Kyoung‐Min Park

AIMS: We investigated the clinical features, predictors, and long-term prognosis of pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PiCM). METHODS AND RESULTS: From a retrospective analysis of 1418 consecutive pacemaker patients, 618 were found to have a preserved baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), follow-up echocardiographic data, and no history of heart failure (HF). PiCM was defined as a reduction in LVEF (< 50%) along with either (i) a ≥ 10% decrease in LVEF, or (ii) new-onset regional wall motion abnormality unrelated to coronary artery disease. PiCM occurred in 87 of 618 patients (14.1%), with a decrease in mean LVEF from 60.5% to 40.1%. The median time to PiCM was 4.7 years. Baseline left bundle branch block, wider paced QRS duration (≥ 155 ms), and higher ventricular pacing percentage (≥ 86%) were identified as independent predictors of PiCM in multivariate logistic regression analysis. The risk of PiCM increased gradually with the number of identified predictors, becoming more significant in the presence of two or more predictors (P < 0.001). During the entire follow-up (median 7.2 years), the risk of all-cause death or HF admission was significantly higher in patients with PiCM compared to those without PiCM (38.3% vs. 54.0%, adjusted hazard ratio 2.93; 95% confidence interval 1.82-4.72; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Pacing-induced cardiomyopathy patients showed a worse long-term prognosis than those without PiCM. Therefore, patients with multiple risk factors of PiCM should be monitored carefully even if their left ventricular systolic function is preserved initially. A timely upgrade to a biventricular or His-bundle pacing device needs to be considered in patients with PiCM.

BACKGROUND: Most previous studies on the efficacy of antipsychotic medication for the treatment of delirium have reported that there is no significant difference between typical and atypical antipsychotic medications. It is known, however, that older age might be a predictor of poor response to antipsychotics in the treatment of delirium. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of haloperidol versus three atypical antipsychotic medications (risperidone, olanzapine, and quetiapine) for the treatment of delirium with consideration of patient age. METHODS: This study was a 6-day, prospective, comparative clinical observational study of haloperidol versus atypical antipsychotic medications (risperidone, olanzapine, and quetiapine) in patients with delirium at a tertiary level hospital. The subjects were referred to the consultation-liaison psychiatric service for management of delirium and were screened before enrollment in this study. A total of 80 subjects were assigned to receive either haloperidol (N = 23), risperidone (N = 21), olanzapine (N = 18), or quetiapine (N = 18). The efficacy was evaluated using the Korean version of the Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 (DRS-K) and the Korean version of the Mini Mental Status Examination (K-MMSE). The safety was evaluated by the Udvalg Kliniske Undersogelser side effect rating scale. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in mean DRS-K severity or K-MMSE scores among the four groups at baseline. In all groups, the DRS-K severity score decreased and the K-MMSE score increased significantly over the study period. However, there were no significant differences in the improvement of DRS-K or K-MMSE scores among the four groups. Similarly, cognitive and non-cognitive subscale DRS-K scores decreased regardless of the treatment group. The treatment response rate was lower in patients over 75 years old than in patients under 75 years old. Particularly, the response rate to olanzapine was poorer in the older age group. Fifteen subjects experienced a few adverse events, but there were no significant differences in adverse event profiles among the four groups. CONCLUSIONS: Haloperidol, risperidone, olanzapine, and quetiapine were equally efficacious and safe in the treatment of delirium. However, age is a factor that needs to be considered when making a choice of antipsychotic medication for the treatment of delirium. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Research Information Service, Republic of Korea, (http://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/en/search/basic_search.jsp, Registered Trial No. KCT0000632).

Importance: Data from randomized clinical trials on a long-term anticoagulation strategy for patients after catheter-based ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) are lacking. Objective: To evaluate whether discontinuing oral anticoagulant therapy provides superior clinical outcomes compared with continuing oral anticoagulant therapy in patients without documented atrial arrhythmia recurrence after catheter ablation for AF. Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized clinical trial including 840 adult patients (aged 19-80 years) who were enrolled and randomized from July 28, 2020, to March 9, 2023, at 18 hospitals in South Korea. Enrolled patients had at least 1 non-sex-related stroke risk factor (determined using the CHA2DS2-VASc score [range, 0-9]) and no documented recurrence of atrial arrhythmia for at least 1 year after catheter ablation for AF. The CHA2DS2-VASc score is used as an assessment of stroke risk among patients with AF (calculated using point values for congestive heart failure, hypertension, ≥75 years of age, diabetes, stroke or transient ischemic attack, vascular disease, between 65 and 74 years of age, and sex category). The date of final follow-up was June 4, 2025. Interventions: The patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to discontinue oral anticoagulant therapy (n = 417) or continue oral anticoagulant therapy (with direct oral anticoagulants; n = 423). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the first occurrence of a composite of stroke, systemic embolism, and major bleeding at 2 years. Individual components of the primary outcome (such as ischemic stroke and major bleeding) were assessed as secondary outcomes. Results: Of the 840 adults randomized, the mean age was 64 (SD, 8) years, 24.9% were women, the mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 2.1 (SD, 1.0), and 67.6% had paroxysmal AF. At 2 years, the primary outcome occurred in 1 patient (0.3%) in the discontinue oral anticoagulant therapy group vs 8 patients (2.2%) in the continue oral anticoagulant therapy group (absolute difference, -1.9 percentage points [95% CI, -3.5 to -0.3]; P = .02). The 2-year cumulative incidence of ischemic stroke was 0.3% in the discontinue oral anticoagulant therapy group vs 0.8% in the continue oral anticoagulant therapy group (absolute difference, -0.5 percentage points [95% CI, -1.6 to 0.6]). Major bleeding occurred in 0 patients in the discontinue oral anticoagulant therapy group vs 5 patients (1.4%) in the continue oral anticoagulant therapy group (absolute difference, -1.4 percentage points [95% CI, -2.6 to -0.2]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients without documented atrial arrhythmia recurrence after catheter ablation for AF, discontinuing oral anticoagulant therapy resulted in a lower risk for the composite outcome of stroke, systemic embolism, and major bleeding vs continuing direct oral anticoagulant therapy. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04432220.