Search

Background and Aims: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) are critical for preventing sudden cardiac death (SCD) in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC). This study aims to identify cross-continental differences in utilization of primary prevention ICDs and survival free from sustained ventricular arrhythmia (VA) in ARVC., Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of ARVC patients without prior VA enrolled in clinical registries from 11 countries throughout Europe and North America. Patients were classified according to whether they received treatment in North America or Europe and were further stratified by baseline predicted VA risk into low- (<10%/5 years), intermediate- (10%-25%/5 years), and high-risk (>25%/5 years) groups. Differences in ICD implantation and survival free from sustained VA events (including appropriate ICD therapy) were assessed., Results: One thousand ninety-eight patients were followed for a median of 5.1 years; 554 (50.5%) received a primary prevention ICD, and 286 (26.0%) experienced a first VA event. After adjusting for baseline risk factors, North Americans were more than three times as likely to receive ICDs {hazard ratio (HR) 3.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.5, 3.8]} but had only mildly increased risk for incident sustained VA [HR 1.4 (95% CI 1.1, 1.8)]. North Americans without ICDs were at higher risk for incident sustained VA [HR 2.1 (95% CI 1.3, 3.4)] than Europeans., Conclusions: North American ARVC patients were substantially more likely than Europeans to receive primary prevention ICDs across all arrhythmic risk strata. A lower rate of ICD implantation in Europe was not associated with a higher rate of VA events in those without ICDs., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

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 ("mHealth") 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 mHealth. The promises of predictive analytics but also operational challenges in embedding mHealth into routine clinical care are explored., (This article has been co-published with the permission of Annals of Noninvasive Electrocardiology, Cardiovascular Digital Health Journal, Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology, European Heart Journal - Digital Health and Journal of Arrhythmia. All rights reserved. © 2021 The Authors. Annals of Noninvasive Electrocardiology published by Wiley Periodicals Inc. on behalf of the International Society for Holter and Noninvasive Electrocardiology / Cardiovascular Digital Health Journal published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of the Heart Rhythm Society / Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc. / European Heart Journal - Digital Health published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology / Journal of Arrhythmia published by Wiley and Sons Australia Ltd on behalf of the Japanese Heart Rhythm Society and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society. This article is published under the Creative Commons CC-BY license, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The articles are identical except for minor stylistic and spelling differences in keeping with each journal’s style. Either citation can be used when citing this article.)

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.

Background: Revision of the Task Force diagnostic criteria for arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy/dysplasia (ARVC/D) has increased their sensitivity for the diagnosis of early and familial forms of the disease. The epsilon wave is a major diagnostic criterion in the context of ARVC/D, which, however, remains not quantifiable and therefore may leave room for substantial subjective interpretation., Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess interobserver agreement in epsilon wave definition and epsilon wave importance for ARVC/D diagnosis., Methods: Electrocardiographic (ECG) tracings depicting leads V1, V2, and V3 collected from individuals evaluated for ARVC/D (n = 30) were given to panel members who were asked to respond to the question whether ECG patterns meet epsilon wave definition outlined by the Task Force diagnostic criteria. The prevalence and importance of epsilon waves for ARVC/D diagnosis were assessed in a pooled data set of patients with definite ARVC/D from European and American registries (n = 815)., Results: The number of ECG patterns identified as epsilon waves varied from 5 to 18 per reviewer (median 13 per reviewer). A unanimous agreement was reached for only 10 cases (33%), 2 of which qualified as epsilon waves and 8 as non-epsilon waves by all panel members. From a pooled data set, 106 patients reportedly had epsilon waves (13%). In 105 of 106 patients with epsilon waves (99%), exclusion of epsilon waves from the diagnostic score would not affect the "definite" diagnostic category., Conclusion: Interobserver variability in the assessment of epsilon waves is high; however, the impact of epsilon waves on ARVC/D diagnosis is negligibly low. The results urge to exercise caution in the assessment of epsilon waves, especially in patients who would not otherwise meet diagnostic criteria., (Copyright © 2016 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)