Search

Aims: Assess prevalence, risk factors, and management of patients with intra-cardiac thrombus referred for scar-related ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation., Methods and Results: Consecutive VT ablation referrals between January 2015 and December 2019 were reviewed (n = 618). Patients referred for de novo, scar-related VT ablation who underwent pre-procedure cardiac computed tomography (cCT) were included. We included 401 patients [61 ± 14 years; 364 male; left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 40 ± 13%]; 45 patients (11%) had cardiac thrombi on cCT at 49 sites [29 LV; eight left atrial appendage (LAA); eight right ventricle (RV); four right atrial appendage]. Nine patients had pulmonary emboli. Overall predictors of cardiac thrombus included LV aneurysm [odds ratio (OR): 6.6, 95%, confidence interval (CI): 3.1-14.3], LVEF < 40% (OR: 3.3, CI: 1.5-7.3), altered RV ejection fraction (OR: 2.3, CI: 1.1-4.6), and electrical storm (OR: 2.9, CI: 1.4-6.1). Thrombus location-specific analysis identified LV aneurysm (OR: 10.9, CI: 4.3-27.7) and LVEF < 40% (OR: 9.6, CI: 2.6-35.8) as predictors of LV thrombus and arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (OR: 10.6, CI: 1.2-98.4) as a predictor for RV thrombus. Left atrial appendage thrombi exclusively occurred in patients with atrial fibrillation. Ventricular tachycardia ablation was finally performed in 363 including 7 (16%) patients with thrombus but refractory electrical storm. These seven patients had tailored ablation with no embolic complications. Only one (0.3%) ablation-related embolic event occurred in the entire cohort., Conclusion: Cardiac thrombus can be identified in 11% of patients referred for scar-related VT ablation. These findings underscore the importance of systematic thrombus screening to minimize embolic risk., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: S.M. received speaking honoraria and consulting fees from Biosense Webster and Abbott. P.J. received speaking honorarium and consulting fees from Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific, and Farapulse. He is stakeholder for Inheart. H.C. is stakeholder for Inheart. F.S. received speaking honorarium and consulting fees from Inheart, Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific, and Abbott., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Persistent left superior vena cava (PLSVC) can be incidentally detected during pacemaker implantation from the left pectoral side. Optimal site pacing is technically difficult, and lead stability of the right ventricle (RV) can lead to such a situation. We describe a case of successful single-chamber pacemaker implantation in a 76-year-old woman with a PLSVC and concomitant agenesis of the right-sided superior vena cava, after failed attempts with the conventional procedure. The pacemaker had been working well after 12 months of follow-up.