Search

Background and aim Prophylactic implantation of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is class 1 recommendation for heart failure (HF) patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) even though its proven advantage is weaker among nonischemic aetiology. In fact, in an era where both optimal medical therapy (OMT) and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) significantly reduce sudden cardiac death (SCD), it is questionable whether ICD still have additional value. The aim of this study was to assess the current benefit of ICDs in preventing sudden cardiac death through resuscitated cardiac arrest (RCA), appropriate therapy for sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) or fibrillation (VF) in a contemporary population of idiopathic HFrEF patients. Methods Single-centre retrospective study of consecutive symptomatic (NYHA class II to IV) idiopathic HFrEF patients with an ICD (either alone or in association with CRT), and remote monitoring with the corresponding software (MerlinTM, LatitudeTM, CarelinkTM, MicroPortTM or BiotronikTM) to assure appropriate event supervising. Idiopathic aetiology was assumed after excluding other probable causes. Coronary angiogram was required to exclude ischemic aetiology. Only those with prophylactic ICD implantation were included. RCA was defined as collapse with clinical signs of cardiac arrest and VF or VT appropriately terminated by ICD. In order to be sustained, VT episode had to have last at least 30 seconds. Results From 781 remote monitoring controlled patients, a total of 187 consecutive symptomatic idiopathic HFrEF patients with an ICD (125 men, mean age 64±18 years) were enrolled. Patients were on optimal medical therapy (ACEi/ARB: n=168, 90%; BB: n=154, 82%; mineralocorticoid antagonists: n=91, 49%; CRT: n=130, 70%; see Table). After a median follow-up of 99 months (IQR 62.2), RCA occurred in 10.7% (n=20) and 36.9% (n=69) had appropriately terminated VT. Both left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) improvement and CRT implantation did not independently reduce the incidence of RCA and VT requiring ICD therapy (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.99–1.05; P=0.146 and OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.34–2.13; P=0.728; respectively). All cause mortality was 20 (10.7%). Inappropriate therapy was given as shocks to 41 patients (21.9%) and as antitachycardia pacing (ATP) to 30 (16%), opposing with appropriately given therapy to 43 (23%) and 63 (33.7%) patients, respectively (see Figure), contributing to a net clinical benefit (NCB) of 18.8%, favouring ICD implantation. Conclusion In this contemporaneous real-world population of symptomatic idiopathic HFrEF patients, episodes of impending cardiac death were frequent. Prophylactic ICD implantation seems to have added further benefit reducing SCD on top of optimal medical therapy, LVEF improvement and coexisting CRT. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

Introduction Direct comparisons of long-term clinical outcomes of endocardial vs. epicardial catheter ablation techniques for drug-resistant ventricular tachycardia (VT) have been scarcely reported. We aim to compare the long-term efficacy and safety of endocardial vs. epicardial catheter ablation (END-ABL and EPI-ABL, respectively) in a propensity score (PS) matched population. Methods Single-center observational registry including 215 consecutive patients who underwent END-ABL (181) or EPI-ABL (n=34) for drug-resistant VT between January 2007 and June 2018. Efficacy endpoint was defined as VT-free survival after catheter ablation, while safety outcomes were defined by 30-days mortality and procedure-related complications. A propensity score was used to match patients in a 1:1 fashion according to the following variables: VT storm at presentation, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III/IV at presentation, ischemic ethology, presence of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), and previous endocardial catheter ablation. Independent predictors of VT recurrence were assessed by Cox regression. Results The PS yielded two groups of 31 patients each well matched for baseline characteristics (Table 1). Over a median follow-up of 2 years (IQR 1–3), 58% (n=18) ENDO-ABL patients had VT recurrence vs. 26% (n=8) in the EPI-ABL group (P=0.020). The yearly rates of VT recurrence were 28%/year for END-ABL vs. 11%/year for EPI-ABL (P=0.021). Multivariate survival analysis identified previous endocardial ablation (HR= 3.52; 95% CI 1.17–10.54, p=0.026) and VT storm at presentation (HR=3.57; 95% CI 1.50–8.50, p=0.004) as independent predictors of VT recurrence. EPI-ABL was independently associated with fewer VT recurrences (HR=0.28; 95 CI 0.12–0.69, p=0.005), but only in patients with a previous endocardial ablation (p for interaction = 0.004) – Figure A. No patients died at 30-days post-procedure. Hospital length of stay was similar between END-ABL and EPI-ABL (5 vs. 4 days respectively, p=0.139), as was the complication rate (6.5% vs. 12.9% respectively, p=0.390), although driven by different causes (Table 1). Conclusion VT storm at presentation and previous catheter ablation were independent predictors of VT recurrence. In patients with a previous failed endocardial catheter ablation, epicardial ablation seems to provide greater VT-free survival than repeat endocardial ablation. Both strategies seem equally safe.

Introduction Pulmonary vein (PV) reconnection is a common cause of relapse after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF). However, some patients have AF recurrence despite durable PV isolation. The aim of this study was to assess the PV isolation status at the time of a second catheter ablation (redo) procedure, and its relationship with subsequent AF relapse. Methods Consecutive patients with symptomatic drug-resistant AF who underwent redo procedures from January 2006 to December 2017 were identified in a single-center observational registry. Pulmonary vein isolation status was assessed during the electrophysiologic study with a circular mapping catheter. Additional radiofrequency (RF) energy applications were also recorded. AF relapse was defined as symptomatic or documented AF/atrial tachycardia/atrial flutter after a 3-month blanking period. Results We identified 240 patients (77 [32%] females, median age 61 [IQR 53–67] years, 85 [35%] with non-paroxysmal AF) undergoing redo procedures during the study period. At the time of redo, 17 (7%) of the patients presented bidirectional conduction block of all PVs. PV reconnection occurred in 157 (65%) of cases in the left superior vein, 142 (59%) in the left inferior vein, 177 (73%) in the right superior vein, and 163 (68%) in the right inferior vein (table). All of the PVs were reconducted in 91 (38%) patients. Additional RF applications were performed in the left atrium (LA) roof, LA posterior wall, cavotricuspid isthmus, mitral isthmus, superior vena cava, coronary sinus, and left atrial appendage ostium, at the operator's discretion (table 1). Over a median follow-up of 2-years (IQR 1–5), 126 patients (53%) suffered AF recurrence, yielding a mean relapse rate of 17%/year. In multivariate Cox regression analysis, the lack of PV reconnection at the time of redo emerged as an independent predictor of subsequent relapse (HR 1.97, 95% CI 1.12–3.49, p=0.019) even after adjustment for univariate predictors including non-paroxysmal AF, body mass index, female sex, and active smoking. Conclusion In patients undergoing redo AF ablation procedures, less than 10% present with complete PV isolation. Despite being relatively infrequent, this finding is independently associated with greater likelihood of subsequent recurrence, suggesting that other mechanisms, not fully addressed by additional RF applications, are at play.

Aims: To study the prevalence of conversion from Radial (RA) to Femoral Access (FA) in cardiac catheterization and identify its clinical and demographic predictors. Methods and results: Prospective multicentre registry, including 7664 consecutive pts undergoing catheterization via RA between Jan/2009 and Out/2012 (66±11 years, 32% female). A total of 2982 procedures (38.9%) were PCIs and the most used route was the right RA (97.6%). We evaluated the incidence of conversion to FA and its predictors by logistic regression analysis. RA failure rate was 6.2%, with conversion to FA in most cases (93.9%). The need for conversion was more frequent in older pts (mean age 69±12 yrs vs 65±11 yrs, p