Background: Patients with sepsis are at risk for developing sepsis-induced cardiomyopathy (SIC). Previous studies offer inconsistent results regarding the association of SIC and mortality. This study sought to assess whether SIC is linked to mortality in patients with sepsis and to evaluate predictors of the development of SIC.Methods: In this retrospective study, patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit with a diagnosis of sepsis in the absence of acute coronary syndrome were included. SIC was identified using transthoracic echo and was defined by a new onset decline in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤50%, or ≥10% decline in LVEF compared to baseline in patients with a history of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed using the R software program.Results: Of the 359 patients in the final analysis, 19 (5.3%) had SIC. Eight (42.1%) of the 19 patients in the SIC group and 60 (17.6%) of the 340 patients in the non-SIC group died during hospitalization. SIC was associated with an increased risk for all-cause in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR], 4.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15–18.69; P=0.03). Independent predictors for the development of SIC were albumin level (OR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.23–0.93; P=0.03) and culture positivity (OR, 8.47; 95% CI, 2.24–55.61; P=0.006). Concomitant right ventricular hypokinesis was noted in 13 (68.4%) of the 19 SIC patients.Conclusions: SIC was associated with an increased risk for all-cause in-hospital mortality. Low albumin level and culture positivity were independent predictors of SIC.

Aims: Loop diuretics have become a mainstay of chronic heart failure management. Furosemide and torsemide are the two most common loop diuretics; nevertheless, there is inconsistent evidence regarding the optimal choice of loop diuretic with respect to clinical outcomes. Methods: Medline and Cochrane Databases were systemically reviewed for randomized and observational studies comparing patients with chronic heart failure on oral torsemide versus oral furosemide and their association with intermediate-term outcomes (5–12 months) through May 2018. Odds ratios with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used for outcomes. A random effect model was used to account for heterogeneity among studies. Heterogeneity was assessed with the Higgins I-square statistic. Results: A total of 8127 patients were included in the analysis from a total of 14 studies (10 randomized, four observational); 5729 patients were prescribed furosemide and 2398 were given torsemide. There was no significant difference in intermediate-term mortality among heart failure patients on furosemide compared with torsemide [odds ratio (OR) 1.01, CI 0.64–1.59, I ² = 65.8%]; however, furosemide was associated with an increased risk of heart failure readmissions (OR 2.16, CI 1.28–2.64, I ² = 0.0%). Heart failure patients taking torsemide were more likely to have an improvement in New York Heart Association class compared with those on furosemide (OR 0.73, CI 0.58–0.93, I ² = 19.6%). Conclusion: Torsemide is associated with a reduction in intermediate-term heart failure readmissions and improvement in New York Heart Association class compared with furosemide but is not associated with a reduced mortality risk. Additional randomized trials are needed to examine the impact of loop diuretics on clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure.

BACKGROUND: The intramural site of origin is a major cause of ablation failure of ventricular arrhythmias, and the optimal strategy is unclear. This study investigated the efficacy of a stepwise ablation approach for intramural outflow tract (OT) premature ventricular complexes (PVCs) guided by mapping of the septal coronary venous system. METHODS: Consecutive patients with OT PVCs were included, in whom an intramural origin was confirmed by demonstration of earliest activation in a septal coronary vein. Radiofrequency ablation was performed from the closest endocardial site in the left ventricular OT or right ventricular OT independent of the local activation time. If there was no suppression by endocardial ablation, then retrograde transvenous ethanol infusion with a single- or double-balloon technique was performed, targeting the earliest septal coronary vein. If venous anatomy was not suitable for ethanol ablation or if this failed, then bipolar ablation was performed. RESULTS: Sixty patients (age 61±12 years; 78% men) were included. The mean QRS duration of the PVC was 150.8±17.6 ms with a maximum deflection index of 0.51±0.11, and the most common ECG pattern was a left bundle branch block with inferior axis and V3 transition (63%), followed by a right bundle branch block with inferior axis and no transition (27%). Earliest ventricular activation (28.6±11.2 ms before QRS) was recorded in the left ventricular annular vein in 15 cases and a septal perforator vein in 45 cases. Acute PVC suppression at the end of the procedure was achieved in all cases. In 87% of cases (n=52), endocardial ablation from the endocardial left ventricular OT, right ventricular OT, or both was successful in eliminating the PVC. In the remaining 8 patients, the PVC was eliminated with ethanol infusion (n=7) and bipolar ablation (n=1). Complications included one case of pericardial effusion related to venous mapping. During follow-up (17±24 months), the PVC burden was reduced from 28±12% to 2.3±4.7%, and long-term success (≥80% burden reduction) was 88%. CONCLUSIONS: Most intramural OT PVCs can be successfully eliminated with endocardial ablation adjacent to the earliest intramural activation site. A high success rate is achieved when following a stepwise approach, with bailout ablation strategies required in a minority of cases.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing first-time atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation can benefit from targeting non-pulmonary vein (PV) triggers. Preprocedural identification of high-risk individuals can guide planning of ablation strategy. This study aimed to create a preprocedural screening tool to identify patients at risk of non-PV triggers during first-time AF ablation. METHODS: All patients who underwent first-time AF ablation at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania between 2018 and 2022 were identified. Those who underwent non-PV trigger provocative maneuvers or had spontaneous non-PV trigger firing were included. Non-PV triggers were defined as non-PV ectopic beats triggering AF or sustained focal atrial tachycardia that occurred spontaneously, after AF cardioversion, or after standard provocative maneuvers. The provocative maneuvers included incremental isoproterenol infusion (3, 6, 12, and 20–30 µg/min) and an atrial burst pacing protocol. Risk factors associated with non-PV triggers in a stepwise multivariable logistic regression model with backward elimination were used to create a risk score. RESULTS: A total of 163 (8.0%) of 2038 patients had non-PV triggers during first-time AF ablation. Based on the multivariable model, we created a risk score using female sex (1 point; odds ratio [OR], 1.90 [95% CI, 1.36–2.67]), sinus node dysfunction (1 point; OR, 1.84 [95% CI, 1.04–3.24]), prior cardiac surgery (1 point; OR, 2.26 [95% CI, 1.45–3.53]), moderate to severe left atrial enlargement (2 points; OR, 3.43 [95% CI, 2.46–4.79]), and cardiac sarcoidosis/amyloidosis (4 points; OR, 7.24 [95% CI, 3.03–17.33]). Internal validation using bootstrap resampling showed an optimism-adjusted C statistic of 0.715 (95% CI, 0.678–0.751). Among all first-time AF ablations, 68.1% of procedures were low-risk for non-PV triggers (scores 0–1, 4.3% risk), 17.8% were intermediate-risk (score 2, 10.5% risk), and 14.1% were high-risk (score ≥3, 22.6% risk). CONCLUSIONS: A preprocedural screening tool can classify patients based on their risk of non-PV triggers during first-time AF ablation. This risk score can guide operators to identify patients who would benefit most from adjunctive non-PV trigger testing. However, further validation is needed to confirm these findings.

Background: Right ventricular (RV) dysfunction is associated with poor clinical outcomes in critically ill sepsis patients, but its pathophysiology and predictors are incompletely characterized. We aimed to investigate the predictors of RV dysfunction and its outcomes in sepsis patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Methods: This is a single-center retrospective cohort study of adult patients admitted to the ICU for sepsis who had echocardiography within 72 h of diagnosis. Patients with acute coronary syndrome, acute decompensated heart failure, or significant valvular dysfunction were excluded. RV dysfunction was defined as the presence of RV dilation, hypokinesis, or both. Demographics and clinical outcomes were obtained from electronic medical records. Results: A total of 361 patients were included in our study—47 with and 314 without RV dysfunction. The mean age of the population was 66.8 years and 54.6% were females. Compared to those without RV dysfunction, patients with RV dysfunction were more likely to require mechanical ventilation (63.8% vs. 43.9%, p = 0.01) and vasopressor support (61.7% vs. 36.6%, p < 0.01). On multivariate logistic regression analysis, increasing age (OR 1.03, 95% C.I. 1.00–1.06), a history of HIV infection (OR 5.88, 95% C.I. 1.57–22.11) and atrial fibrillation (OR 4.34, 95% C.I. 1.83–10.29), and presence of LV systolic dysfunction (OR 14.40, 95% C.I. 5.63–36.84) were independently associated with RV dysfunction. Patients with RV dysfunction had significantly worse 30-day survival (Log-Rank p = 0.023). On multivariate Cox regression analysis, older age (HR 1.02, 95% C.I. 1.00–1.04) and peak lactate (HR 1.16, 95% C.I. 1.11–1.21) were independent predictors of 30-day mortality. Conclusions: Among other findings, our data suggests a possible association between a history of HIV infection and RV dysfunction in critically ill sepsis patients, and this should be investigated further in future studies. Patients with evidence of RV dysfunction had poorer survival in this population; however this was not an independent predictor of mortality in the multivariate analysis. A larger cohort with a longer follow-up period may provide further insights.

Aims: The diagnosis of infiltrative cardiomyopathies has increased over last years. Catheter ablation is becoming the preferred approach for managing atrial fibrillation (AF) in these patients. This study aims to characterize differences in procedural findings during AF ablation in patients with and without infiltrative cardiomyopathies. Methods and results: Patients with cardiac amyloidosis and cardiac sarcoidosis undergoing first-time AF ablation were propensity score matched in 1:4 ratio to separate reference groups that received trigger provocative manoeuvres (isoproterenol infusion and/or atrial burst pacing) and had no prior cardiac surgery. Non-pulmonary vein (PV) triggers [defined as ectopic foci initiating AF or sustained focal atrial tachycardia (AT)] and macro-reentrant atrial flutters (AFLs) were then mapped and targeted. Recurrence was defined as AF/AT/AFL ≥ 30 s after 90-day blanking period. Twenty-four patients with cardiac amyloidosis were matched to 96 controls, and 17 patients with cardiac sarcoidosis were matched to 68 controls. Non-PV triggers were more frequent in patients with cardiac amyloidosis {29.2% vs. 8.3%; odds ratio [OR] = 4.5 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.4–14.2]} and cardiac sarcoidosis [17.6% vs. 7.4%; OR = 2.7 (95% CI: 0.6–12.6)] compared with their reference groups. Patients with cardiac amyloidosis also had a higher incidence of left atrial macro-reentrant flutters [37.5% vs. 6.3%; OR = 9.0, (95% CI: 2.8–29.0)]. One-year recurrence rate was similar between patients with cardiac sarcoidosis and controls (33.3% vs. 33.9%; P = 0.965) but higher in patients with cardiac amyloidosis vs. controls (47.4% vs. 27.1%; P = 0.049). Conclusion: Patients with infiltrative cardiomyopathies exhibit higher rates of non-PV triggers and left AFLs during first-time AF ablation. Those with cardiac amyloidosis experience higher arrhythmia recurrence rates compared with controls.