Background: The novel SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) is responsible for the global coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Small studies have shown a potential benefit of chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine±azithromycin for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019. Use of these medications alone, or in combination, can lead to a prolongation of the QT interval, possibly increasing the risk of Torsade de pointes and sudden cardiac death. Methods: Hospitalized patients treated with chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine±azithromycin from March 1 to the 23 at 3 hospitals within the Northwell Health system were included in this prospective, observational study. Serial assessments of the QT interval were performed. The primary outcome was QT prolongation resulting in Torsade de pointes. Secondary outcomes included QT prolongation, the need to prematurely discontinue any of the medications due to QT prolongation, and arrhythmogenic death. Results: Two hundred one patients were treated for coronavirus disease 2019 with chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine. Ten patients (5.0%) received chloroquine, 191 (95.0%) received hydroxychloroquine, and 119 (59.2%) also received azithromycin. The primary outcome of torsade de pointes was not observed in the entire population. Baseline corrected QT interval intervals did not differ between patients treated with chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine (monotherapy group) versus those treated with combination group (chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin; 440.6±24.9 versus 439.9±24.7 ms, P =0.834). The maximum corrected QT interval during treatment was significantly longer in the combination group versus the monotherapy group (470.4±45.0 ms versus 453.3±37.0 ms, P =0.004). Seven patients (3.5%) required discontinuation of these medications due to corrected QT interval prolongation. No arrhythmogenic deaths were reported. Conclusions: In the largest reported cohort of coronavirus disease 2019 patients to date treated with chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine±azithromycin, no instances of Torsade de pointes, or arrhythmogenic death were reported. Although use of these medications resulted in QT prolongation, clinicians seldomly needed to discontinue therapy. Further study of the need for QT interval monitoring is needed before final recommendations can be made.

Background: The Subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) is safe and effective for sudden cardiac death prevention. However, patients in previous S-ICD studies had fewer comorbidities, less left ventricular dysfunction and received more inappropriate shocks (IAS) than in typical transvenous (TV)-ICD trials. The UNTOUCHED trial was designed to evaluate the IAS rate in a more typical, contemporary ICD patient population implanted with the S-ICD using standardized programming and enhanced discrimination algorithms. Methods: Primary prevention patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 35% and no pacing indications were included. Generation 2 or 3 S-ICD devices were implanted and programmed with rate-based therapy delivery for rates ≥ 250 beats per minute (bpm) and morphology discrimination for rates ≥200 and < 250 bpm. Patients were followed for 18 months. The primary endpoint was the IAS free rate compared to a 91.6% performance goal, derived from the results for the ICD-only patients in the MADIT-RIT study. Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed to evaluate event-free rates for IAS, all cause shock, and complications. Multivariable proportional hazard analysis was performed to determine predictors of endpoints. Results: S-ICD implant was attempted in 1116 patients and 1111 patients were included in post-implant follow-up analysis. The cohort had a mean age of 55.8±12.4 years, 25.6% women, 23.4% black race, 53.5% with ischemic heart disease, 87.7% with symptomatic heart failure and a mean LVEF of 26.4±5.8%. Eighteen-month freedom from IAS was 95.9% (Lower confidence limit LCL 94.8%). Predictors of reduced incidence of IAS were implanting the most recent generation of device, using the three-incision technique, no history of atrial fibrillation, and ischemic etiology. The 18-month all cause shock free rate was 90.6% (LCL 89.0%), meeting the prespecified performance goal of 85.8%. Conversion success rate for appropriate, discrete episodes was 98.4%. Complication free rate at 18 months was 92.7%. Conclusions: This study demonstrates high efficacy and safety with contemporary S-ICD devices and programming despite the relatively high incidence of co-morbidities in comparison to earlier S-ICD trials. The inappropriate shock rate (3.1% at one year) is the lowest reported for the S-ICD and lower than many TV ICD studies using contemporary programming to reduce IAS. Clinical Trial Registration: URL https://clinicaltrials.gov Unique Identifier NCT02433379

In patients with scar-related VT undergoing catheter ablation, pLVAD support was able to safely maintain end-organ perfusion despite extended periods of hemodynamically unstable VT. Randomized studies are necessary to determine whether this enhanced ability to perform entrainment and activation mapping will translate into a higher rate of clinical success.

No abstract

No abstract