Search

Introduction: High-frequency low-tidal-volume (HFLTV) ventilation during radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) has been shown to be superior to standard ventilation (SV) in terms of procedural efficiency, acute and long-term clinical outcomes. Our study aimed to compare ablation lesions characteristics utilizing HFLTV ventilation versus SV during RFCA of PAF., Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients who underwent pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for PAF between August 2022 and March 2023, using high-power short-duration ablation. Thirty-five patients underwent RFCA with HFLTV ventilation and were matched with another cohort of 35 patients who underwent RFCA with SV. Parameters including ablation duration, contact force (CF), impedance drop, and ablation index were extracted from the CARTONET database for each ablation lesion., Results: A total of 70 patients were included (HFLTV = 35/2484 lesions, SV = 35/2830 lesions) in the analysis. There were no differences in baseline characteristics between the groups. While targeting the same ablation index, the HFLTV ventilation group demonstrated shorter average ablation duration per lesion (12.3 ± 5.0 vs. 15.4 ± 8.4 s, p < .001), higher average CF (17.0 ± 8.5 vs. 10.5 ± 4.6 g, p < .001), and greater impedance reduction (9.5 ± 4.6 vs. 7.7 ± 4.1 ohms, p < .001). HFLTV ventilation group also demonstrated shorter total procedural time (61.3 ± 25.5 vs. 90.8 ± 22.8 min, p < .001), ablation time (40.5 ± 18.6 vs. 65.8 ± 22.5 min, p < .001), and RF time (15.3 ± 4.8 vs. 22.9 ± 9.7 min, p < .001)., Conclusion: HFLTV ventilation during PVI for PAF was associated with improved ablation lesion parameters and procedural efficiency compared to SV., (© 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has emerged as a physiological alternative pacing strategy to biventricular pacing (BIVP) in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). We aimed to assess the impact of LBBAP vs. BIVP on all-cause mortality and heart failure (HF)-related hospitalization in patients undergoing CRT., Methods: Studies comparing LBBAP and BIVP for CRT in patients with HF with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were included. The coprimary outcomes were all-cause mortality and HF-related hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included procedural and fluoroscopy time, change in QRS duration, and change in LVEF., Results: Thirteen studies (12 observational and 1 RCT, n = 3239; LBBAP = 1338 and BIVP = 1901) with a mean follow-up duration of 25.8 months were included. Compared to BIVP, LBBAP was associated with a significant absolute risk reduction of 3.2% in all-cause mortality (9.3% vs 12.5%, RR 0.7, 95% CI 0.57-0.86, p < 0.001) and an 8.2% reduction in HF-related hospitalization (11.3% vs 19.5%, RR 0.6, 95% CI 0.5-0.71, p < 0.00001). LBBAP also resulted in reductions in procedural time (mean weighted difference- 23.2 min, 95% CI - 42.9 to - 3.6, p = 0.02) and fluoroscopy time (- 8.6 min, 95% CI - 12.5 to - 4.7, p < 0.001) as well as a significant reduction in QRS duration (mean weighted difference:- 25.3 ms, 95% CI - 30.9 to - 19.8, p < 0.00001) and a greater improvement in LVEF of 5.1% (95% CI 4.4-5.8, p < 0.001) compared to BIVP in the studies that reported these outcomes., Conclusion: In this meta-analysis, LBBAP was associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality as well as HF-related hospitalization when compared to BIVP. Additional data from large RCTs is warranted to corroborate these promising findings., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: High-frequency, low-tidal volume (HFLTV) ventilation increases the efficacy and efficiency of radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Whether those benefits can be extrapolated to RFCA of persistent atrial fibrillation (PeAF) is undetermined., Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether using HFLTV ventilation during RFCA in patients with PeAF is associated with improved procedural and long-term clinical outcomes compared to standard ventilation (SV)., Methods: In this prospective multicenter registry (REAL-AF), patients who had undergone pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) + posterior wall isolation (PWI) for PeAF using either HFLTV ventilation or SV were included. The primary efficacy outcome was freedom from all-atrial arrhythmias at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included procedural and long-term clinical outcomes and complications., Results: A total of 210 patients were included (HFLTV=95 vs. SV=115) in the analysis. There were no differences in baseline characteristics between the groups. Procedural time (80 [66-103.5] minutes vs 110 [85-141] minutes; P <.001), total radiofrequency (RF) time (18.73 [13.93-26.53] minutes vs 26.15 [20.30-35.25] minutes; P <.001), and pulmonary vein RF time (11.35 [8.78-16.69] minutes vs 18 [13.74-24.14] minutes; P <.001) were significantly shorter using HFLTV ventilation compared with SV. Freedom from all-atrial arrhythmias was significantly higher with HFLTV ventilation compared with SV (82.1% vs 68.7%; hazard ratio 0.41; 95% confidence interval [0.21-0.82]; P = .012), indicating a 43% relative risk reduction and a 13.4% absolute risk reduction in all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence. There was no difference in long-term procedure-related complications between the groups (HFLTV 1.1% vs SV 0%, P = .270)., Conclusion: In patients undergoing RFCA with PVI + PWI for PeAF, the use of HFLTV ventilation was associated with higher freedom from all-atrial arrhythmias at 12-month follow-up, with significantly shorter procedural and RF times compared to SV, while reporting a similar safety profile., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Osorio, Dr Zei, Dr Sauer, and Dr Romero report consulting and research support from Biosense Webster. Dr Silverstein reports consulting and honoraria from Biosense Webster. Dr D’Souza, Dr Oza, Dr Sharma, and Dr Rajendra report consulting from Biosense Webster. Dr Thosani reports physician education from Biosense Webster. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia (VT) typically requires radiation exposure with its potential adverse health effects. A completely fluoroless ablation approach is achievable using a combination of electroanatomical mapping and intracardiac echocardiography. Nonetheless, data in patients undergoing VT ablation are limited., Objectives: This study aimed to determine the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of VT ablation in patients with structural heart disease using a zero-fluoroscopy approach., Methods: This multicenter study included consecutive patients with ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy undergoing fluoroless VT ablation. Patients requiring epicardial access or coronary angiography were excluded., Results: Between 2017 and 2023 a total of 198 patients (aged 66.4 ± 13.4 years, 76% male, 48% ischemic) were included. Most patients (95.4%) underwent left ventricular (LV) mapping and/or ablation, which was conducted via transseptal route in 54.5% (n = 103), via retrograde aortic route in 43.4% (n = 82), and using a combined approach in 2.1% (n = 4). Two-thirds of patients had a cardiac device, including a biventricular device in 15%; 2 patients had a LV assist device, and 1 patient had a mechanical aortic valve prosthesis. The mean total procedural time was 211 ± 70 minutes, and the total radiofrequency time was 30 ± 22 minutes. During a follow-up period of 22 ± 18 months, the freedom from VT recurrence was 80%, and 7.6% of patients underwent a repeated ablation. Procedural-related complications occurred in 6 patients (3.0%)., Conclusions: Fluoroless ablation of VT in structural heart disease is feasible, effective, and safe when epicardial mapping/ablation is not required., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This study was supported by the Mark Marchlinski E.P. Research Fund, and the Winkleman Family Fund in Cardiac Innovation. The authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Disclosures Drs Sauer and Romero are paid consultants for Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific, AtriCure, Abbott, and Sanofi. The rest of the authors have nothing to disclose.

Background: Epicardial access (EA) has emerged as an increasingly important approach for the treatment of ventricular arrhythmias and to perform other interventional cardiology procedures. EA is frequently underutilized because the current approach is challenging and carries a high risk of life-threatening complications., Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of the SAFER (Sustained Apnea for Epicardial Access With Right Ventriculography) epicardial approach., Methods: Consecutive patients who underwent EA with the SAFER technique were included in this multicenter study. The primary efficacy outcome was the successful achievement of EA. The primary safety outcomes included right ventricular (RV) perforation, major hemorrhagic pericardial effusion (HPE), and bleeding requiring surgical intervention. Secondary outcomes included procedural characteristics and any complications. Our results were compared with those from previous studies describing other EA techniques to assess differences in outcomes., Results: A total of 105 patients undergoing EA with the SAFER approach from June 2021 to February 2023 were included. EA was used for ventricular tachycardia ablation in 98 patients (93.4%), left atrial appendage closure in 6 patients (5.7%), and phrenic nerve displacement in 1 patient (0.9%). EA was successful in all subjects (100%). The median time to EA was 7 minutes (IQR: 5-14 minutes). No cases of RV perforation, HPE, or need of surgical intervention were observed in this cohort. Comparing our results with previous studies about EA, the SAFER epicardial approach resulted in a significant reduction in major pericardial bleeding., Conclusions: The SAFER epicardial approach is a simple, efficient, effective, and low-cost technique easily reproducible across multiple centers. It is associated with lower complication rates than previously reported techniques for EA., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures All authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: General anesthesia (GA) is the standard anesthetic approach for subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) implantation. Nonetheless, GA is expensive and can be associated with adverse events. Tumescent local anesthesia (TLA) has been shown to reduce in-room and procedural times and to decrease post-procedural pain, all of which could result in a reduction in procedure-related costs., Objective: The purpose of this study is to compare the cost-effectiveness of GA and TLA in patients undergoing S-ICD implantation., Methods: The present study is a prospective, nonrandomized, controlled study of patients who underwent S-ICD implantation between 2019 and 2022. Patients were allocated to either the TLA or the GA group. We performed a cost analysis for each intervention. As an effectiveness measure, the 0-10 point Numeric Pain Rating Scale at 1, 12, and 24 hours post-implantation was analyzed and compared between the groups. A score of 0 was considered no pain; 1-5, mild pain; 6-7, moderate pain; and 8-10, severe pain. Cost-effectiveness was calculated using incremental cost-effectiveness ratios., Results: Seventy patients underwent successful S-ICD implantation. The total cost of the electrophysiology laboratory was higher in the GA group than in the TLA group (median ± interquartile range US$55,824 ± US$29,411 vs US$37,222 ± US$24,293; P < .001), with a net saving of $20,821 when compared with GA for each S-ICD implantation. There was a significant decrease in post-procedural pain scores in the TLA group when compared with the GA group (repeated measures analysis of variance, P = .009; median ± interquartile range 0 ± 3 vs 0 ± 5 at 1 hour, P = .058; 3 ± 4 vs 6 ± 8 at 12 hours, P = .030; 0 ± 4 vs 2 ± 6 at 24 hours, P = .040)., Conclusion: TLA is a more cost-effective alternative to GA for S-ICD implantation, with both direct and indirect cost reductions. Importantly, these reduced costs are associated with reduced postprocedural pain., (Copyright © 2022 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Prolonged use of fluoroscopy during catheter ablation (CA) of arrhythmias is associated with a significant exposure to ionizing radiation and risk of orthopedic injuries given the need for heavy protective equipment. CA of ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) arising from the left ventricular (LV) summit is challenging, requiring a vast knowledge of the intricate cardiac anatomy of this area and careful imaging delineation of the different anatomical structures, which is frequently performed using fluoroscopic guidance. Certain techniques, including pericardial mapping and ablation, use of intracoronary wires, and mapping and ablation inside the coronary venous system have been proposed, further prolonging fluoroscopy time. Fluoroless CA procedures are feasible with currently available technology and appear to have similar safety and efficacy outcomes compared with conventional techniques. To successfully perform fluoroless CA of LV summit arrhythmias, it is important to be fully acquainted with intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) imaging and electroanatomic mapping (EAM). We will describe our approach to perform fluoroless CA in LV summit VAs., Competing Interests: Disclosure Dr L. Di Biase is a consultant for Stereotaxis, Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific, Abbott Medical, and has received speaker honoraria/travel from Medtronic, Atricure, Bristol Meyers Squibb, Pfizer, and Biotronik. Dr A. Natale is a consultant for Biosense Webster, Stereotaxis, Abbott, and has received speaker honoraria/travel from Medtronic, Atricure, Biotronik, and Janssen. The remaining authors report no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Idiopathic ventricular arrhythmias (VA), particularly left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) VA accounts for up to 10% of all VAs referred for ablative therapy. In addition to being infrequent, its intricate anatomy and its pathophysiology make catheter ablation (CA) of these arrhythmias a challenge even for experts. In this scenario, detailed right ventricular outflow tract as well as LVOT electroanatomic mapping including epicardial mapping are essential. In this article, we will emphasize our approach toward the CA technique used for LVOT VA, particularly IVS and/or LVS VA originating from intramural foci, along with its acute and long-term efficacy and safety., Competing Interests: Disclosure Dr L. Di Biase is a consultant for Stereotaxis, Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific, Abbott Medical and has received speaker honoraria/travel from Medtronic, Atricure, Bristol Meyers Squibb, Pfizer, and Biotronik. Dr A. Natale is a consultant for Biosense Webster, Stereotaxis, Abbott and has received speaker honoraria/travel from Medtronic, Atricure, Biotronik, and Janssen. The remaining authors report no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The aim of this study is to provide guidance for the clinical interpretation of electrocardiograms (ECGs) in prone position and to establish the electroanatomic explanations for the possible differences to supine position ECGs that may be observed. Additionally, to determine if prone back ECG can be used as an alternative to standard ECG in patients who may benefit from prone position., Methods and Results: The ECG in supine (standard ECG), prone back (precordial leads placed on the patient's back), and prone anterior position (precordial leads placed in the standard position with the subjects in prone position) were prospectively examined on 85 subjects. Comparisons of ECG parameters between these positions were performed. Computed tomography (CT) scans were performed in both positions to determine possible electroanatomic aetiologies for prone-associated ECG changes. There were significant differences in QRS amplitude in Leads V1-V5 between supine and prone positions. Q waves were more frequently observed in prone back position vs. supine position (V1: 74.1 vs. 10.6%, P < 0.0001; V2: 23.5 vs. 0%, P < 0.0001, respectively). Flat and inverted T waves were more common in prone back leads (V1: 98 vs. 66%, P < 0.0001; V2: 96 vs. 8%, P < 0.0001; V3: 45 vs. 7%, P < 0.0001). The 3D-CT reconstructions measurements corroborated the significant inverse correlation between QRS amplitude and the distance from the centre of the heart to the estimated lead positions., Conclusion: In prone back position ECG, low QRS amplitude should not be misinterpreted as low voltage conditions, neither should Q waves and abnormal T waves are considered anteroseptal myocardial infarction. These changes can be explained by an increased impedance (due to interposing lung tissue) and by the increased distance between the electrodes to the centre of the heart., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: L.D.B. is a consultant for Stereotaxis, Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific, Abbott Medical; has received speaker honoraria/travel support from Medtronic, AtriCure, Bristol Meyers Squibb, Pfizer and Biotronik. A.N. is a consultant for Biosense Webster, Stereotaxis, Abbott; has received speaker honoraria/travel support from Medtronic, Atricure, Biotronik and Janssen. No further conflict of interest., (© 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.)

Introduction: Increasing evidence has suggested improved outcomes in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with heart failure (HF) undergoing catheter ablation (CA) as compared to medical therapy. We sought to investigate the benefit of CA on outcomes of patients with AF and HF as compared to medical therapy., Methods and Results: A systematic review of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials was performed for clinical studies evaluating the benefit of CA for patients with AF and HF. Primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. Secondary endpoints included atrial-arrhythmia recurrence and improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Eight randomized controlled trials were included with a total of 2121 patients (mean age: 65 ± 5 years; 72% male). Mean follow-up duration was 32.9 ± 14.5 months. All-cause mortality in patients who underwent CA was significantly lower than in the medical treatment group (8.8% vs. 13.5%, RR 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.51-0.83, p = .0005). A 35% relative risk reduction and 4.7% absolute risk reduction in all-cause mortality was observed with CA. Rates of all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence were significantly lower in the CA group (39.9% vs. 69.6%, RR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.40-0.76, p = .0003). Improvement in LVEF was significantly higher in patients undergoing CA (+9.4 ± 7.6%) as compared to conventional treatment (+3.3 ± 8%) (mean difference 6.2, 95% CI: 3.6-8.8, p < .00001)., Conclusion: CA for AF in patients with HF decreases all-cause mortality, improves all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence rate and LVEF when compared to medical management. CA should be considered the treatment of choice to improve survival in this select group of patients. Nonetheless, the benefit of CA in patients with severely reduced ejection fraction and New York Heart Association class IV HF has not been clearly elucidated., (© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Numerous systemic manifestations, including cardiac involvement in the form of myocardial infarction, myocarditis, and electrocardiographic changes, have been associated with COVID-19..In this review, the authors describe the electrocardiographic features that have been reported to date in patients affected by this disease and their possible underlying mechanisms., Competing Interests: Disclosure Dr L. Di Biase is a consultant for Stereotaxis, Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific, and Abbott Medical and has received speaker honoraria/travel support from Medtronic, Atricure, Bristol Meyers Squibb, Pfizer, and Biotronik. Dr A. Natale is a consultant for Biosense Webster, Stereotaxis, and Abbott and has received speaker honoraria/travel support from Medtronic, Atricure, Biotronik, and Janssen. Remaining authors report no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) off-label use data is lacking. Our study aimed to assess the clinical outcomes in a racially mixed population treated for atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE)., Methods: We retrospectively evaluated six months of DOAC prescriptions for AF or VTE treatment. Prescriptions were classified as off-label or appropriate following FDA labeling. The off-label group was sub-classified as under or overdosing., Results: Of the 1,087 DOAC prescriptions, 67% were for AF. African Americans and Caucasians were equally represented. There were 171 (16%) inappropriate prescriptions, with 106 (62%), being underdosed. The off-label group had a higher 30-day readmissions risk (OR = 1.69, 95% CI:1.11-2.54, p = 0.012) and 1-year all-cause mortality (OR = 1.90, 95% CI:1.02-3.37, p = 0.032). There was no difference in major bleeding (OR = 1.27, 95% CI:0.63-2.37, p = 0.480) or new thromboembolism (OR = 1.27, 95% CI:0.73-2.13, p = 0.369) between the groups. Underdosing carried a higher risk of new thromboembolism (OR = 3.15, 95% CI:1.09-9.15, p = 0.024)., Conclusions: One in every six patients received off-label DOACs dosing. Off-label use had increased 30-day readmissions and 1-year all-cause mortality. Underdosing was associated with a higher risk of new thromboembolism.

Purpose: First-line catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF) in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) has been associated with improved outcomes; however, most benefit seems to be in patients with moderately depressed left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Herein, outcomes were stratified based on LVEF., Methods: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating first-line ablation versus medical therapy in patients with VT and ICM was performed. Risk estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were measured., Results: Four RCTs with a total of 505 patients (mean age 66 ± 9 years, 89% male, 80% with previous revascularization) were included. Mean LVEF was 35 ± 8%. At a mean follow-up of 24 ± 9 months, a significant benefit in survival-free from appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapies was observed in all patients undergoing first-line catheter ablation compared with medical management (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.56-0.86). In patients with moderately depressed LVEF (> 30-50%), first-line VT ablation was associated with a statistically significant reduction in the composite endpoint of survival free from VT/VF and appropriate ICD therapies (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.36-0.76), whereas there was no difference in patients with severely depressed LVEF (≤30%) (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.24-1.32). Funnel plots did not show asymmetry suggesting lack of bias., Conclusions: Patients with ICM and VT undergoing first-line ablation have a significantly lower rate of appropriate ICD therapies without a mortality difference compared with patients receiving an initial approach based on medical therapy. The beneficial effect of a first-line ablation approach was only observed in patients with moderately depressed LVEF (> 30-50%)., (© 2020. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is standard of care for the management of patients with cardiac implantable electronic device infection or lead-related complications. Currently, objective data on TLE in Latin America is lacking., Objective: To describe the current practice standards in Latin American centers performing TLE., Methods: An online survey was sent through the mailing list of the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society. Online reminders were sent through the mailing list; duplicate answers were discarded. The survey was available for 1 month, after which no more answers were accepted., Results: A total of 48 answers were received, from 44 different institutions (39.6% from Colombia, 27.1% from Brazil), with most respondents (82%) being electrophysiologists. Twenty-nine institutions (66%) performed <10 lead extractions/year, with 7 (16%) institutions not performing lead extraction. Although most institutions in which lead extraction is performed reported using several tools, mechanical rotating sheaths were cited as the main tool (66%) and only 13% reported the use of laser sheaths. Management of infected leads was performed according to current guidelines., Conclusion: This survey is the first attempt to provide information on TLE procedures in Latin America and could provide useful information for future prospective registries. According to our results, the number of centers performing high volume lead extraction in Latin America is smaller than that reported in other continents, with most interventions performed using mechanical tools. Future prospective registries assessing acute and long-term success are needed., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are contraindicated in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and mechanical cardiac valves. However, safety and efficacy are controversial in patients with biological cardiac valves., Objective: We report the safety and feasibility of periprocedural and long-term treatment with DOACs in patients with biological valves undergoing ablation for AF., Methods: A total of 127 patients with AF and biological cardiac valve undergoing CA on uninterrupted DOAC were matched by gender and age with 127 patients with AF and biological cardiac valves undergoing CA on uninterrupted warfarin. All patients were anticoagulated for at least 3-4 weeks prior to ablation with either rivaroxaban (70%) or apixaban (30%), which were continued for at least 3 months and subsequently based on CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score., Results: Mean age of the study population was 63.0 ± 10.9 with 66% being male. The majority of patients on NOACs had aortic valve replacement (59%), while mitral valve was replaced in 41% of patients, which did not differ from the matched cohort on coumadin (aortic valve 57% and mitral valve 43%, (p = 0.8) (p = 0.8), respectively). The CHADS 2 score was ≥ 2 in 90 patients (71.0%) on DOAC and 86 patients in (68%) the control (p = 0.6) group. Patients underwent ablation predominantly with uninterrupted rivaroxaban [89 (70%)], while the remaining 38 patients (30%) underwent ablation while on apixaban. Two groin hematomas were observed periprocedurally in both groups. No stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA) was observed both periprocedurally and at long-term follow-up in either group., Conclusion: Periprocedural and long-term administration of DOACs in patients with biological cardiac valves undergoing AF ablation appears as safe as warfarin therapy., (© 2020. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) is an effective alternative to transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. General anesthesia (GA) is considered the standard sedation approach because of the pain caused by the manipulation of subcutaneous tissue with S-ICD implantation. However, GA carries several limitations, including additional risk of adverse events, prolonged in-room times, and increased costs., Objective: The purpose of this study was to define the effectiveness and safety of tumescent local anesthesia (TLA) in comparison to GA in patients undergoing S-ICD implantation., Methods: We performed a prospective, nonrandomized, controlled, multicenter study of patients referred for S-ICD implantation between 2019 and 2020. Patients were allocated to either TLA or GA on the basis of patient's preferences and/or anesthesia service availability. TLA was prepared using lidocaine, epinephrine, sodium bicarbonate, and sodium chloride. All patients provided written informed consent, and the institutional review board at each site provided approval for the study., Results: Sixty patients underwent successful S-ICD implantation from July 2019 to November 2020. Thirty patients (50%) received TLA, and the rest GA. There were no differences between groups with regard to baseline characteristics. In-room and procedural times were significantly shorter with TLA (107.6 minutes vs 186 minutes; P < .0001 and 53.2 minutes vs 153.7 minutes; P < .0001, respectively). Pain was reported less frequently by patients who received TLA. The use of opioids was significantly reduced in patients who received TLA (23% vs 62%; P = .002)., Conclusion: TLA is an effective and safe alternative to GA in S-ICD implantation. The use of TLA is associated with shorter in-room and procedural times, less postprocedural pain, and reduced usage of opioids and acetaminophen for analgesia., (Copyright © 2021 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Percutaneous epicardial access (EA) was first described more than two decades ago. Since its initial introduction, indications for its utilization in the field of electrophysiology have expanded dramatically., Discussion: Epicardial mapping and ablation in patients with ventricular tachycardia is routinely performed in tertiary electrophysiology centers around the world. Although limited by lack of randomized controlled trials, epicardial ablation for atrial fibrillation has been suggested as a conjunctive strategy in patients who have failed an initial endocardial catheter ablation attempt, and it is necessary for placement of some left atrial appendage occlusion devices as well. An accurate understanding of the cardiac anatomy is crucial to avoid complications such as inadvertent right ventricular puncture, injury to the coronary arteries, abdominal viscera, phrenic nerves, and esophagus during both EA and catheter ablation., Conclusion: The aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the cardiac anatomy, technical aspects to optimize the safety of epicardial puncture, recognize and avoid potential complications., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Introduction: Empirical pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) remains the cornerstone for catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF). Various ablation strategies and modalities are continually tested with the aim of improving ablation outcomes. Although focal impulse and rotor modulation (FIRM)-guided ablation is currently used as an adjunct to PVI, evidence supporting this strategy is conflicting. We sought to examine whether the utilization of FIRM-guided ablation with or without PVI is associated with a decrease in all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence as compared to PVI alone., Methods: A systematic review of PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase was performed for head-to-head study designs comparing outcomes of patients who underwent FIRM-guided ablation with or without PVI to those who underwent PVI alone. The primary efficacy endpoint was all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence. The secondary endpoints were complications rates and procedural characteristics., Results: Overall, six studies comprising 674 patients undergoing either FIRM-guided ablation ± PVI versus PVI were included (mean age 63.4 ± 9.2, male 74%, 9% paroxysmal AF, 91% nonparoxysmal AF). After a mean follow-up of 18.8 months, FIRM-guided ablation with or without PVI was not associated with improvement in all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence rate compared to PVI alone (43.4% vs. 45.9%, risk ratio [RR]: 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.77-1.47; p = .70). No statistically significant difference was noted in complication rates between the two groups (RR: 1.66; 95% CI: 0.08-34.54; p = .74)., Conclusion: In this meta-analysis of head-to-head comparison studies, FIRM-guided ablation with or without PVI did not provide any benefit in improving all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence at follow-up when compared to PVI alone., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Substrate catheter ablation of scar-related ventricular tachycardia (VT) is a widely accepted therapeutic option for patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM)., Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether concomitant amiodarone therapy affects procedural outcomes., Methods: A total of 134 consecutive patients (89% male; age 66 ± 10 years) with ICM undergoing catheter ablation of VT were included in the study. Patients were sorted by amiodarone therapy before ablation. In all patients, a substrate-based catheter ablation (endocardial ± epicardial) in sinus rhythm abolishing all "abnormal" electrograms within the scar was performed. The endpoint of the procedure was VT noninducibility. After the ablation procedure, all antiarrhythmic medications were discontinued. All patients had an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, and recurrences were analyzed through the device., Results: In 84 patients (63%), the ablation was performed on amiodarone; the remaining 50 patients (37%) were off amiodarone. Patients had comparable baseline characteristics. Mean scar size area was 143.6 ± 44.9 cm 2 on amiodarone vs 139.2 ± 36.8 cm 2 off amiodarone (P = .56). More radiofrequency time was necessary to achieve noninducibility in the off-amiodarone group compared to the on-amiodarone group (68.1 ± 20.1 minutes vs 51.5 ± 19.7 minutes; P <.001). In addition, due to persistent VT inducibility, more patients in the off-amiodarone group required epicardial ablation than in the on-amiodarone group (13/50 [26%] vs 5/84 [6%], respectively; P <.001). During mean follow-up of 23.9 ± 11.6 months, recurrence of any ventricular arrhythmias off antiarrhythmic drugs was 44% (37/84) in the on-amiodarone group vs 22% (11/50) in the off-amiodarone group (P = .013)., Conclusion: Albeit, VT noninducibility after substrate catheter ablation for scar related VT was achieved faster, with less radiofrequency time and less need for epicardial ablation in patients taking amiodarone, these patients had significantly higher VT recurrence at long-term follow-up when this medication was discontinued., (Copyright © 2021 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Chagas disease is caused by infection from the protozoan parasite Trypanosoma cruzi. Although it is endemic to Latin America, global migration has led to an increased incidence of Chagas in Europe, Asia, Australia, and North America. Following acute infection, up to 30% of patients will develop chronic Chagas disease, with most patients developing Chagasic cardiomyopathy. Chronic Chagas cardiomyopathy is highly arrhythmogenic, with estimated annual rates of appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapies and electrical storm of 25% and 9.1%, respectively. Managing arrhythmias in patients with Chagasic cardiomyopathy is a major challenge for the clinical electrophysiologist, requiring intimate knowledge of cardiac anatomy, advanced training, and expertise. Endocardial-epicardial mapping and ablation strategy is needed to treat arrhythmias in this patient population, owing to the suboptimal long-term success rate of endocardial mapping and ablation alone. We also describe innovative approaches to improve acute and long-term clinical outcomes in patients with refractory ventricular arrhythmias following catheter ablation, such as bilateral cervicothoracic sympathectomy and bilateral renal denervation, among others., Competing Interests: FUNDING SUPPORT AND AUTHOR DISCLOSURES Drs. Pisani and Scanavacca serve on the Speakers Bureau for Biosense Webster. Dr. Natale is a consultant for Boston Scientific, Biosense Webster, St. Jude Medical, Biotronik, and Medtronic. Dr Di Biase is a consultant for Biosense Webster and Stereoataxis; and has received speaker honoraria/travel support from Biosense Webster, St. Jude Medical (now Abbott), Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Biotronik, Pfizer, and Bristol Myers Squibb. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Left atrial appendage electrical isolation (LAAEI) has been shown to improve freedom from all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence in patients with non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). The aim of this study is to investigate the long-term efficacy and safety outcomes of LAAEI in patients with non-paroxysmal AF undergoing catheter ablation., Methods and Results: A systematic review of Medline, Cochrane, and Embase was performed for clinical studies evaluating the benefit of LAAEI in non-paroxysmal AF. Nine studies with a total of 2336 patients were included (mean age: 65 ± 9 years, 63% male). All studies included patients with persistent AF, long-standing persistent AF, or both. At a mean follow-up of 40.5 months, patients who underwent LAAEI had significantly higher freedom from all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence than patients who underwent standard ablation alone [69.3% vs. 46.4%; risk ratio (RR) 0.54; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42-0.69; P < 0.0001]. A 46% relative risk reduction and 22.9% absolute risk reduction in atrial-arrhythmia recurrence was noted with LAAEI. Rates of cerebral thromboembolism were not significantly different between the two groups (LAAEI 3% vs. standard ablation 1.6%, respectively; RR 1.76; 95% CI 0.61-5.04; P = 0.29). Furthermore, there was no significant difference in the acute procedural complication rates between the two groups (LAAEI 4% vs. standard ablation 3%, respectively; RR 1.29; 95% CI 0.83-2.02; P = 0.26)., Conclusion: At long-term follow-up, LAAEI led to a significantly higher improvement in freedom from all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence in patients with non-paroxysmal AF, when compared to standard ablation alone. Importantly, this benefit was achieved without an increased risk of acute procedural complications or cerebral thromboembolic events., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2020. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Purpose: Cardiac involvement with COVID-19 infection has become evident by elevated troponin, cardiac arrhythmias, ST segment elevation, myocarditis, fulminant heart failure, and sudden cardiac death. We aimed to describe the association of COVID-19 and T-wave inversion (TWI) in a large case series., Methods: We conducted an observational, retrospective study of confirmed COVID-19 cases with at least one electrocardiogram (ECG) in a large hospital in New York City (March 23, 2020-April 23, 2020). Patients with new TWI or pseudonormalization were further analyzed. Mortality and the need for invasive mechanical ventilation were the main outcomes., Results: A total of 3225 patients were screened; 195 (6%) were selected for further analysis: 181 with TWI and 14 with T-wave pseudonormalization. Mean age was 66 ± 7 years; 51% were male. TWI were more commonly noted in the lateral (71%), followed by anterior (64%), inferior (57%), and septal (26%) leads. A total of 44 patients (23%) had elevated troponin. A total of 50 patients died (26%). Mortality rates of 35%, and 52% were observed in patients with diffuse TWI, and elevated troponin, respectively. Mortality rate of 80% was observed in patients with both elevated troponin and diffuse TWI. Additionally, 30% of the entire cohort and 58% of patients with elevated troponin required invasive mechanical ventilation., Conclusion: Our study demonstrates that new TWI is a relatively common finding in COVID-19 patients. Importantly, our findings suggest that new TWI or T-wave pseudonormalization, particularly with elevated troponin, was associated with higher rates of mechanical ventilation and in-hospital mortality.

Background: Thromboembolic stroke is a rare but devastating consequence of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is recommended to rule out left atrial appendage thrombus; however, its use is variable., Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess whether TEE is mandatory in patients undergoing AF ablation on uninterrupted direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs)., Methods: Data from our prospective multicenter registry of patients with AF undergoing radiofrequency catheter ablation on uninterrupted DOACs were analyzed. All the included patients were on anticoagulation for at least 4 weeks before ablation. All AF ablation procedures were performed under intracardiac echocardiography guidance. Before transseptal puncture, heparin bolus was administered, followed by continuous infusion, with a target activated clotting time of >300 seconds., Results: A total of 6186 patients (3180 on apixaban [51.4%], 2528 on rivaroxaban [40.9%], 404 on dabigatran [6.5%], and 74 on edoxaban [1.2%]) were analyzed. The mean age of the study population was 69.4 ± 10.3 years; 4194 patients (67.8%) were male, and 5120 patients (82.8%) had persistent and long-standing persistent AF. The mean CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score was 2.86 ± 1.58; the mean CHADS 2 score was 1.65 ± 1.14. Intracardiac echocardiography ruled out left atrial appendage and left atrial thrombi in all patients and revealed "smoke" in 1672 patients (27.03%). Transient ischemic attack was noted in 1 patient with long-standing persistent AF in the setting of a missed dose of rivaroxaban before ablation., Conclusion: Our study showed that performing AF ablation in patients on uninterrupted DOACs without TEE is safe and feasible in high stroke risk patients. Elimination of routine preablation TEE would have significant economic and clinical implications., (Copyright © 2020 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Accessory pathways are abnormal electrical conductions between the atrial and ventricular myocardium, bypassing the atrioventricular node and as such are an important substrate for arrhythmias. Ablation is a curative treatment and should always be offered to symptomatic patients and asymptomatic patients with high risk professions. Adequate knowledge and understanding of different mapping and ablation techniques is pivotal to achieve successful outcomes., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Left atrial appendage electrical isolation (LAAEI) has been proposed for the treatment of nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). The long-term clinical outcomes of this approach remain unclear. The objective of our study was to investigate the incremental benefit and safety of LAAEI in patients undergoing catheter ablation for nonparoxysmal AF., Methods: Propensity score-matched analysis was performed using a prospective registry database from 2010 to 2014. All patients in the LAAEI group were matched based on baseline characteristics, echocardiographic parameters, and procedural ablation techniques., Results: We identified 1842 patients who underwent catheter ablation for nonparoxysmal AF. Propensity score matching yielded 1092 patients, 546 patients with LAAEI, and 546 patients without LAAEI. At 5-year follow-up, overall freedom from all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence, off-antiarrhythmic drugs, in patients who underwent LAAEI was 68.9% versus 50.2% in those who underwent standard ablation alone ( P <0.001). Acute complication rates were similar between groups (LAAEI 1.3% versus non-LAAEI 0.73%, P =0.36). At 5-year follow-up, 382 (70%) patients in the LAAEI group remained on oral anticoagulation versus 217 (39.7%) in the non-LAAEI group. At 5-year follow-up, thromboembolic events occurred in 15/546 (2.75%) in the LAAEI group and 4/546 (0.73%) in the non-LAAEI group ( P =0.01). No thromboembolic events occurred in either group on-oral anticoagulation. In patients who were off-oral anticoagulation, at 5-year follow-up, thromboembolic events occurred in 15/164 (9.1%) in the LAAEI group and 4/329 (1.2%) in the non-LAAEI group ( P <0.001)., Conclusions: At 5-year follow-up, LAAEI was associated with significantly higher freedom from all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence in patients with persistent and long-standing persistent AF without increasing acute procedural complication rate. In patients off-oral anticoagulation, there appears to be a higher risk of thromboembolic events in the LAAEI group.

Managing arrhythmias from the left ventricular summit and interventricular septum is a major challenge for the clinical electrophysiologist requiring intimate knowledge of cardiac anatomy, advanced training and expertise. Novel mapping and ablation strategies are needed to treat arrhythmias originating from these regions given the current suboptimal long-term success rates with standard techniques. Herein, we describe innovative approaches to improve acute and long-term clinical outcomes such as mapping and ablation using the septal coronary venous system and the septal coronary arteries, alcohol ablation, coil embolization, and ablation of all early sites among others., (Copyright © 2020 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The pathologic process of ARVC (arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy) typically originates in the epicardium or subepicardial layers with progression toward endocardium. However, in the most recent ARVC international task force consensus statement, epicardial ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation is recommended as a Class I indication only in patients with at least one failed endocardial VT ablation attempt., Objective: The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the outcomes of ARVC patients undergoing combined endo-epicardial VT ablation, as compared to endocardial ablation alone., Methods: A systematic review of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane was performed for studies reporting clinical outcomes of endo-epicardial VT ablation vs endocardial-only VT ablation in patients with ARVC. Fixed-Effect model was used if I 2 < 25 and the Random-Effects Model was used if I 2 ≥ 25%., Results: Nine studies consisting of 452 patients were included (mean age 42.3 ± 5.7 years; 70% male). After a mean follow-up of 48.1 ± 21.5 months, endo-epicardial ablation was associated with 42% relative risk reduction in VA recurrence as opposed to endocardial ablation alone (risk ratio [RR], 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45-0.75; P < .0001). No significant differences were noted between endo-epicardial and endocardial VT ablation groups in terms of all-cause mortality (RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.03-47.08; P = .93) and acute procedural complications (RR, 5.39; 95% CI, 0.60-48.74; P = .13)., Conclusions: Our findings suggest that in patients with ARVC, endo-epicardial VT ablation is associated with a significant reduction in VA recurrence as opposed to endocardial ablation alone, without a significant difference in all-cause mortality or acute procedural complications., (© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is the mainstay of catheter ablation (CA) for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). However, for persistent and long-standing persistent AF, there are no established strategies to improve the success rate of CA. Despite studies indicating that prophylactic cavotricuspid isthmus (CTI) ablation provides no or limited incremental benefit in patients with AF, it is still routinely performed worldwide., Objective: We sought to examine whether CTI ablation for AF is associated with improvement in recurrence of all-atrial arrhythmias, compared with PVI alone in patients with and without typical atrial flutter (AFL)., Methods: A systematic review of PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase was performed for clinical studies including AF patients, reporting outcomes of CTI + PVI versus PVI alone. The primary efficacy endpoint was recurrence of all-atrial arrhythmias., Results: Five studies comprising 1400 patients undergoing CTI + PVI versus PVI alone were included; 1110 patients had AF without AFL, and 290 patients had coexistent AF and AFL. After a mean follow-up of 14.4 ± 4.8 months, CTI + PVI was not associated with improvement in recurrence of all-atrial arrhythmias when compared with PVI alone (risk ratio [RR]: 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.93-1.79;p = .13). In the subgroup analysis, there were no differences between both groups in patients with AF without AFL (RR: 1.55; 95% CI: 0.96-2.48; p = .07), and in patients with AF and AFL (RR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.6-1.39; p = .68)., Conclusion: In AF patients, irrespective of the presence of typical AFL, additional CTI ablation is not associated with improvement in recurrence of all-atrial arrhythmias, compared with PVI alone., (© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Fluoroscopy continues to be considered an indispensable part of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation worldwide. Deleterious effects of radiation exposure to patients, physicians, and catheter laboratory personnel are gaining increased consideration. Safety and efficacy of a fluoroless approach for AF ablation is comparable with outcomes achieved with fluoroscopy use. This article focuses on AF ablation with zero fluoroscopy use as well as current evidence on efficacy and safety of this technique. In contrast, minimal fluoroscopy is an alternative. Relying on intracardiac echocardiography for transseptal access and electroanatomic mapping for catheter manipulation can help implement this approach on a wider scale., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors have no disclosures related to this article., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The optimal ablation strategy for non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation remains controversial. Non-PV triggers have been shown to have a major arrhythmogenic role in these patients. Common sources of non-PV triggers are: posterior wall, left atrial appendage, superior vena cava, coronary sinus, vein of Marshall, interatrial septum, crista terminalis/Eustachian ridge, and mitral and tricuspid valve annuli. These sites are targeted empirically in selected cases or if significant ectopy is noted (with or without a drug challenge), to improve outcomes in patients with non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. This article focuses on summarizing the current evidence and the approach to mapping and ablation of these frequent non-PV trigger sites., Competing Interests: Disclosure Dr L. Di Biase is a consultant for Stereotaxis, Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific, and Abbott Medical; and received speaker honoraria/travel support from Medtronic, Pfizer, Bristol Meyers Squibb, and Biotronik. The other authors have no disclosures., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: A significant role of the left atrial appendage (LAA) in the genesis of atrial fibrillation (AF) has been described. Left atrial appendage electrical isolation (LAAEI) confers substantial long-term clinical benefits. Nevertheless, the left phrenic nerve (LPN) is in the vicinity of the LAA and can be injured during radiofrequency ablation at the ostial level., Objective: The purpose of this study was to describe our experience mapping the LPN, its anatomic relationships to the LAA and alternative approaches to isolate this structure when the LPN is located at the LAA ostium., Methods: Patients undergoing LAAEI for nonparoxysmal AF were included in this study. We attempted to localize the LPN with high-output pacing (20 mA/2 ms). Cases were classified into 4 groups (distal, middle, proximal segment and unmappable) based on the position of the LPN in electroanatomic mapping in the posterior wall of the LAA., Results: A total of 66 cases were included in this study. The LPN was mapped in the distal segment in 27 cases (40.9%); in the middle segment in 22 (33.3%); and at the proximal segment/ostium in 3 (4.5%); the LPN was unmappable in 14 cases (21.2%). In the 3 patients in whom the LPN was at the ostial level or crossing the ostium, segmental LAAEI was attempted in 2, with successful LAAEI achieved in 1 case. There was no LPN injury., Conclusion: LPN mapping is feasible and should be routinely performed to prevent LPN injury during LAAEI., (Copyright © 2019 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study sought to determine the distance between the anterior wall of the left atrial appendage (LAA) ostium to the left main coronary artery (LMCA) and the left circumflex artery (LCx) in patients undergoing left atrial appendage electrical isolation (LAAEI)., Background: LAAEI improves outcomes in nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation ablation. There is a potential risk of damaging the LMCA and the LCx during LAAEI., Methods: Patients undergoing LAAEI during the period between January 1, 2017 and October 31, 2018, were included in this study. Patients underwent cardiac computed tomography prior to ablation. The position of the LAA was analyzed. The closest distances between the LMCA, its bifurcation, LCx, and the anterior wall of the LAA ostium were measured. Additionally, imaging integration was performed to localize these vessels and catheter ablation was performed at least 5 mm away., Results: A total of 74 patients (mean age: 68 ± 9.5 years; male 54%) who underwent LAAEI were included. The mean distance from the anterior wall of the LAA ostium to the LMCA was 7.88 ± 2.8 mm, to the LMCA bifurcation was 9.24 ± 4.40 mm, and to the LCx was 10.03 ± 4.56 mm. The LCx artery was found along the LAA ostium in 98% of the cases, whereas the LMCA was found in only 48.6%. No coronary damage or vasospasm was observed after performing LAAEI., Conclusions: A detailed imaging integration with cardiac computed tomography, electroanatomic mapping, and CARTOSOUND reconstructions to accurately define the anatomical relationship between the LMCA and LCx and the anterior edge of the LAA ostium should be performed prior to delivering radiofrequency energy during LAAEI. When the distance on cardiac computed tomography between the LAA ostium and left coronary arteries is >10 mm, intraprocedural localization of these vessels may be not necessary., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Introduction: Catheter ablation (CA) has been shown to be an effective treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF). The complication rates and outcomes among octogenarians remain poorly studied. We aimed to compare trends, morbidity, and mortality associated with CA for AF among octogenarians versus those less than 80 years old., Methods: Using weighted sampling from the National Inpatient Sample database, we identified patients with a primary diagnosis of AF and a primary procedure of CA (2004-2013). Our primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes included incidence of major and minor complications., Results: Among 86,119 patients who underwent CA for AF, 3,482 were 80 years old or older. Complications were significantly more frequent in octogenarians; [16.2% (564 of 3,482) versus 9.8% (8,092 of 82,637), P < 0.001]. Of note, there was no significant difference for the composite of major complications; [3.6% (124 of 3482) in octogenarians versus 2.8% (2286 of 82637), P = 0.20]. The total mortality rate was not significant in a multivariate regression analysis (odds ratio [OR], 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35-2.64; P = .94). The presence of chronic renal failure (OR, 4.19; 95% CI, 2.75-6.36; P < 0.001), anemia (OR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.03-2.97; P = .04), and chronic pulmonary disease (OR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.11-2.62; P = .015) were predictors of major complications in octogenarians., Conclusion: Catheter ablation for AF in octogenarians does not confer a higher mortality risk than in those less than 80 years old. The procedure is associated with a higher rate of overall complications but there was no difference in terms of major complications or death. The presence of anemia, CKD or pulmonary disease were predictors of major complications in octogenarians., (© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Objectives: This study assessed the incremental benefit of uninterrupted direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) versus uninterrupted vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for catheter ablation (CA) of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) on 3 primary outcomes: major bleeding events (MBEs), minor bleeding events, and thromboembolic events (TEs). The secondary outcome was post-procedural silent cerebral infarction (SCI) as detected by brain cardiac magnetic resonance., Background: As a class, evidence of the benefits of DOACs versus VKAs during CA of AF is scant., Methods: A systematic review of Medline, Cochrane, and Embase was done to find all randomized controlled trials in which uninterrupted DOACs were compared against uninterrupted VKAs for CA of NVAF. A fixed-effect model was used, except when I 2 was ≥25, in which case, a random effects model was used., Results: The benefit of uninterrupted DOACs over VKAs was analyzed from 6 randomized control trials that enrolled a total of 2,256 patients (male: 72.7%) with NVAF, finding significant benefit in MBEs (relative risk [RR]: 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.20 to 0.99; p = 0.05). No significant differences were found in minor bleeding events (RR: 1.12; 95% CI: 0.87 to 1.43; p = 0.39), TEs (RR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.26 to 2.14; p = 0.59), or post-procedural SCI (RR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.80 to 1.49; p = 0.58)., Conclusions: An uninterrupted DOACs strategy for CA of AF appears to be safer than uninterrupted VKAs with a decreased rate of major bleeding events. There are no significant differences among the other outcomes. DOACs should be offered as a first-line therapy to patients undergoing CA of AF, due to their lower risk of major bleeding events, ease of use, and fewer interactions., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: We sought to examine whether continuing oral anticoagulation (OAC) after catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with improved outcomes. OAC reduces morbidity and mortality in patients with AF. However, the continuation of OAC following the blanking period of CA is controversial due to conflicting published data., Methods: A systematic review of Medline, Cochrane, and Embase was performed for studies comparing patients who were continued on OAC (ON-OAC) vs those in which OAC was discontinued (OFF-OAC). CHA 2 DS 2 VASc score had to be available for the classification of patients into high- or low-risk cohorts (CHA 2 DS 2 VASc ≥ 2 and ≤ 1, respectively). The primary efficacy outcome was thromboembolic events (TE). Intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) was the primary safety outcome., Results: Five studies comprising 3956 patients were included (mean age, 61.1 ± 2.9 years; 72.4% male, CHA 2 DS 2 VASc ≤ 1 50.1%; CHA 2 DS 2 VASc ≥ 2 49.9%). After a mean follow-up of 39.6 ± 11.7 months, OAC-continuation was associated with a significant decrease in risk of TE in the high-risk cohort (CHA 2 DS 2 VASc ≥ 2) (risk ratio [RR] 0.41, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21-0.82, P = .01) with a RR reduction of 59%. ICH was significantly higher in the ON-OAC group (RR, 5.78; 95% CI, 1.33-25.08; P = .02). No significant benefit was observed in the low-risk cohort ON-OAC after the blanking period., Conclusion: Continuation of OAC after CA of AF with CHA 2 DS 2 VASc ≥ 2 is associated with a significant decreased TE risk and a favorable net clinical benefit in spite of ICH being significantly increased in the ON-OAC group. Continued OAC offers no benefit with CHA 2 DS 2 VASC ≤ 1., (© 2019 Wiley Periodicals Inc.)

Objectives: This study sought to determine whether combined endocardial-epicardial (endo-epi) ablation was superior to endocardial only ablation in patients with scar-related ventricular tachycardia (VT)., Background: Limited single-center studies suggest that combined endo-epi ablation strategy may be superior to endocardial ablation (endo) alone in patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) and arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC), and ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM)., Methods: A systematic review of Medline, Cochrane, and Embase databases was performed for studies that reported outcomes comparing endo-epi with endo VT ablation alone., Results: Seventeen studies consisting of 975 patients were included (mean 56 ± 10 years of age; 79% male; NICM in 36.6%; ICM in 32.8%; and ARVC in 30.6%). After a mean follow-up of 27 ± 21 months, endo-epi ablation was associated with a 35% reduction in risk of VT recurrence compared with endocardial ablation alone (risk ratio [RR]: 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55 to 0.78; p < 0.001). Sensitivity analysis showed lower risk of VT recurrence in ICM (RR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.67; p = 0.0002) and ARVC (RR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.43 to 0.82; p = 0.0002), with a nonsignificant trend in NICM (RR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.70 to 1.08; p = 0.20). Endo-epi, compared with endo ablation, was associated with reduced all-cause mortality (RR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.32 to 0.97; p = 0.04). Acute procedural complications were higher with the endo-epi approach (RR: 2.62; 95% CI: 0.91 to 7.52; p = 0.07)., Conclusions: This meta-analysis suggests that a combined endo-epi ablation is associated with a lower risk of VT recurrence and subsequent mortality than endo only VT ablation in patients with scar-related VT. Procedural complications, however, are higher with the endo-epi approach., (Crown Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: To assess the incremental benefit of uninterrupted direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) vs. uninterrupted vitamin K antagonists (VKA) for catheter ablation (CA) of non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) on three primary outcomes: major bleeding, thrombo-embolic events, and minor bleeding. A secondary outcome was post-procedural silent cerebral infarction (SCI) as detected by brain magnetic resonance imaging., Methods and Results: A systematic review of Medline, Cochrane, and Embase was done to find all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which uninterrupted DOACs were compared against uninterrupted VKA for CA of NVAF. A fixed-effect model was used, with the exception of the analysis regarding major bleeding events (I2 > 25), for which a random effects model was used. The benefit of uninterrupted DOACs over VKA was analysed from four RCTs that enrolled a total of 1716 patients (male: 71.2%) with NVAF. Of these, 1100 patients (64.1%) had paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. No significant benefit was seen in major bleeding events [risk ratio (RR) 0.54, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.29-1.00; P = 0.05]. No significant differences were found in minor bleeding events (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.82-1.52; P = 0.50), thrombo-embolic events (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.26-2.11; P = 0.57), or post-procedural SCI (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.74-1.53; P = 0.74)., Conclusion: An uninterrupted DOACs strategy for CA of NVAF appears to be as safe as uninterrupted VKA without a significantly increased risk of minor or major bleeding events. There was a trend favouring DOACs in terms of major bleeding. Given their ease of use, fewer drug interactions and a similar security and effectiveness profile, DOACs should be considered first line therapy in patients undergoing CA for NVAF.