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

High-burden AF is associated with progressive LA structural remodeling. In contrast, AF ablation results in significant reverse remodeling. These data may have implications for timing of ablative intervention.

Aims The clinical reliability of echocardiographic surrogate markers of left ventricular filling pressures (LVFPs) across different cardiovascular pathologies remains unanswered. The main objective was to evaluate the evidence of how effectively different echocardiographic indices estimate true LVFP. Methods and results Design: this is a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Data source: Scopus, PubMed and Embase. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies were those that used echocardiography to predict or estimate pulmonary capillary wedge pressure or left ventricular end‐diastolic pressures. Twenty‐seven studies met criteria. Only eight studies (30%) reported both correlation coefficient and bias between non‐invasive and invasively measured LVFPs. The majority of studies (74%) recorded invasive pulmonary capillary wedge pressure as a surrogate for left ventricular end‐diastolic pressures. The pooled correlation coefficient overall was r = 0.69 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63–0.75, P < 0.01]. Evaluation by cohort demonstrated varying association: heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (11 studies, n = 575, r = 0.59, 95% CI 0.53–0.64) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (8 studies, n = 381, r = 0.67, 95% CI 0.61–0.72). Conclusions Echocardiographic indices show moderate pooled association to invasively measured LVFP; however, this varies widely with disease state. In heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, no single echocardiography‐based metric offers a reliable estimate. In heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, mitral inflow‐derived indices (E/e′, E/A, E/Vp, and EDcT) have reasonable clinical applicability. While an integrated approach of several echocardiographic metrics provides the most promise for estimating LVFP reliably, such strategies need further validation in larger, patient‐specific studies.

End-stage renal disease was the strongest indicator of cardiovascular disease progression in Fabry disease. Enzyme replacement initiated prior to CKD5 was associated with stability in cardiac and renal disease while patients with CKD5 showed ongoing deterioration. Additionally, E/Ea ≥15 may predict risk of cardiac events.

Background: There are several methods to quantify mitral regurgitation (MR) by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR). The interoperability of these methods and their reproducibility remains undetermined. Objective: To determine the agreement and reproducibility of different MR quantification methods by CMR across all aetiologies. Methods: Thirty-five patients with MR were recruited (primary MR = 12, secondary MR = 10 and MVR = 13). Patients underwent CMR, including cines and four-dimensional flow (4D flow). Four methods were evaluated: MR Standard (left ventricular stroke volume -aortic forward flow by phase contrast), MR LVRV (left ventricular stroke volume -right ventricular stroke volume), MR Jet (direct jet quantification by 4D flow) and MR MVAV (mitral forward flow by 4D flow -aortic forward flow by 4D flow). For all cases and MR types, 520 MR volumes were recorded by these 4 methods for intra−/inter-observer tests. Results: In primary MR, MR MVAV and MR LVRV were comparable to MR Standard (P > 0.05). MR Jet resulted in significantly higher MR volumes when compared to MR Standard (P < 0.05) In secondary MR and MVR cases, all methods were comparable. In intra-observer tests, MR MVAV demonstrated least bias with best limits of agreement (bias = −0.1 ml, −8 ml to 7.8 ml, P = 0.9) and best concordance correlation coefficient (CCC = 0.96, P < 0.01). In interobserver tests, for primary MR and MVR, least bias and highest CCC were observed for MR MVAV . For secondary MR, bias was lowest for MR Jet (−0.1 ml, P_NS). Conclusion: CMR methods of MR quantification demonstrate agreement in secondary MR and MVR. In primary MR, this was not observed. Across all types of MR, MR MVAV quantification demonstrated the highest reproducibility and consistency.