent ambulatory ECG patch monitoring. The secondary objectives are to: 1) characterize the concordance of pulse irregularity notification episodes from the Apple Watch with simultaneously recorded ambulatory ECGs; 2) estimate the rate of initial contact with a health care provider within 3 months after notification of pulse irregularity. The study is conducted virtually, with screening, consent and data collection performed electronically from within an accompanying smartphone app. Study visits are performed by telehealth study physicians via video chat through the app, and ambulatory ECG patches are mailed to the participants. The results of this trial will provide initial evidence for the ability of a smartwatch algorithm to identify pulse irregularity and variability which may reflect previously unknown AF. The Apple Heart Study will help provide a foundation for how wearable technology can inform the clinical approach to AF identification and screening.

BackgroundCardiovascular and arrhythmic events have been reported in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. However, arrhythmia manifestations and treatment strategies used in these patients have not been well-described. We sought to better understand the cardiac arrhythmic manifestations and treatment strategies in hospitalized COVID-19 patients through a worldwide cross-sectional survey.MethodsThe Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) sent an online survey (via SurveyMonkey) to electrophysiology (EP) professionals (physicians, scientists, and allied professionals) across the globe. The survey was active from March 27 to April 13, 2020.ResultsA total of 1197 respondents completed the survey with 50% of respondents from outside the USA, representing 76 countries and 6 continents. Of respondents, 905 (76%) reported having COVID-19-positive patients in their hospital. Atrial fibrillation was the most commonly reported tachyarrhythmia whereas severe sinus bradycardia and complete heart block were the most common bradyarrhythmias. Ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation arrest and pulseless electrical activity were reported by 4.8% and 5.6% of respondents, respectively. There were 140 of 631 (22.2%) respondents who reported using anticoagulation therapy in all COVID-19-positive patients who did not otherwise have an indication. One hundred fifty-five of 498 (31%) reported regular use of hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine (HCQ) + azithromycin (AZM); concomitant use of AZM was more common in the USA. Sixty of 489 respondents (12.3%) reported having to discontinue therapy with HCQ + AZM due to significant QTc prolongation and 20 (4.1%) reported cases of Torsade de Pointes in patients on HCQ/chloroquine and AZM. Amiodarone was the most common antiarrhythmic drug used for ventricular arrhythmia management.ConclusionsIn this global survey of > 1100 EP professionals regarding hospitalized COVID-19 patients, a variety of arrhythmic manifestations were observed, ranging from benign to potentially life-threatening. Observed adverse events related to use of HCQ + AZM included prolonged QTc requiring drug discontinuation as well as Torsade de Pointes. Large prospective studies to better define arrhythmic manifestations as well as the safety of treatment strategies in COVID-19 patients are warranted.

Purpose of Review Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained cardiac arrhythmia. The estimated lifetime risk of developing AF is higher in men; however, due to differences in life expectancy, the overall prevalence is higher among women, particularly in the older age group. Sex differences play an important role in the pathophysiology, presentation, and clinical outcomes of AF. Awareness of these differences minimizes the potential for disparities in AF management. Our review summarizes the current literature on sex differences in AF, including the epidemiology, pathophysiology, risk factors, clinical symptomatology, mechanisms, treatment, and outcomes. We also explore the implications of these differences for clinical practice and future research. Recent Findings Women are more likely to present with atypical symptoms, have a higher stroke risk, and have a worse quality of life with AF when compared to men. Despite this, they are less likely to receive rhythm control strategies and anticoagulants. Summary The sex-based differences in AF pathology and management might be a combination of inherent biological and hormonal differences, and implicit bias of the research entities and treating clinicians. Our review stresses the need for further sex-specific research in the pathophysiology of AF and opens a dialogue on personalized medicine, where management strategies can be tailored to individual patient characteristics, including sex.

Clinical trials have demonstrated the benefit of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) for the primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in selected high-risk individuals. Because of small numbers of women enrolled in these trials, outcomes for women after hospital discharge have not been well described. We compared procedure-related complications and outcomes after hospital discharge between men and women undergoing single- or dual-chamber ICD implantation for primary prevention. In patients 65 years or older with Medicare fee-for-service coverage, we identified 38,912 initial implants (25% women) who received single- or dual-chamber ICDs for primary prevention between January 2006 and December 2009 in the NCDR and evaluated gender differences in outcomes. Women had greater comorbidity and more advanced heart failure (HF) at the time of ICD implantation than did men. Device-related complications, death at 6 months, all-cause readmissions, and HF readmissions at 6 months were significantly more common in women (7.2% vs 4.8%, 6.5% vs 5.6%, 37.2% vs 31.7%, and 14.0% vs 10.0% respectively; P < .001 for all). Women continued to have higher odds of procedural complications (odds ratio [OR] 1.39, 95% CI 1.26-1.53, P < .001), 6-month all-cause readmission (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.16-1.28, P < .001), and 6-month HF readmission (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.23-1.42, P < .001), with a trend toward higher 6-month mortality (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.98-1.20, P = .123), compared with men, after adjusting for differences in baseline characteristics and device type (single vs dual chamber). Among older patients receiving ICDs for primary prevention in clinical practice, women experience worse outcomes than do men. Reasons for gender differences in outcomes are poorly understood and require further investigation.

Purpose of Review A significant proportion of patients infected by the severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus (SARS-CoV2) (COVID-19) also have disorders affecting the cardiac rhythm. In this review, we provide an in-depth review of the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying the associated arrhythmic complications of COVID-19 infection and provide pragmatic, evidence-based recommendations for the clinical management of these conditions. Recent Findings Arrhythmic manifestations of COVID-19 include atrial arrhythmias such as atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter, sinus node dysfunction, atrioventricular conduction abnormalities, ventricular tachyarrhythmias, sudden cardiac arrest, and cardiovascular dysautonomias including the so-called long COVID syndrome. Various pathophysiological mechanisms have been implicated, such as direct viral invasion, hypoxemia, local and systemic inflammation, changes in ion channel physiology, immune activation, and autonomic dysregulation. The development of atrial or ventricular arrhythmias in hospitalized COVID-19 patients has been shown to portend a higher risk of in-hospital death. Summary Arrhythmic complications from acute COVID-19 infection are commonly encountered in clinical practice, and COVID-19 patients with cardiac complications tend to have worse clinical outcomes than those without. Management of these arrhythmias should be based on published evidence-based guidelines, with special consideration of the acuity of COVID-19 infection, concomitant use of antimicrobial and anti-inflammatory drugs, and the transient nature of some rhythm disorders. Some manifestations, such as the long COVID syndrome, may lead to residual symptoms several months after acute infection. As the pandemic evolves with the discovery of new SARS-CoV2 variants, development and use of newer anti-viral and immuno-modulator drugs, and the increasing adoption of vaccination, clinicians must remain vigilant for other arrhythmic manifestations that may occur in association with this novel but potentially deadly disease.

Using a smartphone app, the investigators recruited 419,297 participants to be monitored for irregular pulses. Patterns suggesting atrial fibrillation were detected in 2161 participants who then received ECG monitoring devices to be worn for 7 days to confirm the presence or absence of atrial fibrillation.

The prevalence of CVD in pregnant people is estimated to be around 1 to 4%, and it is imperative that clinicians that care for obstetric patients can promptly and accurately diagnose and manage common cardiovascular conditions as well as understand when to promptly refer to a high-risk obstetrics team for a multidisciplinary approach for managing more complex patients. In pregnant patients with CVD, arrhythmias and heart failure (HF) are the most common complications that arise. The difficulty in the management of these patients arises from variable degrees of severity of both arrhythmia and heart failure presentation. For example, arrhythmia-based complications in pregnancy can range from isolated premature ventricular contractions to life-threatening arrhythmias such as sustained ventricular tachycardia. HF also has variable manifestations in pregnant patients ranging from mild left ventricular impairment to patients with advanced heart failure with acute decompensated HF. In high-risk patients, a collaboration between the general obstetrics, maternal-fetal medicine, and cardiovascular teams (which may include cardio-obstetrics, electrophysiology, adult congenital, or advanced HF)—physicians, nurses and allied professionals—can provide the multidisciplinary approach necessary to properly risk-stratify these women and provide appropriate management to improve outcomes.

[Display omitted] Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with an increased risk of dementia. Emerging evidence suggests AF suppression is associated with reduced risk of dementia, but the optimal strategy to achieve this is unknown. We sought to compare the risk of dementia in patients with AF who underwent catheter ablation (CA) versus anti-arrhythmic drug (AAD) treatment. Using the 2000 to 2021 Optum Clinformatics database, patients with AF who underwent CA versus AAD treatment (≥1 prescription fill for ≥2 different AADs) were identified and propensity score matched overall and within sex subgroups. A cause-specific hazard model was performed to assess dementia overall and in sex-specific subgroups. After matching, there were 19,088 patients per group. CA was associated with a 41% lower risk of dementia compared with AAD alone (1.9% vs 3.3%; hazard ratio [HR] 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.52-0.67, log-rank P < .0001). When examined by sex, dementia risk reduction associated with CA versus AAD use alone was observed among both males (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.46-0.66) and females (HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.50-0.72). Though not studied as a primary outcome, patients treated with CA were also observed to have 49% lower associated risk of mortality compared with AAD only (HR 0.51 95% CI 0.46-0.55, P < .0001). Among patients treated for AF, CA was associated with significantly lower risk of dementia and death compared with AADs only. These reductions in risk associated with CA versus AAD were seen in both males and females.