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

Background: Observational data suggest that catheter ablation may be safe and effective to treat younger and older patients with atrial fibrillation. No large, randomized trial has examined this issue. This report describes outcomes according to age at entry in the CABANA trial (Catheter Ablation versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation). Methods: Patients with atrial fibrillation ≥65 years of age, or <65 with ≥1 risk factor for stroke, were randomly assigned to catheter ablation versus drug therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, the composite of mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization, and recurrence of atrial fibrillation. Treatment effect estimates were adjusted for baseline covariables using proportional hazards regression models. Results: Of 2204 patients randomly assigned in CABANA, 766 (34.8%) were <65 years of age, 1130 (51.3%) were 65 to 74 years of age, and 308 (14.0%) were ≥75 years of age. Catheter ablation was associated with a 43% reduction in the primary outcome for patients <65 years of age (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.57 [95% CI, 0.30–1.09]), a 21% reduction for 65 to 74 years of age (aHR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.54–1.16]), and an indeterminate effect for age ≥75 years of age (aHR, 1.39 [95% CI, 0.75–2.58]). Four-year event rates for ablation versus drug therapy across age groups, respectively, were 3.2% versus 7.8%, 7.8% versus 9.6%, and 14.8% versus 9.0%. For every 10-year increase in age, the primary outcome aHR increased (ie, less favorable to ablation) an average of 27% (interaction P value=0.215). A similar pattern was seen with all-cause mortality: for every 10-year increase in age, the aHR increased an average of 46% (interaction P value=0.111). Atrial fibrillation recurrence rates were lower with ablation than with drug therapy across age subgroups (aHR 0.47, 0.58, and 0.49, respectively). Treatment-related complications were infrequent for both arms (<3%) regardless of age. Conclusions: We found age-based variations in clinical outcomes for catheter ablation compared with drug therapy, with the largest relative and absolute benefits of catheter ablation in younger patients. No prognostic benefits for ablation were seen in the oldest patients. No differences were found by age in treatment-related complications or in the relative effectiveness of catheter ablation in preventing recurrent atrial arrhythmias. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT00911508.

Cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of morbidity and mortality for women in United States and worldwide. One in 3 women dies from cardiovascular disease, and 45% of women >20 years old have some form of CVD. Historically, women have had higher morbidity and mortality after cardiac surgery. Sex influences pathogenesis, pathophysiology, presentation, postoperative complications, surgical outcomes, and survival. This review summarizes current cardiovascular surgery outcomes as they pertain to women. Specifically, this article seeks to address whether sex disparities in research, surgical referral, and outcomes still exist and to provide strategies to close these gaps. In addition, with the growing population of women of reproductive age with cardiovascular disease and cardiovascular risk factors, indications for cardiac surgery arise in pregnant women. The current review will also address the unique issues associated with this special population.

Background: Among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), women are less likely to receive catheter ablation and may have more complications and less durable results. Most information about sex-specific differences after ablation comes from observational data. We prespecified an examination of outcomes by sex in the 2204-patient CABANA trial (Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation). Methods: CABANA randomized patients with AF age ≥65 years or <65 years with ≥1 risk factor for stroke to a strategy of catheter ablation with pulmonary vein isolation versus drug therapy with rate/rhythm control agents. The primary composite outcome was death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest, and key secondary outcomes included AF recurrence. Results: CABANA randomized 819 (37%) women (ablation 413, drug 406) and 1385 men (ablation 695, drug 690). Compared with men, women were older (median age, 69 years versus 67 years for men), were more symptomatic (48% Canadian Cardiovascular Society AF Severity Class 3 or 4 versus 39% for men), had more symptomatic heart failure (42% with New York Heart Association Class ≥II versus 32% for men), and more often had a paroxysmal AF pattern at enrollment (50% versus 39% for men) ( P <0.0001 for all). Women were less likely to have ancillary (nonpulmonary vein) ablation procedures performed during the index procedure (55.7% versus 62.2% in men, P =0.043), and complications from treatment were infrequent in both sexes. For the primary outcome, the hazard ratio for those who underwent ablation versus drug therapy was 1.01 (95% CI, 0.62–1.65) in women and 0.73 (95% CI, 0.51–1.05) in men (interaction P value=0.299). The risk of recurrent AF was significantly reduced in patients undergoing ablation compared with those receiving drug therapy regardless of sex, but the effect was greater in men (hazard ratio, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.51–0.82] for women versus hazard ratio, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.40–0.58] for men; interaction P value=0.060). Conclusions: Clinically relevant treatment-related strategy differences in the primary and secondary clinical outcomes of CABANA were not seen between men and women, and there were no sex differences in adverse events. The CABANA trial results support catheter ablation as an effective treatment strategy for both women and men. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT00911508.

This collaborative statement from the International Society for Holter and Noninvasive Electrocardiology/Heart Rhythm Society/European Heart Rhythm Association/Asia-Pacific Heart Rhythm Society describes the current status of mobile health technologies in arrhythmia management. The range of digital medical tools and heart rhythm disorders that they may be applied to and clinical decisions that may be enabled are discussed. The facilitation of comorbidity and lifestyle management (increasingly recognized to play a role in heart rhythm disorders) and patient self-management are novel aspects of mobile health. The promises of predictive analytics but also operational challenges in embedding mobile health into routine clinical care are explored.