Search

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) via biventricular pacing (BVP) is a well-established therapy for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and left bundle branch block, who remain symptomatic despite optimal medical therapy. Despite the long-standing clinical evidence, as well as the familiarity of cardiac electrophysiologists with the implantation technique, CRT via BVP cannot be achieved or may result ineffective in up to one-third of the patients. Therefore, new alternative techniques, such as conduction system pacing and left ventricular pacing, are emerging as potential alternatives to this technique, not only in case of BVP failure, but also as a stand-alone first choice due to several potential advantages over traditional CRT. Specifically, due to its procedural characteristics, left bundle branch area pacing appears to be the most convincing technique, showing comparable efficacy outcomes when compared with traditional CRT, not increasing short-term device-related complications, as well as improving procedural times. However, transvenous leads remain a major limitation of all these pacing modalities. To overcome this limit, a leadless left ventricular endocardial pacing has been developed as an additional tool to achieve a left endocardial activation, although being still associated with non-negligible pitfalls, limiting its current use in clinical practice. This article focuses on the current state and latest progresses in cardiac resynchronization therapy.

BACKGROUND: Limited data on the real-world safety and efficacy of leadless pacemakers (LPMs) post-transvenous lead extraction (TLE) are available. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the long-term safety and effectiveness of LPMs following TLE in comparison with LPMs de novo implantation. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent LPM implantation in 12 European centers joining the International LEAdless PacemakEr Registry were enrolled. The primary end point was the comparison of LPM-related complication rate at implantation and during follow-up (FU) between groups. Differences in electrical performance were deemed secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 1179 patients enrolled, 15.6% underwent a previous TLE. During a median FU of 33 (interquartile range 24-47) months, LPM-related major complications and all-cause mortality did not differ between groups (TLE group: 1.6% and 5.4% vs de novo group: 2.2% and 7.8%; P = .785 and P = .288, respectively). Pacing threshold (PT) was higher in the TLE group at implantation and during FU, with very high PT (>2 V@0.24 ms) patients being more represented than in the de novo implantation group (5.4% vs 1.6 %; P = .004). When the LPM was deployed at a different right ventricular (RV) location than the one where the previous transvenous RV lead was extracted, a lower proportion of high PT (>1-2 V@0.24 ms) patients at implantation, 1-month FU, and 12-month FU (5.9% vs 18.2%, P = .012; 3.4% vs 12.9%, P = .026; and 4.3% vs 14.5%, P = .037, respectively) was found. CONCLUSION: LPMs showed a satisfactory safety and efficacy profile after TLE. Better electrical parameters were obtained when LPMs were implanted at a different RV location than the one where the previous transvenous RV lead was extracted.

Background: Age-related differences on leadless pacemaker (LP) are poorly described. Aim of this study was to compare clinical indications, periprocedural and mid-term device-associated outcomes in a large real-world cohort of LP patients, stratified by age at implantation. Methods: Two cohorts of younger and older patients (≤50 and > 50 years old) were retrieved from the iLEAPER registry. The primary outcome was to compare the underlying indication why a LP was preferred over a transvenous PM across the two cohorts. Rates of peri-procedural and mid-term follow-up major complications as well as LP electrical performance were deemed secondary outcomes. Results: 1154 patients were enrolled, with younger patients representing 6.2% of the entire cohort. Infective and vascular concerns were the most frequent characteristics that led to a LP implantation in the older cohort (45.8% vs 67.7%, p < 0.001; 4.2% vs 16.4%, p = 0.006), while patient preference was the leading cause to choose a LP in the younger (47.2% vs 5.6%, p < 0.001). Median overall procedural (52 [40–70] vs 50 [40–65] mins) and fluoroscopy time were similar in both groups. 4.3% of patients experienced periprocedural complications, without differences among groups. Threshold values were higher in the younger, both at discharge and at last follow-up (0.63 [0.5–0.9] vs 0.5 [0.38–0-7] V, p = 0.004). Conclusion: When considering LP indications, patient preference was more common in younger, while infective and vascular concerns were more frequent in the older cohort. Rates of device-related complications did not differ significantly. Younger patients tended to have a slightly higher pacing threshold at mid-term follow-up.

The prevalence and impact of pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients with lead-related infective endocarditis undergoing transvenous lead extraction (TLE) are unknown.Twenty-five consecutive patients with vegetations ≥10 mm at transoesophageal echocardiography were prospectively studied. Contrast-enhanced chest computed tomography (CT) was performed before (pre-TLE) and after (post-TLE) the lead extraction procedure.Pre-TLE CT identified 18 patients (72%) with subclinical PE. The size of vegetations in patients with PE did not differ significantly from those without (median 20.0 mm [interquartile range: 13.0-30.0] vs. 14.0 mm [6.0-18.0], p = 0.116). Complete TLE success was achieved in all patients with 3 (2-3) leads extracted per procedure. There were no postprocedure complications related to the presence of PE and no differences in terms of fluoroscopy time and need for advanced tools. In the group of positive pre-TLE CT, post-TLE scan confirmed the presence of silent PE in 14 patients (78%). There were no patients with new PE formation. Large vegetations (≥20 mm) tended to increase the risk of post-TLE subclinical PE (odds ratio 5.99 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.93-38.6], p = 0.059). During a median 19.4 months follow-up, no re-infection of the implanted system was reported. Survival rates in patients with and without post-TLE PE were similar (hazard ratio: 1.11 [95% CI: 0.18-6.67], p = 0.909).Subclinical PE detected by CT was common in patients undergoing TLE with lead-related infective endocarditis and vegetations but was not associated with the complexity of the procedure or adverse outcomes. TLE procedure seems safe and feasible even in patients with large vegetations.

Superior vena cava (SVC) syndrome is a rare disease induced by thrombosis and consequent occlusion of SVC, negatively affecting morbidity and mortality. The incidence of SVC syndrome from central venous catheters and pacemaker or defibrillator leads is increasing. Optimal treatment of pacemaker or defibrillator-related SVC syndrome is not well defined. Lead extraction causes mechanical trauma to the vessel wall. In addition, subsequent device implantation on the contralateral side can be an added factor for venous occlusion. The use of leadless pacemakers could be an interesting option to reduce the risk of SVC restenosis after lead extraction. We report a clinical case of PM leads-related SVC syndrome referred to our centers and treated with transvenous lead extraction, leadless pacemaker implantation and subsequent percutaneous angioplasty and stenting of the SVC and left innominate vein.

While looking for a “magic bullet” to treat COVID-19, the massive off-label use of several of drugs in COVID-19, including repurposed antimalarial drugs, immunosuppressive agents, anti-virals and antibacterial agents, have generated concerns in the early phase of the pandemic due a possible arrhythmogenic effects in relation to QTc interval prolongation. Indeed, some of these drugs have been historically associated to QT prolongation and Torsade de Point, a potentially lethal ventricular arrhythmia, and their first-time use on a very large scale has raised several concerns in the scientific community. The aim of this work is to summarize the underlying arrhythmogenic mechanisms related to the use of potentially QT prolonging drugs used during the pandemic to treat COVID-19.

Background The rates of cardiac device-related infection have increased substantially over the past years. Transvenous lead extraction is the standard therapy for such cases. In some patients, however, the procedure cannot be completed through the transvenous route alone. A hybrid surgical and transvenous approach may provide the solution in such cases. Methods We present three cases who underwent hybird transvenous and surgical extraction for coronary sinus leads due to infection of CRT-D systems. One patient had an Attain Starfix lead implanted in the coronary sinus. The procedures were performed under local anaesthesia with continuous hemodynamic and transthoracic echocardiographic monitoring. We highlight the characteristics of the patients, the features of the devices, the technical difficulties and the outcomes of the procedures. Results In all cases, the right atrial and right ventricular leads were extracted through the transvenous route. In one patient, they were extracted using regular stylets and manual traction, while in the other two patients, telescoping dilator sheaths (Cook), Tightrail hand-powered mechanical sheaths (Spectranetics) and/or Glidelight Excimer Laser sheaths (Spectranetics) were used. The coronary sinus lead could not be retrieved due to extensive fibrosis after utilizing locking stylets and mechanical dilator sheaths in all 3 cases, in addition to rotational mechanical sheaths and Laser. sheaths in one case, so the so the patients were referred to surgery. Two patients underwent left mini-thoracotomy and one patient underwent midline sternotomy to extract the remaining CS lead. The target vein was identified and ligated, then the fibrosis around the lead was dissected, this was followed by lead retrieval through the surgical incision. The patient who underwent sternotomy suffered from mediastinitis, which required reoperation and mediastinal lavage. There were no complications in the other two patients. All three patients were reimplanted with a new CRT-D device on the contralateral side after the resolution of infection. Conclusion A hybrid surgical and transvenous approach can be complementary in case the transvenous route alone fails to completely extract the coronary sinus lead. The transvenous approach can be used to free the proximal part of the lead, while the distal adhesions can be removed surgically, preferably though a limited thoracic incision.

Background limited data on real-world safety and efficacy of leadless pacemakers (LPMs) in patients who underwent transvenous lead extraction (TLE) are currently available. The present study aims to assess long-term safety and efficacy of LPMs implantation following TLE, compared with LPM de novo implant patients. Methods consecutive patients who underwent LPM implantation in 12 centers joining the International LEAdless PacemakEr (i-LEAPER) registry were enrolled end retrospectively considered. Patients receiving LPM following TLE (n=184) were compared with patients with de novo implant (n=995). The primary endpoint was LPM-related complications rate at implant and during follow-up (FU). Additionally, differences in electrical performance were assessed between the two groups. Results 1179 patients were enrolled in this study and followed for a median of 33 months. LPM related major complications and all-cause mortality did not differ among the two groups (1.6% TLE group vs. 2.2% de novo group, p=0.785, and 5.4% TLE group vs. 7.8% de novo group, p=0.288, respectively). Pacing threshold (PT) resulted higher in the TLE group throughout the whole follow-up (FU) (Figure 1). Higher PTs were recorded in LPMs implanted at same location from where the previous transvenous lead was removed, as far as 24-months postimplant (Figure 2), with a higher proportion of patients with high PT (>1 to 2V @0.24ms) in the first group at implant, 1-month, and 12-month FU (Figure 3). Conclusion In this real-world registry, LPMs showed a satisfactory safety and efficacy profile after TLE. In the post-TLE cohort, better electrical parameters were obtained when LPMs were implanted at a different location from where the previous transvenous lead was extracted.

Aims Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) may sustain damages during a course of radiation therapy, especially when the beam is directed onto the pulse generator, with device electrical reset and/or sudden battery drain. 2010 HRS/ASA expert consensus, and all CIEDs manufacturers, recommend to avoid devices direct irradiation with an accumulated dose that exceed 5 grays (Gy). In our prospective study we tested the effects of direct irradiation on CIEDs with different radiation doses, also higher than 5 Gy. Methods 124 CIEDs of Medronic, Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, were collected during system upgrading or lead extraction procedures. All devices were considered if they had at least 80% of residual battery capacity. All CIEDs were programmed with same default electrical parameters. Depending by CIED type, pacing mode was configured in VVI, VVIR, VDDR or DDDR, and biventricular stimulation was activated, if present. ICDs electrical therapies were set-up with a pre-determined configuration. All devices were singularly placed in a 30 cm×30 cm plastic bowl containing 2 Lt of deionized water that was placed over 5 cm Rockwool to simulate the backscatter and irradiated by a linear accelerator (Elekta Synergy®). CIEDs were divided into two groups depending on irradiation dose delivered: 5 Gy and 10 Gy. Results No significant differences in battery drainage were observed after irradiation respect to baseline in 5 Gy as well 10 Gy group (7.8±3.1 vs. 7.4±2.1 [years] battery longevity, p=0.693; 7.6±3.1 vs. 7.3±2.1 [years] battery longevity, p=0.677, respectively) . Moreover, all CIEDS saved the baseline program setting, without device reset events. Conclusions Our data confirm that CIEDs direct irradiation of 5 Gy is safe, of note, direct irradiation up to 10 Gy seems to be similarly safe concerning the risk of CIEDs electrical reset and/or unexpected battery drain.

While facing potentially high morbidity from COVID-19 without known effective therapies, the off-label use of several non-specific drugs has been advocated, including re-purposed anti- viral (e.g., remdesivir or the lopinavir/ritonavir combination), biologic agents (e.g., tocilizumab), and antimalarial drugs such as chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, in association with or without azithromycin. Data regarding the effectiveness of these drugs in treating COVID-19 has been shown in some trials and clinical settings, but further randomised controlled trials are still being carried out. One of the main concerns regarding their widespread use, however, is their possible effects on the QT interval and arrhythmogenic potential. Some of these drugs have been associated with QT prolongation and Torsades de Point, a potentially lethal ventricular arrhythmia. The review aims to highlight the magnitude of this problem, to quickly refresh clinically impacting cornerstones of QT interval and TdP pathophysiology, to summarize the available evidence regarding the QT and arrhythmia impact of drugs used in different clinical settings in COVID-19 patients, and to help the physicians dealing with the knowledge needed in the everyday clinical duties in case of doubts regarding QT-induced arrhythmias in this time of emergency.

Leadless pacemakers have become a major breakthrough in the management of bradyarrhythmia as an attractive alternative to the standard transvenous pacemakers, but safety and long-term outcomes of the new Micra-AV, which is capable guarantee atrioventricular (AV) synchrony, have been poorly described. Hence, we describe how we managed a 57-year-old patient who developed pacemaker syndrome due to significant Micra-AV dyssynchrony. This case emphasizes how leadless pacemaker AV synchrony could be overestimated, thereby requiring a stepwise process leading to adequate device reprogramming. Holter-ECG monitoring and exercise test resulted to be valuable tools for an early detection of inadequate AV synchrony, integrating and completing device reports.

Although cryoablation (CA) of septally located accessory pathways (APs) is an established treatment for Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome, its major limitation is the lack of data regarding long-term follow-up (FU). The present study sought to investigate long-term outcomes of a specific CA protocol targeting para-Hisian (P-H) and mid-septal (M-S) APs.26 patients who previously underwent CA of PH or MS APs from 2004 to 2014, were prospectively considered to receive a follow-up (FU) during 2021. All subjects received an outpatient control visit, performing an exercise stress test and a 24-h ECG Holter monitoring.Acute success was achieved in 22 patients (85%). One case of recurrence was reported at short-term FU. Long-term FU, performed after a mean time of 150 ± 37 months, did not show ventricular preexcitation recurrences, with a success rate of 81%, and without late adverse events. Symptoms reduction (12% vs. 96%, plt;.001) and lower rates of antiarrhythmic drug use (12% vs. 62%, plt;.001) were observed at long term-FU with respect to baseline. This clinical outcome was detected also among patients who underwent unsuccessful CA at baseline.Our CA protocol confirmed remarkable safety and efficacy throughout a longterm FU. Significant clinical improvement in terms of antiarrhythmic therapy discontinuation and symptoms reduction was also shown among patients who experienced acute failure of CA.

Since its inception cardiac electrical therapy has evolved, with transvenous pacemakers (PMs) and implantable cardiac defibrillators (ICDs) providing significant benefits in terms of improved quality of life and reducing mortality in patients with cardiac conduction disturbances and/or requiring protection against ventricular arrhythmias [...]

Background: Available reports on the post-discharge management of atrial fibrillation (AF) in COVID-19 patients are scarce. The aim of this case series was to describe the clinical outcomes of new-onset AF in COVID-19 patients referred to a tertiary cardiac arrhythmia center after hospital discharge. Methods: All consecutive patients referred to our center for an ambulatory evaluation from 18 May 2020 to 15 March 2022 were retrospectively screened. Patients were included in the current analysis if new-onset AF was diagnosed during hospitalization for COVID-19 and then referred to our clinic. Results: Among 946 patients, 23 (2.4%) were evaluated for new-onset AF during COVID-19. The mean age of the study cohort was 71.5 ± 8.1 years; 87.0% were male. Median time from COVID-19 discharge and the first ambulatory evaluation was 53 (41.5–127) days; median follow-up time was 175 (83–336) days. At the in-office evaluation, 14 (60.9%) patients were in sinus rhythm, and nine patients were in AF. In 13.0% of cases, oral anticoagulation was stopped according to CHADS-VASc. Eight patients in AF were scheduled for electrical cardioversion; one patient was rate-controlled. Four patients were treated with catheter ablation (CA) during follow-up. Two post-cardioversion AF recurrences were detected during follow-up, while no recurrences were diagnosed among patients who underwent CA. Conclusion: Our data suggest that AF may not be considered as a simple bystander of the in-hospital COVID-19 course. Management of new-onset AF in post-COVID-19 patients referred to our clinic did not significantly differ from our usual practice, both in terms of long-term oral anticoagulation and in terms of rhythm control strategy.

(1) Background: Leadless (LL) stimulation is perceived to lower surgical, vascular, and lead-related complications compared to transvenous (TV) pacemakers, yet controlled studies are lacking and real-life experience is non-conclusive. (2) Aim: To prospectively analyse survival and complication rates in leadless versus transvenous VVIR pacemakers. (3) Methods: Prospective analysis of mortality and complications in 344 consecutive VVIR TV and LL pacemaker recipients between June 2015 and May 2021. Indications for VVIR pacing were “slow” AF, atrio-ventricular block in AF or in sinus rhythm in bedridden cognitively impaired patients. LL indication was based on individualised clinical judgement. (4) Results: 72 patients received LL and 272 TV VVIR pacemakers. LL pacemaker indications included ongoing/expected chronic haemodialysis, superior venous access issues, active lifestyle with low pacing percentage expected, frailty causing high bleeding/infectious risk, previous valvular endocarditis, or device infection requiring extraction. No significant difference in the overall acute and long-term complication rate was observed between LL and TV cohorts, with greater mortality occurring in TV due to selection of older patients. (5) Conclusions: Given the low complication rate and life expectancy in this contemporary VVIR cohort, extending LL indications to all VVIR candidates is unlikely to provide clear-cut benefits. Considering the higher costs of LL technology, careful patient selection is mandatory for LL PMs to become advantageous, i.e., in the presence of vascular access issues, high bleeding/infectious risk, and long life expectancy, rendering lead-related issues and repeated surgery relevant in the long-term perspective.

Leadless pacemakers (LLPMs) have become a major breakthrough in the management of bradyarrhythmia as an attractive alternative to the standard transvenous pacemakers (TV-PMs). Recently, the introduction of a second-generation LLPMs (Micra AV-MC1AVR1) has expanded pacing modes to obtain atrioventricular (AV) synchronous pacing, providing an interesting alternative in the actual scenario of leadless pacing. Nevertheless, actual reports have highlighted some concerns regarding those devices. In this review, we sought to provide an overview of this technology based on its approval studies and major reports.

Catheter-based or surgical procedures in patients with long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (LSPAF) remain a challenge. As a result, different approaches including hybrid (surgical and endocardial) ablation have been developed. Bachmann’s bundle (BB) is a mainly epicardial structure capable of sustaining arrhythmic reentry that could be involved in the development and perpetuation of atrial fibrillation. We investigated the efficacy and safety of an adjunctive BB ablation in LSPAF patients undergoing hybrid ablation. In a two-arm non-randomized study, consecutive LSPAF patients undergoing epicardial isolation of pulmonary veins with left atrial posterior wall (box lesion) with (n = 30, BB group) and without additional BB ablation (n = 30, CONV group) were enrolled in the study. All patients underwent an endocardial procedure within 6 weeks post-surgery to assess for potential lesion gaps and additional atrial substrate modification. The primary endpoint was freedom from AF through 12 months of follow-up. The two-staged hybrid ablation was successfully completed in all patients. One-year freedom from atrial arrhythmias recurrence rates was 96.6% in the BB group vs 76.6% in the CONV group (p = 0.025). At procedure completion, 30 (100%) and 17 (56%) patients had a spontaneous cardioversion in BB and CONV group, respectively (p < 0.001). No significant differences in quality of life or complication rates were observed. This initial experience shows, for the first time, that adjunctive BB ablation in the setting of hybrid ablation for LSPAF is a feasible and effective approach in increasing maintenance of sinus rhythm without increasing complication rates.

Background Since the body of evidence addressing the coagulation derangements caused by Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has been constantly growing, we investigated whether pre-hospitalization oral anticoagulation (OAC) or in-hospital heparin treatment could have a protective role among COVID-19 patients. Method In this cohort study, consecutive COVID-19 patients admitted to four different Italian Institutions were enrolled. Baseline demographic, clinical, laboratory, and radiological characteristics, as well as in-hospital treatment and outcomes were evaluated. The primary outcome was mortality. Results A total of 844 COVID-19 patients were enrolled as study cohort, n = 65 (7.7%) taking OACs prior to hospitalization. Regarding clinical outcomes, OAC patients developed acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) more frequently than non-OAC patients as well as presenting a higher mortality rate (44.6% vs 19.8%, p, Highlights • Evidence on a prothrombotic asset caused by COVID-19 has been constantly growing. • In our cohort, OACs appeared to be ineffective in reducing mortality rate. • Heparin resulted to be a useful treatment when lung disease was sufficiently severe. • Microthrombosis may have a crucial role in COVID-19. • Due to the relatively small sample size of OAC patients included, larger studies are needed.

Aims The aim of the study was to describe ECG modifications and arrhythmic events in COVID-19 patients undergoing hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) therapy in different clinical settings. Methods and results COVID-19 patients at seven institutions receiving HCQ therapy from whom a baseline and at least one ECG at 48+ h were available were enrolled in the study. QT/QTc prolongation, QT-associated and QT-independent arrhythmic events, arrhythmic mortality, and overall mortality during HCQ therapy were assessed. A total of 649 COVID-19 patients (61.9 ± 18.7 years, 46.1% males) were enrolled. HCQ therapy was administrated as a home therapy regimen in 126 (19.4%) patients, and as an in-hospital-treatment to 495 (76.3%) hospitalized and 28 (4.3%) intensive care unit (ICU) patients. At 36–72 and at 96+ h after the first HCQ dose, 358 and 404 ECGs were obtained, respectively. A significant QT/QTc interval prolongation was observed (P < 0.001), but the magnitude of the increase was modest [+13 (9–16) ms]. Baseline QT/QTc length and presence of fever (P = 0.001) at admission represented the most important determinants of QT/QTc prolongation. No arrhythmic-related deaths were reported. The overall major ventricular arrhythmia rate was low (1.1%), with all events found not to be related to QT or HCQ therapy at a centralized event evaluation. No differences in QT/QTc prolongation and QT-related arrhythmias were observed across different clinical settings, with non-QT-related arrhythmias being more common in the intensive care setting. Conclusion HCQ administration is safe for a short-term treatment for patients with COVID-19 infection regardless of the clinical setting of delivery, causing only modest QTc prolongation and no directly attributable arrhythmic deaths.

The absence of pacing capabilities may reduce the appeal of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) devices for patients at risk for conduction disorders or with antitachycardia pacing (ATP)/cardiac resynchronization (CRT) requirements. Reports of rates of S-ICD to transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (TV-ICD) system switch in real-world scenarios are limited.The purpose of this study was to investigate the need for a subsequent transvenous (TV) device in patients implanted with an S-ICD and its predictors.All patients implanted with an S-ICD were enrolled from the multicenter, real-world iSUSI (International SUbcutaneouS Implantable cardioverter defibrillator) Registry. The need for a TV device and its clinical reason, and appropriate and inappropriate device therapies were assessed. Logistic regression with Firth penalization was used to assess the association between baseline and procedural characteristics and the overall need for a subsequent TV device.A total of 1509 patients were enrolled (age 50.8 ± 15.8 years; 76.9% male; 32.0% ischemic; left ventricular ejection fraction 38% [30%-60%]). Over 26.5 [13.4-42.9] months, 155 (10.3%) and 144 (9.3%) patients experienced appropriate and inappropriate device therapies, respectively. Forty-one patients (2.7%) required a TV device (13 bradycardia; 10 need for CRT; 10 inappropriate shocks). Body mass index (BMI)30 kg/mA low rate (2.7%) of conversion from S-ICD to a TV device was observed at follow-up, with need for antibradycardia pacing, ATP, or CRT being the main reasons. BMI30 kg/m

Transvenous lead extraction is the standard therapy for cardiac device-related infection. In some patients, however, a hybrid surgical and transvenous approach may be necessary.We present three cases who underwent transvenous lead extraction for an infected CRT-D system. In all cases the CS lead could not be retrieved transvenously due to extensive fibrosis. The lead was successfully extracted through left minithoracotomy in two patients and midline sternotomy in one patient.In cases where the coronary sinus lead shows severe fibrosis, a transvenous approach can be used to free the proximal part of the lead, while the distal adhesions can be removed surgically through a limited thoracic incision.

Transvenous pacing is nowadays the cornerstone of interventional management of bradyarrhythmias. It is still associated, however, with significant complications, mostly related to indwelling transvenous leads or device pocket. In order to reduce these complications, leadless pacemakers have been recently introduced into clinical practice, but no guidelines are yet available to indicate who are those patients that might benefit the most and whether leadless pacing should be preferred in the old or young population. This survey aims to describe the use of leadless pacemaker devices in a real-world setting.Eleven arrhythmia centers in the Lombardy region (out of a total of 17 participating centers) responded to the proposed questionnaire regarding patient characteristics and indications to leadless pacing.Out of a total of 411 patients undergoing leadless pacing during 4.2 ± 0.98 years, the median age was 77 years, with 0.18% of patients having less than 18 years, 29.9% 18-65 years, 34.3% 65-80 years and 35.6%80 years. The most common indication was slow atrial fibrillation (49% of patients), followed by atrioventricular block and sinoatrial dysfunction. Two centers reported in-hospital complications.Leadless pacemakers proved to be a safe pacing strategy actually destined mostly to elderly patients.

The authors wish to make the following corrections to this paper [...]

A few limited case series have shown that the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) system is safe for teenagers and young adults, but a large-scale analysis currently is lacking.The purpose of this study was to compare mid-term device-associated outcomes in a large real-world cohort of S-ICD patients, stratified by age at implantation.Two propensity-matched cohorts of teenagers + young adults (≤30 years old) and adults (30 years old) were retrieved from the ELISIR Registry. The primary outcome was the comparison of inappropriate shock rate. Complications, freedom from sustained ventricular arrhythmias, and overall and cardiovascular mortality were deemed secondary outcomes.Teenagers + young adults represented 11.0% of the entire cohort. Two propensity-matched groups of 161 patients each were used for the analysis. Median follow-up was 23.1 (13.2-40.5) months. In total, 15.2% patients experienced inappropriate shocks, and 9.3% device-related complications were observed, with no age-related differences in inappropriate shocks (16.1% vs 14.3%; P = .642) and complication rates (9.9% vs 8.7%; P = .701). At univariate analysis, young age was not associated with increased rates of inappropriate shocks (hazard ratio [HR] 1.204 [0.675-2.148]: P = .529). At multivariate analysis, use of the SMART Pass algorithm was associated with a strong reduction in inappropriate shocks (adjusted HR 0.292 [0.161-0.525]; P.001), whereas arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) was associated with higher rates of inappropriate shocks (adjusted HR 2.380 [1.205-4.697]; P = .012).In a large multicenter registry of propensity-matched patients, use of the S-ICD in teenagers/young adults was safe and effective. The rates of inappropriate shocks and complications between cohorts were not significantly different. The only predictor of increased inappropriate shocks was a diagnosis of ARVC.

Aims During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in-person visits were reduced to prevent potential risk of exposure. Virtual visits (VVs) represent an innovative model to take care of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and feasibility of VV in the management of CIED patients. Methods and results We performed a prospective study including all CIED patients who received a VV from July 2020 to July 2021. Blood pressure, arterial oxygen saturation, heart rate, and body weight were registered by the patient. Moreover, we sent to the patient a questionnaire to evaluate the patients’ satisfaction about VV. We enrolled 182 patients in the study period. The mean age of patients was 70.2 ± 13.5 years-old and the majority (61.1%) was male. In two cases, VVs were not performed due to technical issues. Overall, 70.9% of patients utilized a smartphone, while 20.1% and 9% used, respectively, a tablet or a personal computer. The mean duration of VV was 27.8 ± 7.8 min. Patients helped by a caregiver were 64 (35.2%). One urgent/emergent in-person visit was performed in a patient with acute heart failure. Overall, VV was preferred to in-person evaluation. Conclusion VV is a safe and feasible approach to follow-up CIED patients. A high degree of patient satisfaction was reached after VV. The use of VV has promising potential and should be implemented beyond COVID-19 period and integrated in the healthcare system as a new model of care.

Aims Micra-VR transcatheter pacing system (TPS) has shown strong stability of electrical parameters over time. Nevertheless, a small percentage of patients develops high pacing threshold (PT) (>1 V@0.24 ms) which can decrease the longevity of battery. Our study sought to investigate the intraoperative electrical parameters able to predict device electrical performances during the time. Methods and results Patients (pts) implanted with Micra-VR TPS from March 2018 to January 2021 were prospectively considered at the Cardiology Department of Spedali Civili Hospital (Brescia) and Luigi Sacco Hospital (Milan). R-wave sensing amplitude (mV), pacing impedance (Ohm), and PT (V@0.24 ms) were recorded twice: upon Micra final positioning, and after removal of the delivery system. All pts received a follow-up visit at 1- and 12-month after discharge. Electrical parameters were recorded at each visit. A total of 93 pts underwent Micra-VR implantation were enrolled. When compared to the first assessment, R-wave amplitude increased of 19.1% at second control performed after 13 ± 4 min (+1.71 ± 0.2 mV, 95% CI: 1.4–2.02; P < 0.001). Conversely, PT significantly decreased of 22.1% at 12-month follow-up respect to baseline (−0.22 ± 0.03 V, 95% CI: −0.13 to − 0.31; P < 0.001) (Figure 1). Among patients with high PT, acute increase of R-wave sensing of 1.5 mV after 14 ± 4 min significantly predicted PT normalization (≤1 V@0.24 ms) 12 months post-implant (R = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.13–0.33, P < 0.001) (Figure 2), with a sensitivity of 87.5% (95% CI: 0.61–0.98) and a specificity of 88.8% (95% CI: 0.51–0.99) (Figure 3). Conclusions A 1.5 mV increase in R-wave amplitude at implant time is predictive of PT normalization ( 536 Figure

Aims Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) may sustain damages during a course of radiation therapy, especially when the beam is directed onto the pulse generator, with device electrical reset and/or sudden battery drain. 2010 HRS/ASA expert consensus, and all CIEDs manufacturers, recommend to avoid devices direct irradiation with an accumulated dose that exceed five grays (Gy). In our prospective study, we tested the effects of direct irradiation on CIEDs with different radiation doses, also higher than 5 Gy. Methods and results Thirty-seven CIEDs of Medtronic, Abbott, Biotronik, and Boston Scientific were collected during system upgrading or lead extraction procedures. All devices were considered if they had at least 80% of residual battery capacity. All CIEDs were programmed with same default electrical parameters. Depending by CIED type, pacing mode was configured in VVI, VVIR, VDDR, or DDDR, and biventricular stimulation was activated, if present. ICDs electrical therapies were set-up with a pre-determined configuration. All devices were singularly placed in a 30 cm × 30 cm plastic bowl containing 2 l of deionized water that was placed over 5 cm Rockwool to simulate the backscatter and irradiated by a linear accelerator (Elekta Synergy®). CIEDs were divided into two groups depending on irradiation dose delivered: 5 Gy and 10 Gy. No significant differences in battery drainage were observed after irradiation respect to baseline in 5 Gy as well 10 Gy group [7.9 ± 3.1 vs. 7.5 ± 2.1 (years) battery longevity, P = 0.693; 7.7 ± 3.1 vs. 7.4 ± 2.1 (years) battery longevity, P = 0.677, respectively) (Figure). Moreover, all CIEDS saved the baseline program setting, without device reset events (Table). Conclusions Our data confirm that CIEDs direct irradiation of 5 Gy is safe, of note, direct irradiation up to 10 Gy seems to be similarly safe concerning the risk of CIEDs electrical reset and/or unexpected battery drain.

The feasibility and effectiveness of virtual visits (VVs) for cardiac electrophysiology patients are still unknown. We aimed to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of VVs as compared to in-person visits, and to describe patient experience with virtual care in clinical electrophysiology. We prospectively enrolled patients scheduled to receive a clinical electrophysiology evaluation, dividing them in two groups: a VV group and an in-person visit group. Outcomes of interest were: (1) improvement in symptoms after the index visit, (2) disappearance of remote monitoring (RM) alerts at follow-up, (3) necessity of urgent hospitalization and (4) patient satisfaction measured by the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire-18 (PSQ-18). This study included 162 patients in the VV group and 185 in the in-office visit group. As compared to in-person visits, VVs resulted in a similar reduction in RM alerts (51.5% vs. 43.2%, p-value 0.527) and in symptomatic patient rates (73.6% vs. 56.9%, p-value 0.073) at follow-up, without differences in urgent hospitalization rates (p-value 0.849). Patient satisfaction with VVs was higher than with in-person evaluation (p-value < 0.012). VVs proved to be as feasible and as effective as in-person visits, with high patient satisfaction. A hybrid model of care including VVs and in-person visits may become the new standard of care after the COVID-19 pandemic is over.

INTRODUCTION The PRAETORIAN score (PS) was developed to assess the implant position and predict defibrillation success of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillators (S-ICD). The main critique moved to the routine use of PS has been its postprocedural timing, that limits its usefulness on procedure guidance. The aim of this proof-of-concept study was to assess the feasibility of an intraprocedural use of PS. METHODS Forty consecutive patients undergoing S-ICD implantation were enrolled. Intraprocedural PS (IP-PS) obtained with fluoroscopy before closure of the pocket and postprocedural PS (PP-PS) obtained with two-views chest X-ray were compared. Intraprocedural data and PS were compared with the historic cohorts of the involved institutions. RESULTS When assessing IP-PS and PP-PS, a complete overall agreement was observed (100%, 1.00-κ; p

High pacing threshold (HPT) and very high pacing threshold (VHPT) are known to have a negative impact on leadless pacemaker battery longevity, representing the most common reason for device repositioning. In this study, we evaluated if intraoperative electrical parameters recorded during Micra™ VR implant would be able to predict device performance during follow-up (FU).A total of 93 patients undergoing Micra™ VR implant were retrospectively considered. Patients were enrolled in the study if electrical assessment was performed at least twice at implant, at Micra™ final positioning and after removal of the delivery system. All patients received a FU visit at 1 and 12 month after discharge. R-wave sensing amplitude, pacing threshold (PT), and impedance were recorded at each visit.When compared to the first assessment, R-wave sensing amplitude increased by 19.1% after 13 ± 4 min (+ 1.71 ± 0.2 mV, 95% CI 1.4 to 2.02; p .001). Conversely, there was a significant PT decrease of 22.1% at 12-month FU (- 0.22 ± 0.03 V, 95% CI - 0.13 to - 0.31; p .001). Among patients with HPT, acute increase of R-wave sensing of 1.5 mV after 14 ± 4 min predicted a significant reduction of PT below 1 V/0.24, at 12-month post-implant (R = 0.72, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.33, p .001), with a sensitivity of 87.5% (95% CI 0.61-0.98) and a specificity of 88.8% (95% CI 0.51-0.99).A 1.5-mV increase in R-wave amplitude at implant is predictive of PT normalization ( 1.0 V/0.24 ms) at 12-month FU. This finding may have practical implications for device repositioning in case of HPT recording at implant.

Background To date, only a few comparisons between subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) patients undergoing and those not undergoing defibrillation testing (DT) at implantation (DT+ vs DT–) have been reported. Objective The purpose of this study was to compare long-term clinical outcomes of 2 propensity-matched cohorts of DT+ and DT– patients. Methods Among consecutive S-ICD patients implanted across 17 centers from January 2015 to October 2020, DT– patients were 1:1 propensity-matched for baseline characteristics with DT+ patients. The primary outcome was a composite of ineffective shocks and cardiovascular mortality. Appropriate and inappropriate shock rates were deemed secondary outcomes. Results Among 1290 patients, a total of 566 propensity-matched patients (283 DT+; 283 DT–) served as study population. Over median follow-up of 25.3 months, no significant differences in primary outcome event rates were found (10 DT+ vs 14 DT–; P = .404) as well as for ineffective shocks (5 DT– vs 3 DT+; P = .725). At multivariable Cox regression analysis, DT performance was associated with a reduction of neither the primary combined outcome nor ineffective shocks at follow-up. A high PRAETORIAN score was positively associated with both the primary outcome (hazard ratio 3.976; confidence interval 1.339–11.802; P = .013) and ineffective shocks alone at follow-up (hazard ratio 19.030; confidence interval 4.752–76.203; P = .003). Conclusion In 2 cohorts of strictly propensity-matched patients, DT performance was not associated with significant differences in cardiovascular mortality and ineffective shocks. The PRAETORIAN score is capable of correctly identifying a large percentage of patients at risk for ineffective shock conversion in both cohorts.

Recently, the Food and Drug Administration issued a recall for the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) because of the possibility of lead ruptures and accelerated battery depletion.The aim of this study was to evaluate device-related complications over time in a large real-world multicenter S-ICD cohort.Patients implanted with an S-ICD from January 2015 to June 2020 were enrolled from a 19-institution European registry (Experience from the Long-term Italian S-ICD registry [ELISIR]; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT0473876). Device-related complication rates over follow-up were collected. Last follow-up of patients was performed after the Boston Scientific recall issue.A total of 1254 patients (median age 52.0 [interquartile range 41.0-62.2] years; 973 (77.6%) men; 387 (30.9%) ischemic) was enrolled. Over a follow-up of 23.2 (12.8-37.8) months, complications were observed in 117 patients (9.3%) for a total of 127 device-related complications (23.6% managed conservatively and 76.4% required reintervention). Twenty-seven patients (2.2%) had unanticipated generator replacement after 3.6 (3.3-3.9) years, while 4 (0.3%) had lead rupture. Body mass index (hazard ratio [HR] 1.063 [95% confidence interval 1.028-1.100]; P.001), chronic kidney disease (HR 1.960 [1.191-3.225]; P = .008), and oral anticoagulation (HR 1.437 [1.010-2.045]; P = .043) were associated with an increase in overall complications, whereas older age (HR 0.980 [0.967-0.994]; P = .007) and procedure performed in high-volume centers (HR 0.463 [0.300-0.715]; P = .001) were protective factors.The overall complication rate over 23.2 months of follow-up in a multicenter S-ICD cohort was 9.3%. Early unanticipated device battery depletions occurred in 2.2% of patients, while lead fracture was observed in 0.3%, which is in line with the expected rates reported by Boston Scientific.

Background: Current guidelines recommend avoiding apical left ventricular (LV) pacing for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Aims: We investigated the feasibility of nonapical pacing with the current quadripolar LV lead technology. Methods: We analyzed consecutive patients who received CRT with an LV quadripolar lead. The post­­implantation position of each electrode of the LV lead was designated as basal, mid, or apical. The pacing capture threshold (PCT) and phrenic nerve stimulation (PNS) threshold were assessed for each electrode. Results: We enrolled 168 patients. A total of 8 CRT defibrillators were from Biotronik (with Sentus OTW QP leads), 98 were from Boston Scientific (with 21 Acuity X4 Spiral and 77 Acuity X4 Straight leads), and 62 from St. Jude Medical (with Quartet leads). The median (interquartile range) number of electrodes at nonapical segments per patient was 3 (1–4) with Biotronik Sentus leads, 4 (3–4) with spiral ­design Boston Scientific leads, 4 (3–4) with straight Boston Scientific leads, and 3 (3–4) with St. Jude Medical Quartet leads (P = 0.045). Three patients (38%) with Biotronik Sentus leads, 21 (100%) with spiral ­design Boston Scientific leads, 69 (90%) with straight ­design Boston Scientific leads, and 49 (79%) with St. Jude Medical Quartet leads (P < 0.001) had at least 1 electrode located at nonapical segments linked with a PNS ­PCT safety margin of more than 2 V. During the 6­month follow ­up, PNS was detected in 4 patients and was eliminated with reprogramming. No significant changes in PCT were detected during follow ­up. Conclusions: Quadripolar leads allowed nonapical pacing with acceptable electrical parameters in the majority of CRT recipients, although differences were found among the currently available devices.

Background Epidemiological evidence suggests that anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory properties of statins may reduce the risk of infections and infection-related complications. Objective We aimed to assess the impact of prior statin use on coronavirus disease (COVID-19) severity and mortality. Methods In this observational multicenter study, consecutive patients hospitalized for COVID-19 were enrolled. In-hospital mortality and severity of COVID-19 assessed with National Early Warning Score (NEWS) were deemed primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. Propensity score (PS) matching was used to obtain balanced cohorts. Results Among 842 patients enrolled, 179 (21%) were treated with statins before admission. Statin patients showed more comorbidities and more severe COVID-19 (NEWS 4 [IQR 2–6] vs 3 [IQR 2–5], p

In the early stages of COVID-19 pneumonia, hypoxemia has been described in absence of dyspnea ("silent" or "happy" hypoxemia). Our aim was to report its prevalence and outcome in a series of hypoxemic patients upon Emergency Department admission.In this retrospective observational cohort study we enrolled a study population consisting of 213 COVID-19 patients with PaOinf2/inf/FiOinf2/infratio300 mmHg at hospital admission. Two groups (silent and dyspneic hypoxemia) were defined. Symptoms, blood gas analysis, chest X-ray (CXR) severity, need for intensive care and outcome were recorded.Silent hypoxemic patients (68-31.9%) compared to the dyspneic hypoxemic patients (145-68.1%) showed greater frequency of extra respiratory symptoms (myalgia, diarrhea and nausea) and lower plasmatic LDH. PaOinf2/inf/FiOinf2/infratio was 225±68 mmHg and 192±78 mmHg in silent and dyspneic hypoxemia respectively (P=0.002). Eighteen percent of the patients with PaOinf2/inf/FiOinf2/inffrom 50 to 150 mmHg presented silent hypoxemia. Silent and dyspneic hypoxemic patients had similar PaCOinf2/inf(34.2±6.8 mmHg vs. 33.5±5.7 mmHg, P=0.47) but different respiratory rates (24.6±5.9 bpm vs. 28.6±11.3 bpm respectively, P=0.002). Even when CXR was severely abnormal, 25% of the population was silent hypoxemic. Twenty-six point five percent and 38.6% of silent and dyspneic patients were admitted to the ICU respectively (P=0.082). Mortality rate was 17.6% and 29.7% (log-rank P=0.083) in silent and dyspneic patients.Silent hypoxemia is remarkably present in COVID-19. The presence of dyspnea is associated with a more severe clinical condition.

Aims Balloon-based technologies have been developed to simplify catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF), to improve the clinical outcome of the procedure and to achieve durable pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). The objective of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of second-generation laser balloon (LB2) ablation in the treatment of AF using a continuous cardiac rhythm monitoring strategy. Atrial tachyarrhythmias (ATas) recurrences were assessed with implantable cardiac monitors (ICMs) or devices. Methods and results All patients underwent LB2 ablation procedure. The primary endpoint was the first recurrence of any, >5.5 and >24 h duration ATas after the blanking period (90 days). In-hospital visits were performed at 3, 6, and 12 months. Seventy-three patients (68% male, mean age 59.8 ± 11.3) were included in the study. The average procedure, fluoroscopy, and laser ablation times were 81.5 ± 30.1, 21.5 ± 12.4, and 33.8 ± 9.7, respectively. All PVs were isolated using the LB2 with no need of touch-up using focal catheters. No major complications occurred during or after the procedures. The one-year freedom from recurrences was 66.9% (95% CI: 57.0–76.7%), 81.0% (69.5–88.5%), and 86.8% (76.1–92.9%) considering any, 5.5-h and 24-h cut-off duration, respectively. At 3, 6, and 12 months, any ATas was recorded in 22%, 32%, and 25% of patients, with a ≥5% arrhythmic burden documented in 4%, 5%, and 3%, respectively. Few patients reported AF-related symptoms (7%, 8%, and 5%). Conclusion LB2 ablation is a safe and effective procedure, showing a high freedom from recurrences and low arrhythmic burden as documented by a continuous rhythm monitoring strategy.

Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been associated with myocardial involvement. Among cardiovascular manifestations, cardiac arrhythmias seem to be fairly common, although no specifics are reported in the literature. An increased risk of malignant ventricular arrhythmias and electrical storm (ES) has to be considered. Case summary We describe a 68-year-old patient with a previous history of coronary artery disease and severe left ventricular systolic disfunction, who presented to our emergency department describing cough, dizziness, fever, and shortness of breath. She was diagnosed with COVID-19 pneumonia, confirmed after three nasopharyngeal swabs. Ventricular tachycardia (VT) storm with multiple implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) shocks was the presenting manifestation of cardiac involvement during the COVID-19 clinical course. A substrate-based VT catheter ablation procedure was successfully accomplished using a remote navigation system. The patient recovered from COVID-19 and did not experience further ICD interventions. Discussion To date, COVID-19 pneumonia associated with a VT storm as the main manifestation of cardiac involvement has never been reported. This case highlights the role of COVID-19 in precipitating ventricular arrhythmias in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy who were previously stable.

Introduction. Catheter-based or surgical procedures in patients with long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (LSPAF) remain a challenge. As a result, different approaches including hybrid (surgical and endocardial) ablation have been developed. Bachmann’s bundle (BB) is a mainly epicardial structure capable of sustaining arrhythmic reentry that could be involved in the development and perpetuation of atrial fibrillation. We investigated the efficacy and safety of an adjunctive BB ablation in LSPAF patients undergoing hybrid ablation. Methods. In a two arm non randomized study, consecutive LSPAF patients undergoing epicardial isolation of pulmonary veins with left atrial posterior wall (box-lesion) with (n=30, BB-group) and without additional BB ablation (n=30, CONV-group) were enrolled in the study. All patients underwent an endocardial procedure within 6 weeks post-surgery to assess for potential lesion gaps and additional atrial substrate modification. The primary endpoint was freedom from AF through 12 months of follow-up. Results. The two-staged hybrid ablation was successfully completed in all patients. One-year freedom from atrial arrhythmias recurrence rates was 96.6% in the BB group vs 76.6% in the CONV group (p=0.025). At procedure completion, 30 (100%) and 17 (56%) patients had a spontaneous cardioversion in BB and CONV group respectively (p < 0.001). No significant differences in quality of life or complication rates were observed. Conclusions. This initial experience shows, for the first time, that adjunctive BB ablation in the setting of hybrid ablation for LSPAF is a feasible and effective approach in increasing maintenance of sinus rhythm without increasing complication rates.

Since an association between myocardial infarction (MI) and respiratory infections has been described for influenza viruses and other respiratory viral agents, understanding possible physiopathological links between severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and acute coronary syndromes (ACS) is of the greatest importance. The initial data suggest an underestimation of ACS cases all over the world, but acute MI still represents a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide and should not be overshadowed during the coronavirus disease (Covid-19) pandemic. No common consensus regarding the most adequate healthcare management policy for ACS is currently available. Indeed, important differences have been reported between the measures employed to treat ACS in China during the first disease outbreak and what currently represents clinical practice across Europe and the USA. This review aims to discuss the pathophysiological links between MI, respiratory infections, and Covid-19; epidemiological data related to ACS at the time of the Covid-19 pandemic; and learnings that have emerged so far from several catheterization labs and coronary care units all over the world, in order to shed some light on the current strategies for optimal management of ACS patients with confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Background: Although studies assessing cardiovascular comorbidities and myocardial injury in Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients have been published, no reports focused on clinical outcomes of myocardial injury in patients with and without chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) are currently available. Methods: In this study, consecutive COVID-19 patients admitted to four different institutions were screened for enrolment. Patients were divided into two groups (CCS vs. no-CCS). Association with in-hospital mortality and related predictors represented the main study outcome, myocardial injury and its predictors were deemed secondary outcomes. Results: A total of 674 COVID-19 patients were enrolled, 112 (16.6%) with an established history of CCS. Myocardial injury occurred in 43.8% patients with CCS vs. 14.4% patients without CCS, as confirmed by high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) elevation on admission or during hospitalization. The mortality rate in the CCS cohort was nearly three-fold higher. After adjusting for disease severity, myocardial injury resulted significantly associated with in-hospital mortality in the no-CCS group but not in CCS patients. Conclusions: Patients with CCS and COVID-19 showed high mortality rate. Myocardial injury may be a bystander in CCS patients and COVID-19, while in patients without known history of CCS, myocardial injury has a significant role in predicting poor outcomes.