COVID-19 outbreak had a major impact on the organization of care in Italy, and a survey to evaluate provision of for arrhythmia during COVID-19 outbreak (March-April 2020) was launched. A total of 104 physicians from 84 Italian arrhythmia centres took part in the survey. The vast majority of participating centres (95.2%) reported a significant reduction in the number of elective pacemaker implantations during the outbreak period compared to the corresponding two months of year 2019 (50.0% of centres reported a reduction of > 50%). Similarly, 92.9% of participating centres reported a significant reduction in the number of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantations for primary prevention, and 72.6% a significant reduction of ICD implantations for secondary prevention (> 50% in 65.5 and 44.0% of the centres, respectively). The majority of participating centres (77.4%) reported a significant reduction in the number of elective ablations (> 50% in 65.5% of the centres). Also the interventional procedures performed in an emergency setting, as well as acute management of atrial fibrillation had a marked reduction, thus leading to the conclusion that the impact of COVID-19 was disrupting the entire organization of health care, with a massive impact on the activities and procedures related to arrhythmia management in Italy.

No abstract

Background: Fever is a potential side effect of the Covid-19 vaccination. Patients with Brugada syndrome (BrS) have an increased risk of life-threatening arrhythmias when experiencing fever. Prompt treatment with antipyretic drugs is suggested in these patients.Aim of the study: To evaluate the incidence and management of fever within 48 h from Covid-19 vaccination among BrS patients.Methods: One hundred sixty-three consecutive patients were enrolled in a prospective registry involving five European hospitals with a dedicated inherited disease ambulatory. Results:The mean age was 50 ± 14 years and 121 (75%) patients were male.Prevalence of Brugada electrocardiogram (ECG) pattern type-1, -2, and -3 was 32%, 44%, and 24%, respectively. Twenty-eight (17%) patients had an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). Fever occurred in 32 (19%) BrS patients after 16 ± 10 h from vaccination, with a peak of body temperature of 37.9°± 0.5°. Patients with fever were younger (39 ± 13 vs. 48 ± 13 years, p = .04). No additional differences in terms of sex and cardiovascular risk factors were found between patients with fever and not. Twenty-seven (84%) out of 32 patients experienced mild fever and five (16%) moderate fever. Pharmacological treatment with antipyretic drugs was required in 18 (56%) out of 32 patients and was associated with the resolution of symptoms. No patient required hospital admission and no arrhythmic episode was recorded in patients with ICD within 48 h after vaccination.No induced type 1 BrS ECG pattern and new ECG features were found among patients with moderate fever.

BackgroundIntermittent ventricular pre‐excitation was considered a low‐risk marker for sudden death. However, to date, some studies do not exclude the existence of accessory pathways (APs) with high‐risk intermittent antegrade conductive properties. According to current European Guidelines, high‐risk features of APs are antegrade pathway conduction ≤250 ms in baseline or during the adrenergic stimulus, inducibility of atrioventricular reciprocating tachycardias (AVRT), inducibility of pre‐excited atrial fibrillation (AF), and presence of multiple APs. For all of these transcatheter ablation is recommended. The aim of our study was to evaluate the existence of differences in risk characteristics between patients with intermittent pre‐excitation (IPX) and those with persistent pre‐excitation (PPX), from a sample of adults with ventricular pre‐excitation and symptoms like palpitations.Methods293 adults [IPX: 51 (17.4%); PPX: 242 (82.6%)] underwent electrophysiological study and then catheter ablation of their APs if arrhythmia inducibility (AVRT/AF) was noted, or, conversely, if it was appreciated a fast AP antegrade conduction, in baseline or during intravenous isoproterenol infusion, or if multiple APs were detected.ResultsThere were no statistically significant differences in demographic characteristics (age and gender), AVRT/AF inducibility, antegrade conductive properties, the prevalence of multiple APs, and APs locations between IPX and PPX patients.ConclusionsIn our study, patients with IPX did not show significant differences in clinical and electrophysiological features versus PPX patients.

No abstract