| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Casteigt, Benjamin, et al.
(author)
-
Atrial arrhythmias and patient-reported outcomes in adults with congenital heart disease : An international study
- 2021
-
In: Heart Rhythm. - : Elsevier BV. - 1547-5271 .- 1556-3871. ; 18:5, s. 793-800
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background Atrial arrhythmias (ie, intra-atrial reentrant tachycardia and atrial fibrillation) are a leading cause of morbidity and hospitalization in adults with congenital heart disease (CHD). Little is known about their effect on quality of life and other patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in adults with CHD. Objective The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of atrial arrhythmias on PROs in adults with CHD and explore geographic variations. Methods Associations between atrial arrhythmias and PROs were assessed in a cross-sectional study of adults with CHD from 15 countries spanning 5 continents. A propensity-based matching weight analysis was performed to compare quality of life, perceived health status, psychological distress, sense of coherence, and illness perception in patients with and those without atrial arrhythmias. Results A total of 4028 adults with CHD were enrolled, 707 (17.6%) of whom had atrial arrhythmias. After applying matching weights, patients with and those without atrial arrhythmias were comparable with regard to age (mean 40.1 vs 40.2 years), demographic variables (52.5% vs 52.2% women), and complexity of CHD (15.9% simple, 44.8% moderate, and 39.2% complex in both groups). Patients with atrial arrhythmias had significantly worse PRO scores with respect to quality of life, perceived health status, psychological distress (ie, depression), and illness perception. A summary score that combines all PRO measures was significantly lower in patients with atrial arrhythmias (-3.3%; P = .0006). Differences in PROs were consistent across geographic regions. Conclusion Atrial arrhythmias in adults with CHD are associated with an adverse impact on a broad range of PROs consistently across various geographic regions.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Lévesque, Valérie, et al.
(author)
-
Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators and Patient-Reported Outcomes in Adults with Congenital Heart Disease : an International Study
- 2020
-
In: Heart Rhythm. - : Elsevier BV. - 1547-5271 .- 1556-3871. ; 17:5, s. 768-776
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) are increasingly used to prevent sudden deaths in the growing population of adults with congenital heart disease (CHD). Yet, little is known about their impact on patient-reported outcomes (PROs).OBJECTIVE: We assessed and compared PROs in adults with CHD with and without ICDs.METHODS: A propensity-based matching weight analysis was conducted to evaluate PROs in an international cross-sectional study of adults with CHD from 15 countries across 5 continents.RESULTS: A total of 3,188 patients were included: 107 with ICDs and 3,081 weight-matched controls without ICDs. ICD recipients averaged 40.1±12.4 years of age, with >95% having moderate or complex CHD. Defibrillators were implanted for primary and secondary prevention in 38.3% and 61.7%, respectively. Perceived health status, psychological distress, sense of coherence, and health behaviours did not differ significantly in patients with and without ICDs. However, ICD recipients had a more threatening view of their illness (relative % difference 8.56, P=0.011). Those with secondary compared to primary prevention indications had a significantly lower quality of life score (linear analogue scale 72.0±23.1 versus 79.2±13.0, P=0.047). Marked geographic variations were observed. Overall sense of well-being, assessed by a summary score that combines various PROs, was significantly lower in ICD recipients (versus controls) from Switzerland, Argentina, Taiwan, and USA.CONCLUSIONS: In an international cohort of adults with CHD, ICDs were associated with a more threatening illness perception, with a lower quality of life in those with secondary compared to primary prevention indications. However, marked geographic variability in PROs was observed.
|
|
| 10. |
- Mehta, Vishal S., et al.
(author)
-
Machine learning-derived major adverse event prediction of patients undergoing transvenous lead extraction : Using the ESC EHRA EORP European lead extraction ConTRolled ELECTRa registry
- 2022
-
In: Heart Rhythm. - : Elsevier. - 1547-5271 .- 1556-3871. ; 19:6, s. 885-893
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) remains a high-risk procedure. OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to develop a machine learning (ML)-based risk stratification system to predict the risk of major adverse events (MAEs) after TLE. A MAE was defined as procedure-related major complication and procedure-related death. METHODS We designed and evaluated an ML-based risk stratification system trained using the European Lead Extraction ConTRolled (ELECTRa) registry to predict the risk of MAEs in 3555 patients undergoing TLE and tested this on an independent registry of 1171 patients. ML models were developed, including a self-normalizing neural network (SNN), stepwise logistic regression model ("stepwise model"), support vector machines, and random forest model. These were compared with the ELECTRa Registry Outcome Score (EROS) for MAEs. RESULTS There were 53 MAEs (1.7%) in the training cohort and 24 (2.4%) in the test cohort. Thirty-two clinically important features were used to train the models. ML techniques were similar to EROS by balanced accuracy (stepwise model: 0.74 vs EROS: 0.70) and superior by area under the curve (support vector machines: 0.764 vs EROS: 0.677). The SNN provided a finite risk for MAE and accurately identified MAE in 14 of 169 "high (<80%) risk" patients (8.3%) and no MAEs in all 198 "low (,20%) risk" patients (100%). CONCLUSION ML models incrementally improved risk prediction for identifying those at risk of MAEs. The SNN has the additional advantage of providing a personalized finite risk assessment for patients. This may aid patient decision making and allow better preoperative risk assessment and resource allocation.
|
|
