Background At peak COVID-19 lockdown, patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) were faced with an equipoise between a palliative rate-control versus cautious rhythm-control strategy, including hospitalization for initiation of antiarrhythmic drug/s (AADs) and cardiac procedures which was impossible due to hospitalization restrictions. Objectives We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of outpatient initiation of dofetilide in patients with AF using cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) for rhythm and QTc interval monitoring. Methods Adult patients with symptomatic AF with prior failure or intolerance to other AADs were enrolled if they were willing to in-office insertion of implantable loop recorders or already implanted with pacemakers or defibrillators capable of remote monitoring. Exclusion criteria were known medical contraindications of dofetilide and unable to provide consent. After making a shared management decision, dofetilide was initiated in a physician office, and rhythm and QTc intervals were monitored by ECGs and CIEDs. Patients were followed to assess the efficacy and safety of the treatment. Results The study cohort comprised of 30 patients, age 76 ± 7 years (mean ± standard deviation), 10 female (33%), CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score 3.25 ± 1.3, ejection fraction 63.45% ± 8.52, and QTc interval 431.68 ± 45.09 ms. From 22 (73%) patients in AF at presentation, SR was restored in 14 (64%) patients after 4 doses of dofetilide. At 46 ± 59 days of follow-up, maintenance of SR in total 22 (73%) patients without cardiac adverse effects was accomplished. Conclusion Effective and safe outpatient initiation of dofetilide during the extenuating circumstance of COVID-19 lockdown was possible in patients with AF who had CIEDs.

Background Antiarrhythmic drugs are often used in the management of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Sotalol is conventionally initiated in the inpatient setting for monitoring efficacy and adverse effects, including QTc interval prolongation and torsades de pointes (TdP) proarrhythmia. Objective We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of outpatient initiation of sotalol for the treatment of AF in a select group of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs): permanent pacemakers (PPMs), implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs), and implantable loop recorders (ILRs) capable of continuous rhythm monitoring remotely. Methods We conducted our clinical study in a real-world practice setting with longitudinal follow-up of the study cohort. We included adult patients with symptomatic paroxysmal and persistent AF eligible for sotalol for rhythm control strategy and who had CIEDs in our study. Patients with a known contraindication to sotalol were excluded. After making a shared management decision with patients, sotalol was initiated as an outpatient, with regular clinical encounters with patients to assess the efficacy and safety of treatment, and monitoring cardiac rhythm and QTc intervals with CIEDs utilizing their remote monitoring platforms. ResultsThe study cohort comprised 105 patients; 38 (36%) females, mean age ± standard deviation (SD) 73.9 ± 10.36 years, and with a CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score of 3.26 ± 1.37 and left ventricular ejection fraction of 60.16 ± 9.10%. Twenty-six (24.8%) patients were implanted with PPMs, 10 (9.5%) with dual-chamber ICDs, and 69 (65.7%) with ILRs. Over a follow-up period of 23 ± 15 months, sotalol was continued at a steady median dose of 80 mg twice daily, 105 ± 42 mg (mean ± SD) in 77 (73%) patients who maintained sinus rhythm, and discontinued in 28 (27%) patients because of inefficacy or development of adverse effects. No adverse effects relating to QTc prolongation and TdP or mortality were observed during the study period. Conclusions Effective and safe outpatient initiation and maintenance of sotalol therapy is possible in select patients who have CIEDs for continuous remote monitoring and surveillance capabilities.