Bibliothek

Notizen: Repolarizing Potassium Currents in Atrial Fibrillation, introduction: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with important alterations in cardiac ion channels that cause shortening and impaired rate adaptation of atrial repolarization. The mechanisms underlying potassium current remodeling in human AF are not clear. We investigated the effects of AF on the gene expression of the Kv4.3, Kv1.4, and Kv1.5 potassium channel subunits and correlated the findings with the transient outward (I10) and the sustained outward (Isus or Ikur) potassium current. Methods and Results: Semiquantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction was used to evaluate mRNA expression, and ion currents were studied with the patch clamp technique in right atrial appendages from patients in AF and compared with those from patients in stable sinus rhythm (SR). The presence of AF was associated with a 61% reduction in Kv4.3 mRNA expression (P 〈 0.001 vs SR), which was paralleled by a reduction in Ito current densities in this group of patients (i.e., at ± 50 mV: 7.44 ± 0.76 pA/pF in SR and 1.24 ± 0.28 pA/pF in AF; P 〈 0.001 vs SR). mRNA levels of Kv 1.4 were identical in the two groups. AF did not affect either the gene expression of Kv 1.5 or the current densities of Isus. Conclusion: Chronic AF in humans reduces Ito by transcriptional down-regulation of the Kv4.3 potassium channel. Altered gene expression is an important component of the electrical remodeling process and may contribute to repolarization abnormalities in AF.

Notizen: KETTERING, K., et al.: Enhanced Detection Criteria in Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators: Sensitivity and Specificity of the Stability Algorithm at Different Heart Rates. Sensitivity and Specificity of the Stability Algorithm at Different Heart Rates. The lack of specificity in the detection of ventricular tachyarrhythmias remains a major clinical problem in the therapy with ICDs. The stability criterion has been shown to be useful in discriminating ventricular tachyarrhythmias characterized by a small variation in cycle lengths from AF with rapid ventricular response presenting a higher degree of variability of RR intervals. But RR variability decreases with increasing heart rate during AF. Therefore, the aim of the study was to determine if the sensitivity and specificity of the STABILITY algorithm for spontaneous tachyarrhythmias is related to ventricular rate. Forty-two patients who had received an ICD (CPI Ventak Mini I, II, III or Ventak AV) were enrolled in the study. Two hundred ninety-eight episodes of AF with rapid ventricular response and 817 episodes of ventricular tachyarrhythmias were analyzed. Sensitivity and specificity in the detection of ventricular tachyarrhythmias were calculated at different heart rates. When a stability value of 30 ms was programmed the result was a sensitivity of 82.7% and a specificity of 91.4% in the detection of slow ventricular tachyarrhythmias (heart rate 〈 150 beats/min). When faster ventricular tachyarrhythmias with rates between 150 and 169 beats/min (170–189 beats/min) were analyzed, a stability value of 30 ms provided a sensitivity of 94.5% (94.7%) and a specificity of 76.5% (54.0%). For arrhythmia episodes ≥ 190 beats/min, the same stability value resulted in a sensitivity of 78.2% and a specificity of 41.0%. Even when other stability values were taken into consideration, no acceptable sensitivity/specificity values could be obtained in this subgroup. RR variability decreases with increasing heart rate during AF while RR variability remains almost constant at different cycle lengths during ventricular tachyarrhythmias. Thus, acceptable performance of the STABILITY algorithm appears to be limited to ventricular rate zones 〈 170 beats/min.

Notizen: ICDs provide protection against sudden cardiac death in patients with life-threatening arrhythmias. Nevertheless, efficacy of defibrillation remains an important issue to guarantee the future safety of patients who receive an ICD. There is a significant number of patients who need an additional subcutaneous lead to obtain a defibrillation safety margin of at least 10 J between the maximum output of the ICD and the energy needed for ventricular defibrillation. However, few data exists about the long-term performance of different types of subcutaneous leads. Therefore, the aim of this study was to analyze the long-term experience with three different types of subcutaneous leads. The study included 132 patients (109 men, 23 women; mean age 59.8 years [SD ± 10.7 years]). All of them received a subcutaneous lead in addition to a single chamber or dual chamber ICD between October 1990 and April 2002. Two patients received a second subcutaneous lead after the first lead had been removed so that a total of 134 subcutaneous leads were evaluated. Inclusion criteria for the implantation of an additional subcutaneous lead were (1) unsuccessful ventricular defibrillation at implant without a subcutaneous lead, (2) insufficient safety margin (〈 10 J) between the maximum output of the ICD and the energy needed for ventricular defibrillation, or (3) clinical evaluation of a new subcutaneous lead (Medtronic 13014). There were no significant differences between the three study groups with regard to age, sex, underlying cardiac disease, left ventricular ejection fraction, NYHA class assessment and clinical arrhythmia. The results of the DFT testing during follow-up (prehospital discharge test and 1 and 3 years) were compared to the baseline value obtained during the implantation procedure. All lead related complications were analyzed. Eighty-two single element subcutaneous array electrodes (SQ-A1), 31 subcutaneous three-finger electrodes (SQ-A3), and 21 subcutaneous patch electrodes (SQ-P) were implanted during the study period. The median follow-up was 1,499 days (25th percentile: 798 days, 75th percentile: 1,976 days) in the SQ-A1 group, 2,209 days (25th percentile: 1,242 days, 75th percentile: 2,710 days) in the SQ-A3 group, and 1,419 days (25th percentile: 787 days, 75th percentile: 2,838 days) in the SQ-P group. None of the three groups had a significant change of the DFT during follow-up compared to baseline. Major complications occurred in six (7.3%) patients in group SQ-A1 and in two (9.5%) patients in group SQ-P. There were no major complications in group SQ-A3. Kaplan-Meier curves analyzing freedom from subcutaneous lead related complications did not show a significant difference between the three study groups (P = 0.16). SQ-A1, SQ-A3, and SQ-P leads provide stable DFTs during long-term follow-up. Major complications are rare. However, a careful follow-up including chest radiographs at regular intervals is needed to detect potentially fatal complications like lead fractures.

Notizen: KETTERING, K., et al.: Efficacy of Metoprolol and Sotalol in the Prevention of Recurrences of Sustained Ventricular Tachyarrhythmias in Patients with an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator. ICDs provide protection against sudden cardiac death in patients with life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias. Nevertheless, most ICD recipients receive adjunctive antiarrhythmic drug therapy to reduce the number of recurrent episodes and ICD discharges. The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy of metoprolol and d,l-sotalol in preventing VT/VF recurrences in patients with an ICD in a prospective, randomized trial. One hundred patients (83 men, 17 women; mean age 59 years, SD ± 11 years) were randomized to receive metoprolol or sotalol after implantation of an ICD. There were no significant differences between the two groups with regard to age, sex, underlying cardiac disease, left ventricular ejection fraction, NYHA class assessment and clinical arrhythmia. The median follow-up was 728 days (25th percentile: 530 days, 75th percentile: 943 days) in the metoprolol group and 727 days (25th percentile: 472 days, 75th percentile: 1,223 days) in the sotalol group (P = 0.52). Thirty-three patients treated with metoprolol and 30 patients receiving sotalol had at least one episode during the follow-up. Event-free survival curves were generated for the two treatment arms using the Kaplan-Meier method and showed no significant difference (P = 0.68). Eight patients treated with metoprolol and six patients treated with sotalol died during follow-up. Total mortality was not significantly different between the two study groups (P = 0.43). Metoprolol is as efficacious as sotalol in preventing VT/VF recurrences in patients with an ICD.