OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to characterize the care pathway of post-MI patients and understand barriers to referral for further SCD risk stratification and management in patients meeting referral criteria.
METHODS: This prospective, nonrandomized, multi-nation study included patients ≥18 years of age, with an acute MI ≤30 days and left ventricular ejection fraction <50% ≤14 days post-MI. The primary endpoint was defined as the physician's decision to refer a patient for SCD stratification and management.
RESULTS: In total, 1,491 post-MI patients were enrolled (60.2 ± 12.0 years of age, 82.4% male). During the study, 26.7% (n = 398) of patients met criteria for further SCD risk stratification; however, only 59.3% of those meeting criteria (n = 236; 95% CI: 54.4%-64.0%) were referred for a visit. Of patients referred for SCD risk stratification and management, 94.9% (n = 224) attended the visit of which 56.7% (n =127; 95% CI: 50.1%-63.0%) met ICD indication criteria. Of patients who met ICD indication criteria, 14.2% (n = 18) were implanted.
CONCLUSIONS: We found that ∼40% of patients meeting criteria were not referred for further SCD risk stratification and management and ∼85% of patients who met ICD indications did not receive a guideline-directed ICD. Physician and patient reasons for refusing referral to SCD risk stratification and management or ICD implant varied by geography suggesting that improvement will require both physician- and patient-focused approaches. (Improve Sudden Cardiac Arrest [SCA] Bridge Study; NCT03715790).
METHODS: Patients with symptomatic AF and moderate to severe MR who underwent catheter ablation from 2011 to 2021 were retrospectively included in the study. Patients' baseline characteristics and electrophysiological features were examined. These patients were classified as group 1 with improved MR and group 2 with refractory MR after CA.
RESULTS: Fifty patients (age 60.2 ± 11.6 years, 29 males) were included in the study (32 in group 1 and 18 in group 2). Group 1 patients had a lower CHA2DS2-VASc score (1.7 ± 1.5 vs. 2.7 ± 1.5, P = 0.005) and had a lower incidence of hypertension (28.1% vs. 66.7%, P = 0.007) and diabetes mellitus (3.1% vs. 22.2%, P = 0.031) as compared to group 2 patients. Electroanatomic three-dimensional (3D) mapping showed that group 1 patients demonstrated less scars on the posterior bottom of the left atrium compared to group 2 patients (12.5% vs. 66.7%, P
METHOD: Patient baseline characteristics and electrophysiological parameters were examined to identify the predictors of atrial fibrillation recurrence following catheter ablation. The clinical outcomes of catheter ablation and medical therapy were compared using the propensity score matched method.
RESULTS: A total of 343 patients were enrolled, with 46 in the catheter ablation group and 297 in the medical therapy group. Among the catheter ablation group, 58.7% (n = 27) had persistent atrial fibrillation. The recurrence rate of atrial arrhythmia was 30.4% (n = 14) after an average follow-up duration of 7.7 years following catheter ablation. The only predictive factor for atrial fibrillation recurrence after catheter ablation was the left atrial diameter. When compared to medical therapy, catheter ablation demonstrated significantly better outcomes in terms of overall survival, freedom from heart failure hospitalization, improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction, and a greater reduction in left ventricular diameter and left atrial diameter after propensity score matching.
CONCLUSIONS: Therefore, catheter ablation proves to be effective in providing long-term control of atrial fibrillation in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy. In addition to standard heart failure care, catheter ablation significantly enhanced both morbidity and mortality outcomes and reversed structural remodeling when compared to heart failure medication alone.
METHODS AND RESULTS: This retrospective study included consecutive patients with NICM who underwent SAECG, biventricular substrate mapping, and ablation for ventricular arrhythmia (VA). Patients with baseline ventricular conduction disturbances were excluded. Patients who fulfilled at least one SAECG criterion were categorized into Group 1, and the other patients were categorized into Group 2. Baseline and ventricular substrate characteristics were compared between the two groups. The study included 58 patients (39 men, mean age 50.4 ± 15.5 years), with 34 and 24 patients in Groups 1 and 2, respectively. Epicardial mapping was performed in eight (23.5%) and six patients (25.0%) in Groups 1 and 2 (p = 0.897), respectively. Patients in Group 1 had a more extensive right ventricular (RV) low-voltage zone (LVZ) and scar area than those in Group 2. Group 1 had a larger epicardial LVZ than Group 2. Epicardial late potentials were more frequent in Group 1 than in Group 2. There were more arrhythmogenic foci within the RV outflow tract in Group 1 than in Group 2. There was no significant difference in long-term VA recurrence.
CONCLUSION: In our NICM population, a positive SAECG was associated with a larger RV endocardial scar, epicardial scar/late potentials, and a higher incidence of arrhythmogenic foci in the RV outflow tract.
METHODS: We conducted a two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) study to examine the genetically predicted effects of epigenetic age acceleration as measured by HannumAge (nine single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs)), Horvath Intrinsic Age (24 SNPs), PhenoAge (11 SNPs), and GrimAge (4 SNPs) on multiple cancers (i.e. breast, prostate, colorectal, ovarian and lung cancer). We obtained genome-wide association data for biological ageing from a meta-analysis (N = 34,710), and for cancer from the UK Biobank (N cases = 2671-13,879; N controls = 173,493-372,016), FinnGen (N cases = 719-8401; N controls = 74,685-174,006) and several international cancer genetic consortia (N cases = 11,348-122,977; N controls = 15,861-105,974). Main analyses were performed using multiplicative random effects inverse variance weighted (IVW) MR. Individual study estimates were pooled using fixed effect meta-analysis. Sensitivity analyses included MR-Egger, weighted median, weighted mode and Causal Analysis using Summary Effect Estimates (CAUSE) methods, which are robust to some of the assumptions of the IVW approach.
RESULTS: Meta-analysed IVW MR findings suggested that higher GrimAge acceleration increased the risk of colorectal cancer (OR = 1.12 per year increase in GrimAge acceleration, 95% CI 1.04-1.20, p = 0.002). The direction of the genetically predicted effects was consistent across main and sensitivity MR analyses. Among subtypes, the genetically predicted effect of GrimAge acceleration was greater for colon cancer (IVW OR = 1.15, 95% CI 1.09-1.21, p = 0.006), than rectal cancer (IVW OR = 1.05, 95% CI 0.97-1.13, p = 0.24). Results were less consistent for associations between other epigenetic clocks and cancers.
CONCLUSIONS: GrimAge acceleration may increase the risk of colorectal cancer. Findings for other clocks and cancers were inconsistent. Further work is required to investigate the potential mechanisms underlying the results.
FUNDING: FMB was supported by a Wellcome Trust PhD studentship in Molecular, Genetic and Lifecourse Epidemiology (224982/Z/22/Z which is part of grant 218495/Z/19/Z). KKT was supported by a Cancer Research UK (C18281/A29019) programme grant (the Integrative Cancer Epidemiology Programme) and by the Hellenic Republic's Operational Programme 'Competitiveness, Entrepreneurship & Innovation' (OΠΣ 5047228). PH was supported by Cancer Research UK (C18281/A29019). RMM was supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol and by a Cancer Research UK (C18281/A29019) programme grant (the Integrative Cancer Epidemiology Programme). RMM is a National Institute for Health Research Senior Investigator (NIHR202411). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. GDS and CLR were supported by the Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00011/1 and MC_UU_00011/5, respectively) and by a Cancer Research UK (C18281/A29019) programme grant (the Integrative Cancer Epidemiology Programme). REM was supported by an Alzheimer's Society project grant (AS-PG-19b-010) and NIH grant (U01 AG-18-018, PI: Steve Horvath). RCR is a de Pass Vice Chancellor's Research Fellow at the University of Bristol.