Safety and Effectiveness of Pulsed Field Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation in Patients with Heart Failure: A MANIFEST-PF Sub-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) coexist, increasing morbidity and mortality. Studies have demonstrated improved outcomes following AF ablation in HF patients with reduced ejection fraction (EF). OBJECTIVE: To assess the outcomes of pulsed-field ablation (PFA) in HF. METHODS: MANIFEST-PF is a multicenter patient-level registry of consecutive patients undergoing PFA for paroxysmal (PAF) or persistent AF (PerAF). In this sub-study, patients were stratified as: no history of HF (no-HF), HF with preserved EF (HFPEF; LVEF≥50%) or HF with reduced/mildly-reduced EF (HFMR/REF; LVEF<50%). The primary effectiveness and safety endpoints were freedom from documented atrial arrhythmias lasting ≥30s and major adverse events (MAEs), respectively. RESULTS: Of the 1,381 patients, 85% (n=1,174) were no-HF, 6.2% (n=87) were HFPEF, and 8.6% (n=120) were HFMR/REF. No-HF patients had less PerAF than patients with HF (p<0.001), with no difference between HF subtypes (p=1.00). The 1-year freedom from atrial arrhythmia was significantly higher in no-HF than with HFPEF or HFMR/REF (79.9%, 71.3%, 67.5%, p<0.001), but similar between HFMR/REF and HFPEF (p=0.26). However, there was no significant difference in freedom from atrial arrhythmia among patients with no-HF vs HFPEF vs HFMR/REF for those with PAF (82.8%/82.4%/71.7%, p=0.09) and PerAF (73.3%, 64.2%, and 64.9%, p=0.14.MAE rates were similar between the no-HF, HFPEF and HFMR/REF groups (1.9%, 0%, and 2.5%, respectively). CONCLUSION: PFA appears to be potentially safe and effective in AF patients with HF. Freedom from atrial arrhythmia post-PFA was higher in patients without a history of HF, with no significant difference between HF subtypes.

A cost-consequence analysis comparing three cardiac ablation strategies for the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Cardiac ablation is a well-established method for treating atrial fibrillation (AF). Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a non-thermal therapeutic alternative to radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and cryoballoon ablation (CRYO). PFA uses high-voltage electric pulses to target cells. The present analysis aims to quantify the costs, outcomes, and resources associated with these three ablation strategies for paroxysmal AF. METHODS: Real-world clinical data were prospectively collected during index hospitalization by three European medical centers (Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands) specialized in cardiac ablation. These data included procedure times (pre-procedural, skin-to-skin and post-procedural), resource use, and staff burden. Data regarding complications associated with each of the three treatment options and redo procedures were extracted from the literature. Costs were collected from hospital economic formularies and published cost databases. A cost-consequence model from the hospital perspective was built to estimate the impact of the three treatment options in terms of effectiveness and costs. RESULTS: Across the three centers, N = 91 patients were included over a period of 12 months. A significant difference was seen in pre-procedural time (mean ± SD, PFA: 13.6 ± 3.7 min, CRYO: 18.8 ± 6.6 min, RFA: 20.4 ± 6.4 min; p < .001). Procedural time (skin-to-skin) was also different across alternatives (PFA: 50.9 ± 22.4 min, CRYO: 74.5 ± 24.5 min, RFA: 140.2 ± 82.4 min; p < .0001). The model reported an overall cost of €216,535 per 100 patients treated with PFA, €301,510 per 100 patients treated with CRYO and €346,594 per 100 patients treated with RFA. Overall, the cumulative savings associated with PFA (excluding kit costs) were €850 and €1,301 per patient compared to CRYO and RFA, respectively. CONCLUSION: PFA demonstrated shorter procedure time compared to CRYO and RFA. Model estimates indicate that these time savings result in cost savings for hospitals and reduce outlay on redo procedures. Clinical practice in individual hospitals varies and may impact the ability to transfer the results of this analysis to other settings.

Safety and Effectiveness of Pulsed Field Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) coexist, increasing morbidity and mortality. Studies have demonstrated improved outcomes following AF ablation in HF patients with reduced ejection fraction (EF). OBJECTIVE: This study sought to assess the outcomes of pulsed field ablation (PFA) in HF. METHODS: MANIFEST-PF (Multi-National Survey on the Methods, Efficacy, and Safety on the Post-Approval Clinical Use of Pulsed Field Ablation) is a multicenter, patient-level registry of consecutive patients undergoing PFA for paroxysmal AF or persistent AF (PerAF). In this substudy, patients were stratified as no history of HF (no-HF), HF with preserved EF (HFpEF) (left ventricular EF of ≥50%) or HF with reduced/mildly reduced EF (HFmr/rEF) (left ventricular EF of <50%). The primary effectiveness and safety endpoints were freedom from documented atrial arrhythmias lasting ≥30 seconds and major adverse events, respectively. RESULTS: Of the 1,381 patients, 85% (n = 1,174) were no-HF, 6.2% (n = 87) were HFpEF, and 8.6% (n = 120) were HFmr/rEF. No-HF patients had less PerAF than patients with HF (P < 0.001), with no difference between HF subtypes (P = >0.99). The 1-year freedom from atrial arrhythmia was significantly higher in no-HF patients than in those with HFpEF or HFmr/rEF (79.9%, 71.3%, and 67.5%, respectively; P < 0.001) but similar between patients with HFmr/rEF and HFpEF (P = 0.26). However, there was no significant difference in freedom from atrial arrhythmia among patients with no-HF vs HFpEF vs HFmr/rEF for those with paroxysmal AF (82.8%, 82.4%, and 71.7%, respectively; P = 0.09) and PerAF (73.3%, 64.2%, and 64.9%, respectively; P = 0.14). Major adverse event rates were similar between the no-HF, HFpEF, and HFmr/rEF groups (1.9%, 0%, and 2.5%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: PFA appears to be potentially safe and effective in AF patients with HF. Freedom from atrial arrhythmia post-PFA was higher in patients without a history of HF, with no significant difference between HF subtypes.

Cardioneuroablation for vasovagal syncope: insights on patients' selection, centre settings, procedural workflow and endpoints-results from an European Heart Rhythm Association survey.

AIMS: Cardioneuroablation (CNA) is a catheter-based intervention for recurrent vasovagal syncope (VVS) that consists in the modulation of the parasympathetic cardiac autonomic nervous system. This survey aims to provide a comprehensive overview of current CNA utilization in Europe. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 202 participants from 40 different countries replied to the survey. Half of the respondents have performed a CNA during the last 12 months, reflecting that it is considered a treatment option of a subset of patients. Seventy-one per cent of respondents adopt an approach targeting ganglionated plexuses (GPs) systematically in both the right atrium (RA) and left atrium (LA). The second most common strategy (16%) involves LA GP ablation only after no response following RA ablation. The procedural endpoint is frequently an increase in heart rate. Ganglionated plexus localization predominantly relies on an anatomical approach (90%) and electrogram analysis (59%). Less utilized methods include pre-procedural imaging (20%), high-frequency stimulation (17%), and spectral analysis (10%). Post-CNA, anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy is prescribed, with only 11% of the respondents discharging patients without such medication. Cardioneuroablation is perceived as effective (80% of respondents) and safe (71% estimated <1% rate of procedure-related complications). Half view CNA emerging as a first-line therapy in the near future. CONCLUSION: This survey offers a snapshot of the current implementation of CNA in Europe. The results show high expectations for the future of CNA, but important heterogeneity exists regarding indications, procedural workflow, and endpoints of CNA. Ongoing efforts are essential to standardize procedural protocols and peri-procedural patient management.

Cryoablation of atrial fibrillation in "very severe" obese patients (BMI ≥ 40): Indications, feasibility, procedural safety and efficacy, and clinical outcome (the ICE-Obese Extreme).

BACKGROUND: Management of atrial fibrillation (AF) in very severe obese patients is challenging. Cryoballoon ablation (CBA) represents an effective rhythm control strategy. However, data in this patient group were limited. METHODS: Highly symptomatic AF patients with body mass index (BMI) ≥ 40 kg/m2 who had failed antiarrhythmic drug therapy and electrocardioversion and failure to achieve targeted body-weight-reduction underwent CBA. RESULTS: Data of 72 very severe obese AF patients (Group A) and 129 AF patients with normal BMI (Group B, BMI < 25 kg/m2) were consecutively collected. Group A had significantly younger age (60.6 ± 10.4 vs. 69.2 ± 11.2 years), higher BMI (44.3 ± 4.3 vs. 22.5 ± 1.6 kg/m2). Procedural pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) was successful in all patients (2 touch-up ablation in Group A). Compared to Group B, Group A had similar procedural (61.3 ± 22.6 vs. 57.5 ± 19 min), similar fluoroscopy time (10.1 ± 5.5 vs. 9.2 ± 4.8 min) but significantly higher radiation dose (2852 ± 2095 vs. 884 ± 732 µGym2). We observed similar rates of real-time-isolation (78.6% vs. 78.5%), single-shot-isolation (86.5% vs. 88.8%), but significantly longer time-to-sustained-isolation (53.5 ± 33 vs. 43.2 ± 25 s). There was significantly higher rate of puncture-site-complication (6.9% vs. 1.6%) in Group A. One-year clinical success in paroxysmal AF was (Group A: 69.4% vs. Group B: 80.2%; p < .001), in persistent AF was (Group A: 58.1% vs. Group B: 62.8%; p = .889). In Re-Do procedures Group A had a numerically lower PVI durability (75.0% vs. 83.6%, p = .089). CONCLUSION: For very severe obese AF patients, CBA appears feasible, leads to relatively good clinical outcome.

Severe ST-segment elevation and AV block during pulsed-field ablation due to vasospastic angina - a novel observation.

Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation using non-thermal electroporation represents a promising ablation modality due to its believed superior safety profile. Still, if electroporation is delivered in proximity to a coronary artery, vasospasms can occur. We report the first case of severe right coronary artery vasospasm resulting in ST-segment elevation and AV block despite a remote distance from the ablation site to the right coronary artery, indicating a different mechanism. In this case, electroporation most likely triggered a previously unknown Prinzmetal vasospastic angina in the patient, resulting in the coronary vasospasm. Thus, meticulous monitoring of ST-segment changes following PFA delivery even from regions remote to coronary arteries is required.

Stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation and its implications for modern cardiac electrophysiology: results of an EHRA survey.

Stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation (STAR) is a treatment option for recurrent ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation (VT/VF) in patients with structural heart disease (SHD). The current and future role of STAR as viewed by cardiologists is unknown. The study aimed to assess the current role, barriers to application, and expected future role of STAR. An online survey consisting of 20 questions on baseline demographics, awareness/access, current use, and the future role of STAR was conducted. A total of 129 international participants completed the survey [mean age 43 ± 11 years, 25 (16.4%) female]. Ninety-one (59.9%) participants were electrophysiologists. Nine participants (7%) were unaware of STAR as a therapeutic option. Sixty-four (49.6%) had access to STAR, while 62 (48.1%) had treated/referred a patient for treatment. Common primary indications for STAR were recurrent VT/VF in SHD (45%), recurrent VT/VF without SHD (7.8%), or premature ventricular contraction (3.9%). Reported main advantages of STAR were efficacy in the treatment of arrhythmias not amenable to conventional treatment (49%) and non-invasive treatment approach with overall low expected acute and short-term procedural risk (23%). Most respondents have foreseen a future clinical role of STAR in the treatment of VT/VF with or without underlying SHD (72% and 75%, respectively), although only a minority expected a first-line indication for it (7% and 5%, respectively). Stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation as a novel treatment option of recurrent VT appears to gain acceptance within the cardiology community. Further trials are critical to further define efficacy, patient populations, as well as the appropriate clinical use for the treatment of VT.

Impact of Left Atrial Posterior Wall Ablation During Pulsed-Field Ablation for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) alone is insufficient to treat many patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (PersAF). Adjunctive left atrial posterior wall (LAPW) ablation with thermal technologies has revealed lack of efficacy, perhaps limited by the difficulty in achieving lesion durability amid concerns of esophageal injury. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to compare the safety and effectiveness of PVI + LAPW ablation vs PVI in patients with PersAF using pulsed-field ablation (PFA). METHODS: In a retrospective analysis of the MANIFEST-PF (Multi-National Survey on the Methods, Efficacy, and Safety on the Post-approval Clinical Use of Pulsed Field Ablation) registry, we studied consecutive PersAF patients undergoing post-approval treatment with a pentaspline PFA catheter. The primary effectiveness outcome was freedom from any atrial arrhythmia of ≥30 seconds. Safety outcomes included the composite of acute and chronic major adverse events. RESULTS: Of the 547 patients with PersAF who underwent PFA, 131 (24%) received adjunctive LAPW ablation. Compared to PVI-alone, patients receiving adjunctive LAPW ablation were younger (65 vs 67 years of age, P = 0.08), had a lower CHA2DS2-VASc score (2.3 ± 1.6 vs 2.6 ± 1.6, P = 0.08), and were more likely to receive electroanatomical mapping (48.1% vs 39.0%, P = 0.07) and intracardiac echocardiography imaging (46.1% vs 17.1%, P < 0.001). The 1-year Kaplan-Meier estimate for freedom from atrial arrhythmias was not statistically different between groups in the full (PVI + LAPW: 66.4%; 95% CI: 57.6%-74.4% vs PVI: 73.1%; 95% CI: 68.5%-77.2%; P = 0.68) and propensity-matched cohorts (PVI + LAPW: 71.7% vs PVI: 68.5%; P = 0.34). There was also no significant difference in major adverse events between the groups (2.2% vs 1.4%, respectively, P = 0.51). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with PersAF undergoing PFA, as compared to PVI-alone, adjunctive LAPW ablation did not improve freedom from atrial arrhythmia at 12 months.

Management of ventricular tachycardias: insights on centre settings, procedural workflow, endpoints, and implementation of guidelines-results from an EHRA survey.

Ventricular tachycardia (VT), and its occurrence, is still one of the main reasons for sudden cardiac death and, therefore, for increased mortality and morbidity foremost in patients with structural heart [Kahle A-K, Jungen C, Alken F-A, Scherschel K, Willems S, Pürerfellner H et al. Management of ventricular tachycardia in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy: contemporary armamentarium. Europace 2022;24:538-51]. Catheter ablation has become a safe and effective treatment option in patients with recurrent VT [Cronin EM, Bogun FM, Maury P, Peichl P, Chen M, Namboodiri N et al. 2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS expert consensus statement on catheter ablation of ventricular arrhythmias. Heart Rhythm 2020;17:e2-154]. Previous and current guidelines provide guidance on indication for VT ablation and risk assessment and evaluation of underlying disease. However, no uniform recommendation is provided regarding procedural strategies, timing of ablation, and centre setting. Therefore, these specifics seem to differ largely, and recent data are sparse. This physician-based European Heart Rhythm Association survey aims to deliver insights on not only infrastructural settings but also procedural specifics, applied technologies, ablation strategies, and procedural endpoints. Therefore, these findings might deliver a real-world scenario of VT management and potentially are of guidance for other centres.

Current management of atrial fibrillation in routine practice according to the last ESC guidelines: an EHRA physician survey-how are we dealing with controversial approaches?

AIMS: Although guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation (AF) are regularly published, many controversial issues remain, limiting their implementation. We aim to describe current clinical practice among European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) community according to last guidelines. METHODS AND RESULTS: A 30 multiple-choice questionnaire covering the most controversial topics related to AF management was distributed through the EHRA Research Network, National Societies, and social media between January and February 2023. One hundred and eighty-one physicians responded the survey, 61% from university hospitals. Atrial fibrillation screening in high-risk patients is regularly performed by 57%. Only 42% has access to at least one programme aiming at diagnosing/managing comorbidities and lifestyle modifications, with marked heterogeneity between countries. Direct oral anticoagulants are the preferred antithrombotic (97%). Rhythm control is the preferred strategy in most AF phenotypes: symptomatic vs. asymptomatic paroxysmal AF (97% vs. 77%), low vs. high risk for recurrence persistent AF (90% vs. 72%), and permanent AF (20%). I-C drugs and amiodarone are preferred while dronedarone and sotalol barely used. Ablation is the first-line therapy for symptomatic paroxysmal AF (69%) and persistent AF with markers of atrial disease (57%) and is performed independently of symptoms by 15%. In persistent AF, 68% performs only pulmonary vein isolation and 32% also additional lesions. CONCLUSION: There is marked heterogeneity in AF management and limited accordance to last guidelines in the EHRA community. Most of the discrepancies are related to the main controversial issues, such as those related to AF screening, management of comorbidities, pharmacological treatment, and ablation strategy.

Prevention of venous thromboembolism in right heart-sided electrophysiological procedures: results of an European Heart Rhythm Association survey.

Limited data are available regarding venous thromboembolism (VTE), specifically deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), following right-sided ablations and electrophysiological (EP) studies. Compared to left-sided procedures, no guidelines on antithrombotic management strategies for the prevention of DVT and PE are available. The main purpose of the present European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) survey is to report the current management of right-sided EP procedures, focusing on anticoagulation and prevention of VTE. An online survey was conducted using the EHRA infrastructure. A total of 244 participants answered a 19-items questionnaire on the periprocedural management of EP studies and right-sided catheter ablations. The right femoral vein is the most common access for EP studies and right-sided procedures. An ultrasound-guided approach is employed by more than 2/3 of respondents. Intravenous heparin is not commonly given by the majority of participants. About 1/3 of participants (34%) routinely prescribe VTE prophylaxis during (mostly aspirin and low molecular weight heparin) and 1/4 of respondents (25%) commonly prescribe VTE prophylaxis after discharge (mostly aspirin). Of note, respectively 13% and 9% of participants observed at least one DVT and one PE related to right-sided ablation or EP study within the last year in their center. The present survey shows that only a minority of operators routinely gives intraprocedural intravenous heparin and prescribes VTE prophylaxis after right-sided EP procedures. Compared to left-sided procedures like atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation, there are no consistent systematic antithrombotic management strategies.

Clinical Outcomes by Sex After Pulsed Field Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation.

Importance: Previous studies evaluating the association of patient sex with clinical outcomes using conventional thermal ablative modalities for atrial fibrillation (AF) such as radiofrequency or cryoablation are controversial due to mixed results. Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a novel AF ablation energy modality that has demonstrated preferential myocardial tissue ablation with a unique safety profile. Objective: To compare sex differences in patients undergoing PFA for AF in the Multinational Survey on the Methods, Efficacy, and Safety on the Postapproval Clinical Use of Pulsed Field Ablation (MANIFEST-PF) registry. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a retrospective cohort study of MANIFEST-PF registry data, which included consecutive patients undergoing postregulatory approval treatment with PFA to treat AF between March 2021 and May 2022 with a median follow-up of 1 year. MANIFEST-PF is a multinational, retrospectively analyzed, prospectively enrolled patient-level registry including 24 European centers. The study included all consecutive registry patients (age ≥18 years) who underwent first-ever PFA for paroxysmal or persistent AF. Exposure: PFA was performed on patients with AF. All patients underwent pulmonary vein isolation and additional ablation, which was performed at the discretion of the operator. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary effectiveness outcome was freedom from clinically documented atrial arrhythmia for 30 seconds or longer after a 3-month blanking period. The primary safety outcome was the composite of acute (<7 days postprocedure) and chronic (>7 days) major adverse events (MAEs). Results: Of 1568 patients (mean [SD] age, 64.5 [11.5] years; 1015 male [64.7%]) with AF who underwent PFA, female patients, as compared with male patients, were older (mean [SD] age, 68 [10] years vs 62 [12] years; P < .001), had more paroxysmal AF (70.2% [388 of 553] vs 62.4% [633 of 1015]; P = .002) but had fewer comorbidities such as coronary disease (9% [38 of 553] vs 15.9% [129 of 1015]; P < .001), heart failure (10.5% [58 of 553] vs 16.6% [168 of 1015]; P = .001), and sleep apnea (4.7% [18 of 553] vs 11.7% [84 of 1015]; P < .001). Pulmonary vein isolation was performed in 99.8% of female (552 of 553) and 98.9% of male (1004 of 1015; P = .90) patients. Additional ablation was performed in 22.4% of female (124 of 553) and 23.1% of male (235 of 1015; P = .79) patients. The 1-year Kaplan-Meier estimate for freedom from atrial arrhythmia was similar in male and female patients (79.0%; 95% CI, 76.3%-81.5% vs 76.3%; 95% CI, 72.5%-79.8%; P = .28). There was also no significant difference in acute major AEs between groups (male, 1.5% [16 of 1015] vs female, 2.5% [14 of 553]; P = .19). Conclusion and Relevance: Results of this cohort study suggest that after PFA for AF, there were no significant sex differences in clinical effectiveness or safety events.

Persistent and Recurrent Device-Related Thrombus After Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Incidence, Predictors, and Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Scarce data exist on the evolution of device-related thrombus (DRT) after left atrial appendage closure (LAAC). OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess the incidence, predictors, and clinical impact of persistent and recurrent DRT in LAAC recipients. METHODS: Data were obtained from an international multicenter registry including 237 patients diagnosed with DRT after LAAC. Of these, 214 patients with a subsequent imaging examination after the initial diagnosis of DRT were included. Unfavorable evolution of DRT was defined as either persisting or recurrent DRT. RESULTS: DRT resolved in 153 (71.5%) cases and persisted in 61 (28.5%) cases. Larger DRT size (OR per 1-mm increase: 1.08; 95% CI: 1.02-1.15; P = 0.009) and female (OR: 2.44; 95% CI: 1.12-5.26; P = 0.02) were independently associated with persistent DRT. After DRT resolution, 82 (53.6%) of 153 patients had repeated device imaging, with 14 (17.1%) cases diagnosed with recurrent DRT. Overall, 75 (35.0%) patients had unfavorable evolution of DRT, and the sole predictor was average thrombus size at initial diagnosis (OR per 1-mm increase: 1.09; 95% CI: 1.03-1.16; P = 0.003), with an optimal cutoff size of 7 mm (OR: 2.51; 95% CI: 1.39-4.52; P = 0.002). Unfavorable evolution of DRT was associated with a higher rate of thromboembolic events compared with resolved DRT (26.7% vs 15.1%; HR: 2.13; 95% CI: 1.15-3.94; P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: About one-third of DRT events had an unfavorable evolution (either persisting or recurring), with a larger initial thrombus size (particularly >7 mm) portending an increased risk. Unfavorable evolution of DRT was associated with a 2-fold higher risk of thromboembolic events compared with resolved DRT.

Length of hospital stay for elective electrophysiological procedures: a survey from the European Heart Rhythm Association.

AIMS: Electrophysiological (EP) operations that have traditionally involved long hospital lengths of stay (LOS) are now being undertaken as day case procedures. The coronavirus disease-19 pandemic served as an impetus for many centres to shorten LOS for EP procedures. This survey explores LOS for elective EP procedures in the modern era. METHODS AND RESULTS: An online survey consisting of 27 multiple-choice questions was completed by 245 respondents from 35 countries. With respect to de novo cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantations, day case procedures were reported for 79.5% of implantable loop recorders, 13.3% of pacemakers (PMs), 10.4% of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs), and 10.2% of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices. With respect to CIED generator replacements, day case procedures were reported for 61.7% of PMs, 49.2% of ICDs, and 48.2% of CRT devices. With regard to ablations, day case procedures were reported for 5.7% of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablations, 10.7% of left-sided ablations, and 17.5% of right-sided ablations. A LOS ≥ 2 days for CIED implantation was reported for 47.7% of PM, 54.5% of ICDs, and 56.9% of CRT devices and for 54.5% of AF ablations, 42.2% of right-sided ablations, and 46.1% of left-sided ablations. Reimbursement (43-56%) and bed availability (20-47%) were reported to have no consistent impact on the organization of elective procedures. CONCLUSION: There is a wide variation in the LOS for elective EP procedures. The LOS for some procedures appears disproportionate to their complexity. Neither reimbursement nor bed availability consistently influenced LOS.

Electrophysiology fellowship experience and requirements: an EHRA survey.

AIMS: This study aims to survey current educational experience and the individual requirements for electrophysiologists in training. METHODS AND RESULTS: The European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) e-Communication Committee and the Scientific Initiatives Committee prepared a questionnaire and distributed it via newsletters, Twitter, LinkedIn, and Facebook. The survey consisted of 22 questions collected on an individual basis anonymously. Two hundred and forty-three responders from 35 countries (32% female, age 38 ± 6 years old) completed the survey. This EHRA electrophysiology (EP) fellowship survey showed that (i) hands-on participation and observation of EP procedures are very important; (ii) the main motivations to choose the EP fellowship institution are centre reputation and volume as well as the availability of a structured EP fellowship programme; (iii) 59% passed the EHRA exam and 46% took a national certification exam; (iv) respondents are overall satisfied with their own fellowships, but there are areas of less confidence such as conduction system pacing implantation and cardiac resynchronization therapy implantation; (v) 78% of respondents performed research during their fellowship, (vi) the optimal duration of an EP fellowship should be at least 2 years; and (viii) doing fellowships abroad is beneficial, but significant obstacles exist. CONCLUSION: The results of this EHRA survey may help to refine current EP fellowship programmes to improve the quality of EP training and early career building of young electrophysiologists.

Occupational radiation exposure of electrophysiology staff with reproductive potential and during pregnancy: an EHRA survey.

AIMS: Electrophysiology (EP) is a growing field in cardiology, with an increasing involvement of young people. Nevertheless, concerns about radiation exposure and its impact on reproduction and pregnancy may discourage the choice of an EP career. The study is aimed at investigating the level of awareness and main sources of concern about the effects of radiation on reproductive potential and pregnancy, exploring the safety measures adopted in different EP labs, and verifying the adherence to the current guidelines. METHODS AND RESULTS: An online survey was conducted using the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) infrastructure from April to June 2022. A total of 252 EP personnel (42% women) participated, from 50 countries and different professional roles. Most participants expressed concerns regarding the effects of radiation on reproductive capacity (67.1%) and offspring diseases (68.2%). Only 37.9% of participants were aware of the EHRA 2017 consensus document about occupational radiation exposure. Most participants (80.9%) considered that occupational radiation during pregnancy is not safe. EP female staff were not allowed to work in the EP lab during pregnancy in 48.1% of cases. Zero-fluoroscopy was the preferred choice to continue working in the EP lab during pregnancy. CONCLUSION: EP staff, including both men and women, have concerns about the effects of radiation on reproductive capacity. Despite the recommendations issued by international bodies, implementation of the policies regarding pregnancy and occupational radiation exposure is heterogeneous. Zero-fluoroscopy is the preferred approach to ensure safety during pregnancy in the EP lab.

Diagnostic and therapeutic pathways for the malignant left atrial appendage: European Heart Rhythm Association physician survey.

AIMS: Patients with atrial fibrillation who despite taking oral anti-coagulant therapy (OAT) suffer a stroke or systemic embolism (SSE) without vascular cause or who develop left atrial appendage (LAA) thrombus (LAAT) should be considered as having malignant LAA. The optimal treatment strategy to reduce SSE risk in such patients is unknown. The aim of the study is to investigate the diagnostic and therapeutic pathways for malignant LAA practiced in European cardiac centres. METHODS AND RESULTS: An 18-item online questionnaire on malignant LAA was disseminated by the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) Scientific Initiatives Committee. A total of 196 physicians participated in the survey. There seems to be high confidence in transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE) imaging, considering LAAT diagnosis. Switching to another direct oral anti-coagulant (DOAC) is the preferred initial step for the treatment of malignant LAA followed by a switch to vitamin K antagonist (VKA), low-molecular-weight heparin, or continued/optimized DOAC dosage, whereas LAA closure is the last option. Left atrial appendage closure is a viable option in patients with embolic stroke despite OAT and no evidence of thrombus at TEE (empty LAA) after comprehensive diagnostic measures to exclude other sources of embolism. CONCLUSION: This EHRA survey provides a snapshot of the contemporary management of patients diagnosed with malignant LAA. Currently, the majority of patients are treated on an outpatient basis with either shifting from VKA to DOAC or from one DOAC to another. Left atrial appendage closure in this population seems to be reserved for patients with higher bleeding risk or complications of malignant LAA, such as stroke.