Search

Background: Guidelines recommended remote monitoring (RM) in managing patients with Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices. In recent years, smart device (phone or tablet) monitoring-based RM (SM-RM) was introduced. This study aims to systematically review SM-RM versus bedside monitor RM (BM-RM) using radiofrequency in terms of compliance, connectivity, and episode transmission time., Methods: We conducted a systematic review, searching three international databases from inception until July 2023 for studies comparing SM-RM (intervention group) versus BM-RM (control group)., Results: Two matched studies (21 978 patients) were retrieved (SM-RM arm: 9642 patients, BM-RM arm: 12 336 patients). There is significantly higher compliance among SM-RM patients compared with BM-RM patients in both pacemaker and defibrillator patients. Manyam et al. found that more SM-RM patients than BM-RM patients transmitted at least once (98.1% vs. 94.3%, p  < .001), and Tarakji et al. showed that SM-RM patients have higher success rates of scheduled transmissions than traditional BM-RM methods (SM-RM: 94.6%, pacemaker manual: 56.3%, pacemaker wireless: 77.0%, defibrillator wireless: 87.1%). There were higher enrolment rates, completed scheduled and patient-initiated transmissions, shorter episode transmission time, and higher connectivity among SM-RM patients compared to BM-RM patients. Younger patients (aged <75) had more patient-initiated transmissions, and a higher proportion had ≥10 transmissions compared with older patients (aged ≥75) in both SM-RM and BM-RM groups., Conclusion: SM-RM is a step in the right direction, with good compliance, connectivity, and shorter episode transmission time, empowering patients to be in control of their health. Further research on cost-effectiveness and long-term clinical outcomes can be carried out., Competing Interests: Authors declare no conflict of interests for this article., (© 2024 The Authors. Journal of Arrhythmia published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japanese Heart Rhythm Society.)

Aims: The aim of the Mid-Q Response study is to test the hypothesis that adaptive preferential left ventricular-only pacing with the AdaptivCRT algorithm has superior clinical outcomes compared to conventional cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in heart failure (HF) patients with moderately wide QRS duration (≥120 ms and <150 ms), left bundle branch block (LBBB), and normal atrioventricular (AV) conduction (PR interval ≤200 ms)., Methods: This prospective, multi-center, randomized, controlled, clinical study is being conducted at approximately 60 centers in Asia. Following enrollment and baseline assessment, eligible patients are implanted with a CRT system equipped with the AdaptivCRT algorithm and are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to have AdaptivCRT ON (Adaptive Bi-V and LV pacing) or AdaptivCRT OFF (Nonadaptive CRT). A minimum of 220 randomized patients are required for analysis of the primary endpoint, clinical composite score (CCS) at 6 months post-implant. The secondary and ancillary endpoints are all-cause and cardiovascular death, hospitalizations for worsening HF, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ), atrial fibrillation (AF), and cardiovascular adverse events at 6 or 12 months., Conclusion: The Mid-Q Response study is expected to provide additional evidence on the incremental benefit of the AdaptivCRT algorithm among Asian HF patients with normal AV conduction, moderately wide QRS, and LBBB undergoing CRT implant., Competing Interests: Kengo Kusano, MD, PhD: Speaker honoraria from Daiichi Sankyo Company, Ltd., Japan, Bristol‐Myers Squibb, Biotronik Japan, and Medronic Japan, and research grants from Medtronic Japan. Seung‐Jung Park, MD, PhD: Research grants and speaker honoraria from Boston Scientific Korea, Abbott Korea, Biotronik Korea, and Medtronic Korea. Sofian Johar, MB, BChir, PhD: speaker for Medtronic and Johnson and Johnson. Toon Wei Lim MD, PhD: Speaker for Biotronik, Medtronic, and Abbott. Research support from Medtronic and Biotronik. Kazuhiro Hidaka: employee and shareholder of Medtronic. Bart Gerritse: employee and shareholder of Medtronic. Kazutaka Aonuma, MD, PhD: Speaker honoraria from Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH, Medtronic Japan Co., Ltd., Daiichi Sankyo Co., Ltd., Japan, and Abbott Medical Japan Co., Ltd., and research grants from Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd, ASTEC Co., Ltd, Astellas Pharma Inc., Johnson & Johnson, Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd, TEIJIN PHARMA LIMITED, SHIONOGI & CO., LTD., Medical Corporation Tsukuba Kinenkai, Abbott Medical Japan Co., Ltd., and belongs to endowed departments by Boston Scientific Corporation, Japan Lifeline Co., Ltd., Nihon Cohden Corporation, BIOTRONIK Japan Inc., Toray Industries, Inc., Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH, Century Medical Inc., (© 2022 The Authors. Journal of Arrhythmia published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of the Japanese Heart Rhythm Society.)

In this paper, the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS) sought to provide practice guidance on AF screening based on recent evidence, with specific considerations relevant to the Asia-Pacific region. A key recommendation is opportunistic screening for people aged ≥65 years (all countries), with systematic screening to be considered for people aged ≥75 years or who have additional risk factors (all countries)., Competing Interests: All other authors declared no conflict of interest related to this paper., (© 2021 The Authors. Journal of Arrhythmia published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japanese Heart Rhythm Society.)

The consensus of the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS) on stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) has been published in 2017 which provided useful clinical guidance for cardiologists, neurologists, geriatricians, and general practitioners in Asia-Pacific region. In these years, many important new data regarding stroke prevention in AF were reported. The Practice Guidelines subcommittee members comprehensively reviewed updated information on stroke prevention in AF, and summarized them in this 2021 focused update of the 2017 consensus guidelines of the APHRS on stroke prevention in AF. We highlighted and focused on several issues, including the importance of AF Better Care (ABC) pathway, the advantages of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) for Asians, the considerations of use of NOACs for Asian patients with AF with single 1 stroke risk factor beyond gender, the role of lifestyle factors on stroke risk, the use of oral anticoagulants during the "coronavirus disease 2019" (COVID-19) pandemic, etc. We fully realize that there are gaps, unaddressed questions, and many areas of uncertainty and debate in the current knowledge of AF, and the physician's decision remains the most important factor in the management of AF., Competing Interests: Tze‐Fan Chao: None. Boyoung Joung: Boyoung Joung has served as a speaker for Bayer, BMS/Pfizer, Medtronic, and Daiichi‐Sankyo and received research funds from Samjin, Medtronic and Abbott. No fees have been received directly or personally. Yoshihide Takahashi: Research grants from Medtronic Japan, Boston Scientific, Japan Lifeline, WIN International, Abbott and Biosense‐Webster, and speaker honoraria from Abbott and Biosense‐Webster. Toon‐Wei Lim: None. Eue‐Keun Choi: None. Yi‐Hsin Chan: None. Yutao Guo: None. Charn Sriratanasathavorn: None. Seil Oh: None. Ken Okumura: None. Gregory Lip: Consultant and speaker for BMS/Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim and Daiichi‐Sankyo. No fees are received personally., (© 2021 The Authors. Journal of Arrhythmia published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japanese Heart Rhythm Society.)

Background: Conventional right ventricular (RV) pacing is increasingly recognised to cause tricuspid valve (TV) injury or dysfunction, in part due to the need to pass the lead through the valve. This may be especially problematic in patients with preexisting TV disease or prior TV surgery. An alternative in this situation is to implant a left ventricular (LV) lead instead of ventricular pacing., Methods: We performed a single-center retrospective analysis of 26 patients with tricuspid valve surgery/disease who received a LV pacing lead in the coronary veins to avoid crossing the tricuspid valve, with or without a right atrial lead. A matched control population was obtained from patients receiving conventional right ventricular pacing and outcomes were compared. Main outcomes of interest were lead stability, electrical lead parameters and change in echocardiographic parameters such as left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) during long-term follow-up., Results: Successful left ventricular pacing was established in 25 out of the 26 cases with one case converted to a RV lead due to lead dislodgement. During the 2.96 ± 1.0 year follow-up, 24 of 25 (96.0%) leads were functional with stable pacing and sensing parameters, and 1 of 25 (4.0%) was extracted for due to device infection following an episode of thrombophlebitis., Conclusion: We conclude that in patients with existing tricuspid valve disease or surgery, ventricular pacing via the coronary veins is a feasible, safe, and reliable alternative to right ventricular pacing., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interests for this article., (© 2019 The Authors. Journal of Arrhythmia published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of the Japanese Heart Rhythm Society.)