Search

Item does not contain fulltext, AIMS : Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) has become a cornerstone of the invasive treatment of atrial fibrillation. Severe complications are reported in 1-3% of patients. This study aims to compare complications and follow-up outcome of PVI in patients with atrial fibrillation. METHODS AND RESULTS : The data were extracted from the Netherlands Heart Registration. Procedural and follow-up outcomes in patients treated with conventional radiofrequency (C-RF), multielectrode phased RF (Ph-RF), or cryoballoon (CB) ablation from 2012 to 2017 were compared. Subgroup analysis was performed to identify variables associated with complications and repeat ablations. In total, 13 823 patients (69% male) were included. The reported complication incidence was 3.6%. Patients treated with C-RF developed more cardiac tamponades (C-RF 0.8% vs. Ph-RF 0.3% vs. CB 0.3%, P ≤ 0.001) and vascular complications (C-RF 1.7% vs. Ph-RF 1.2% vs. CB 1.3%, P ≤ 0.001). Ph-RF was associated with fewer bleeding complications (C-RF: 1.0% vs. Ph-RF: 0.4% vs. CB: 0.7%, P = 0.020). Phrenic nerve palsy mainly occurred in patients treated with CB (C-RF: 0.1% vs. Ph-RF: 0.2% vs. CB: 1.5%, P ≤ 0.001). In total, 18.4% of patients were referred for repeat ablation within 1 year. Female sex, age, and CHA2DS2-VASc were independent risk factors for cardiac tamponade and bleeding complications, with an adjusted OR for female patients of 2.97 (95% CI 1.98-4.45) and 2.02 (95% CI 1.03-4.00) respectively. CONCLUSION : The reported complication rate during PVI was low. Patients treated with C-RF ablation were more likely to develop cardiac tamponades and vascular complications. Female sex was associated with more cardiac tamponade and bleeding complications.

Contains fulltext : 233794.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access), AIMS : Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) has become a cornerstone of the invasive treatment of atrial fibrillation. Severe complications are reported in 1-3% of patients. This study aims to compare complications and follow-up outcome of PVI in patients with atrial fibrillation. METHODS AND RESULTS : The data were extracted from the Netherlands Heart Registration. Procedural and follow-up outcomes in patients treated with conventional radiofrequency (C-RF), multielectrode phased RF (Ph-RF), or cryoballoon (CB) ablation from 2012 to 2017 were compared. Subgroup analysis was performed to identify variables associated with complications and repeat ablations. In total, 13 823 patients (69% male) were included. The reported complication incidence was 3.6%. Patients treated with C-RF developed more cardiac tamponades (C-RF 0.8% vs. Ph-RF 0.3% vs. CB 0.3%, P ≤ 0.001) and vascular complications (C-RF 1.7% vs. Ph-RF 1.2% vs. CB 1.3%, P ≤ 0.001). Ph-RF was associated with fewer bleeding complications (C-RF: 1.0% vs. Ph-RF: 0.4% vs. CB: 0.7%, P = 0.020). Phrenic nerve palsy mainly occurred in patients treated with CB (C-RF: 0.1% vs. Ph-RF: 0.2% vs. CB: 1.5%, P ≤ 0.001). In total, 18.4% of patients were referred for repeat ablation within 1 year. Female sex, age, and CHA2DS2-VASc were independent risk factors for cardiac tamponade and bleeding complications, with an adjusted OR for female patients of 2.97 (95% CI 1.98-4.45) and 2.02 (95% CI 1.03-4.00) respectively. CONCLUSION : The reported complication rate during PVI was low. Patients treated with C-RF ablation were more likely to develop cardiac tamponades and vascular complications. Female sex was associated with more cardiac tamponade and bleeding complications.

Contains fulltext : 233794.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access), AIMS : Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) has become a cornerstone of the invasive treatment of atrial fibrillation. Severe complications are reported in 1-3% of patients. This study aims to compare complications and follow-up outcome of PVI in patients with atrial fibrillation. METHODS AND RESULTS : The data were extracted from the Netherlands Heart Registration. Procedural and follow-up outcomes in patients treated with conventional radiofrequency (C-RF), multielectrode phased RF (Ph-RF), or cryoballoon (CB) ablation from 2012 to 2017 were compared. Subgroup analysis was performed to identify variables associated with complications and repeat ablations. In total, 13 823 patients (69% male) were included. The reported complication incidence was 3.6%. Patients treated with C-RF developed more cardiac tamponades (C-RF 0.8% vs. Ph-RF 0.3% vs. CB 0.3%, P ≤ 0.001) and vascular complications (C-RF 1.7% vs. Ph-RF 1.2% vs. CB 1.3%, P ≤ 0.001). Ph-RF was associated with fewer bleeding complications (C-RF: 1.0% vs. Ph-RF: 0.4% vs. CB: 0.7%, P = 0.020). Phrenic nerve palsy mainly occurred in patients treated with CB (C-RF: 0.1% vs. Ph-RF: 0.2% vs. CB: 1.5%, P ≤ 0.001). In total, 18.4% of patients were referred for repeat ablation within 1 year. Female sex, age, and CHA2DS2-VASc were independent risk factors for cardiac tamponade and bleeding complications, with an adjusted OR for female patients of 2.97 (95% CI 1.98-4.45) and 2.02 (95% CI 1.03-4.00) respectively. CONCLUSION : The reported complication rate during PVI was low. Patients treated with C-RF ablation were more likely to develop cardiac tamponades and vascular complications. Female sex was associated with more cardiac tamponade and bleeding complications.

Contains fulltext : 225390.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), BACKGROUND: The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) was designed to avoid complications related to the transvenous ICD lead by using an entirely extrathoracic placement. Evidence comparing these systems has been based primarily on observational studies. METHODS: We conducted a noninferiority trial in which patients with an indication for an ICD but no indication for pacing were assigned to receive a subcutaneous ICD or transvenous ICD. The primary end point was the composite of device-related complications and inappropriate shocks; the noninferiority margin for the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval for the hazard ratio (subcutaneous ICD vs. transvenous ICD) was 1.45. A superiority analysis was prespecified if noninferiority was established. Secondary end points included death and appropriate shocks. RESULTS: A total of 849 patients (426 in the subcutaneous ICD group and 423 in the transvenous ICD group) were included in the analyses. At a median follow-up of 49.1 months, a primary end-point event occurred in 68 patients in the subcutaneous ICD group and in 68 patients in the transvenous ICD group (48-month Kaplan-Meier estimated cumulative incidence, 15.1% and 15.7%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 1.39; P = 0.01 for noninferiority; P = 0.95 for superiority). Device-related complications occurred in 31 patients in the subcutaneous ICD group and in 44 in the transvenous ICD group (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.44 to 1.09); inappropriate shocks occurred in 41 and 29 patients, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.43; 95% CI, 0.89 to 2.30). Death occurred in 83 patients in the subcutaneous ICD group and in 68 in the transvenous ICD group (hazard ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.70); appropriate shocks occurred in 83 and 57 patients, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.08 to 2.12). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with an indication for an ICD but no indication for pacing, the subcutaneous ICD was noninferi

Contains fulltext : 225390.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), BACKGROUND: The subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) was designed to avoid complications related to the transvenous ICD lead by using an entirely extrathoracic placement. Evidence comparing these systems has been based primarily on observational studies. METHODS: We conducted a noninferiority trial in which patients with an indication for an ICD but no indication for pacing were assigned to receive a subcutaneous ICD or transvenous ICD. The primary end point was the composite of device-related complications and inappropriate shocks; the noninferiority margin for the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval for the hazard ratio (subcutaneous ICD vs. transvenous ICD) was 1.45. A superiority analysis was prespecified if noninferiority was established. Secondary end points included death and appropriate shocks. RESULTS: A total of 849 patients (426 in the subcutaneous ICD group and 423 in the transvenous ICD group) were included in the analyses. At a median follow-up of 49.1 months, a primary end-point event occurred in 68 patients in the subcutaneous ICD group and in 68 patients in the transvenous ICD group (48-month Kaplan-Meier estimated cumulative incidence, 15.1% and 15.7%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 1.39; P = 0.01 for noninferiority; P = 0.95 for superiority). Device-related complications occurred in 31 patients in the subcutaneous ICD group and in 44 in the transvenous ICD group (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.44 to 1.09); inappropriate shocks occurred in 41 and 29 patients, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.43; 95% CI, 0.89 to 2.30). Death occurred in 83 patients in the subcutaneous ICD group and in 68 in the transvenous ICD group (hazard ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.70); appropriate shocks occurred in 83 and 57 patients, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.08 to 2.12). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with an indication for an ICD but no indication for pacing, the subcutaneous ICD was noninferi