Background: Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter‐defibrillators (S‐ICDs) have been of great interest as an alternative to transvenous implantable cardioverter‐defibrillators (TV‐ICDs). No meta‐analyses synthesizing data from high‐quality studies have yet been published. Methods and Results: An electronic literature search was conducted to retrieve randomized controlled trials or propensity score–matched studies comparing S‐ICD against TV‐ICD in patients with an implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator indication. The primary outcomes were device‐related complications and lead‐related complications. Secondary outcomes were inappropriate shocks, appropriate shock, all‐cause mortality, and infection. All outcomes were pooled under random‐effects meta‐analyses and reported as risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs. Kaplan–Meier curves of device‐related complications were digitized to retrieve individual patient data and pooled under a 1‐stage meta‐analysis using Cox models to determine hazard ratios (HRs) of patients undergoing S‐ICD versus TV‐ICD. A total of 5 studies (2387 patients) were retrieved. S‐ICD had a similar rate of device‐related complications compared with TV‐ICD (RR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.33–1.04]; P =0.070), but a significantly lower lead‐related complication rate (RR, 0.14 [95% CI, 0.07–0.29]; P <0.0001). The individual patient data–based 1‐stage stratified Cox model for device‐related complications across 4 studies yielded no significant difference (shared‐frailty HR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.61–1.09]; P =0.167), but visual inspection of pooled Kaplan–Meier curves suggested a divergence favoring S‐ICD. Secondary outcomes did not differ significantly between both modalities. Conclusions: S‐ICD is clinically superior to TV‐ICD in terms of lead‐related complications while demonstrating comparable efficacy and safety. For device‐related complications, S‐ICD may be beneficial over TV‐ICD in the long term. These indicate that S‐ICD is likely a suitable substitute for TV‐ICD in patients requiring implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator implantation without a pacing indication.

Objective The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the various modalities available for extended ECG monitoring in the detection of atrial fibrillation (AF) following a cryptogenic stroke. Methods MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched from January 2011 to November 2021. All randomised controlled trials and prospective cohort studies including the use of extended ECG monitoring >24 hours with a minimum duration of AF of 30 s in patients with either cryptogenic strokes or transient ischaemic attacks were included. A random-effects model was used to pool effect estimates of AF detection rates from different ECG modalities. Results 3924 studies were identified, of which 47 were included reporting on a pooled population of 6448 patients with cryptogenic stroke. The pooled AF rate for implantable loop recorders (ILRs) increased from 4.9% (3.0%–7.9%) at 1 month to 38.4% (20.4%–60.2%) at 36 months. Mobile cardiac outpatient telemetry (MCOT) had a significantly higher pooled AF detection rate of 12.8% (8.9%–17.9%) versus 4.9% (3.0%–7.9%) for ILR at 1 month (p<0.0001). Predictors for AF detection include duration of monitoring (p<0.0001) and age (p<0.0001) for ILRs, but only age for MCOTs (p<0.020). Conclusion MCOT has a higher rate of detection at 1 month and is less invasive. Beyond 1 month, compliance becomes a significant limitation for MCOT. MCOT may be a reasonable alternative AF screening tool for patients with cryptogenic stroke if ILR is not available. PROSPERO registration number CRD42022297782.

We present a case of redo atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation for pulmonary vein reconnection. In mapping of posterior wall of left upper pulmonary vein (LUPV) with HD grid, a new and unique multipolar mapping catheter, it demonstrated presence of local electrocardiogram signals (EGM). But during mapping with the Tacticath ablation catheter, these signals were not visible. Nevertheless, ablation at this point resulted in isolation of LUPV. The unique mapping technology offered by HD grid mapping catheter may enable us to discover local EGM not otherwise visible in conventional bipole parallel recordings, to have more accurate maps and deliver for effective therapies.

This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the performance of atrial sensing dipole in single lead implantable cardioverter defibrillator (VDD-ICD) recipients in particular diagnosing new-onset atrial high-rate episodes (AHREs) defined as rate threshold of 200 beats per minute, or subclinical atrial fibrillation (SCAF) defined as device-detected AF without symptoms. We comprehensively searched PubMed, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Studies comparing contemporary single- and dual-chamber ICD (VVI-/DDD-ICD) versus VDD-ICD were included. Restricted maximum likelihood method for random effect model and Mantel-Haenszel method for fixed effect model were used to estimate the effect size of new-onset AHREs, or SCAF detection in each group. Three prospective studies were identified and total of 991 participants were included. There were 330 (33.3%) in VDD-ICD and 661 (66.7%) in VVI-/DDD-ICD. Most (78%) participants were men. Median follow-up was from 365 days to 847 days. VDD-ICD has a higher likelihood of detecting AHREs or SCAF as compared to VVI-/DDD-ICD [(OR random effect : 2.6; 95% CI: 1.2, 5.8; p = .018); I-squared = 67.8%, p = .019]. This difference was more apparently seen in the comparison between VDD-ICD and VVI-ICD [(OR random effect: 3.8; 95% CI: 2.1, 6.6, p < .001), I-squared = 0.0%, p = .518]. The result is same as fixed effect. Rate of AHREs detection observed in VDD-ICD was not statistically different when compared to the only group with DDD-ICD from SENSE trial. In conclusion, this meta-analysis reveals that the use of floating atrial sensing dipole in VDD-ICD increases the detection of new-onset AHREs or SCAF when compared to VVI-ICD, with similar atrial sensing performance to DDD-ICD.

Introduction: MyDiagnostick is an atrial fibrillation (AF) screening tool that has been validated in the Caucasian population in the primary care setting. Methods: In our study, we compared MyDiagnostick with manual pulse check for AF screening in the community setting. Results: In our cohort of 671 candidates from a multi-ethnic Asian population, AF prevalence was found to be 1.78%. Of 12 candidates, 6 (50.0%) had a previous history of AF and another 6 (50.0%) were newly diagnosed with AF. Candidates found to have AF during the screening were older (72.0 ± 11.7 years vs. 56.0 ± 13.0 years, P < 0.0001) and had a higher CHADSVASC risk score (2.9 ± 1.5 vs. 1.5 ± 1.1, P = 0.0001). MyDiagnostick had a sensitivity of 100.0% and a specificity of 96.2%. In comparison, manual pulse check had a sensitivity of 83.3% and a specificity of 98.9%. Conclusion: MyDiagnostick is a simple AF screening device that can be reliably used by non-specialist professionals in the community setting. Its sensitivity and specificity are comparable and validated across various studies performed in different population cohorts.