Safety and efficacy of long-term Sodium Channel Blocker therapy for Early Rhythm Control: The EAST-AFNET 4 trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Clinical concerns exist about the potential proarrhythmic effects of the sodium channel blockers flecainide and propafenone (SCB) in patients with cardiovascular disease. SCB were used to deliver early rhythm control (ERC) therapy in EAST-AFNET 4. METHODS: We analysed the primary safety outcome (death, stroke, or serious adverse events related to rhythm-control therapy) and primary efficacy outcome (cardiovascular death, stroke and hospitalization for worsening of heart failure or acute coronary syndrome) during SCB-intake for ERC patients (n = 1395) in EAST-AFNET 4. The protocol discouraged flecainide and propafenone in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction and suggested stopping therapy upon QRS prolongation >25% on therapy. RESULTS: Flecainide or propafenone was given to 689 patients (age 69 (8) years; CHA2DS2-VASc 3.2 (1); 177 with heart failure; 41 with prior myocardial infarction, CABG or PCI; 26 with left ventricular hypertrophy >15 mm; median therapy duration 1,153 [237, 1,828] days). The primary efficacy outcome occurred less often in patients treated with SCB (3/100 (99/3,316) patient-years) than in patients who never received SCB (SCBnever 4.9/100 (150/3,083) patient-years, p < 0.001). There were numerically fewer primary safety outcomes in patients receiving SCB (2.9/100 (96/3,359) patient-years) than in SCBnever patients (4.2/100 (135/3,220) patient-years, adjusted p = 0.015). Sinus rhythm at 2 years was similar between groups (SCB 537/610 (88); SCBnever 472/579 (82)). CONCLUSION: Long-term therapy with flecainide or propafenone appeared to be safe in the EAST-AFNET 4 trial to deliver effective ERC therapy, including in selected patients with stable cardiovascular disease such as coronary artery disease and stable heart failure. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN04708680, NCT01288352, EudraCT2010-021258-20, www.easttrial.org.

Longer and better lives for patients with atrial fibrillation: the 9th AFNET/EHRA consensus conference.

AIMS: Recent trial data demonstrate beneficial effects of active rhythm management in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and support the concept that a low arrhythmia burden is associated with a low risk of AF-related complications. The aim of this document is to summarize the key outcomes of the 9th AFNET/EHRA Consensus Conference of the Atrial Fibrillation NETwork (AFNET) and the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA). METHODS AND RESULTS: Eighty-three international experts met in Münster for 2 days in September 2023. Key findings are as follows: (i) Active rhythm management should be part of the default initial treatment for all suitable patients with AF. (ii) Patients with device-detected AF have a low burden of AF and a low risk of stroke. Anticoagulation prevents some strokes and also increases major but non-lethal bleeding. (iii) More research is needed to improve stroke risk prediction in patients with AF, especially in those with a low AF burden. Biomolecules, genetics, and imaging can support this. (iv) The presence of AF should trigger systematic workup and comprehensive treatment of concomitant cardiovascular conditions. (v) Machine learning algorithms have been used to improve detection or likely development of AF. Cooperation between clinicians and data scientists is needed to leverage the potential of data science applications for patients with AF. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with AF and a low arrhythmia burden have a lower risk of stroke and other cardiovascular events than those with a high arrhythmia burden. Combining active rhythm control, anticoagulation, rate control, and therapy of concomitant cardiovascular conditions can improve the lives of patients with AF.

Secondary stroke prevention in people with atrial fibrillation: treatments and trials.

Atrial fibrillation is one of the most common cardiac arrhythmias and is a major cause of ischaemic stroke. Recent findings indicate the importance of atrial fibrillation burden (device-detected, subclinical, or paroxysmal and persistent or permanent) and whether atrial fibrillation was known before stroke onset or diagnosed after stroke for the risk of recurrence. Secondary prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation and stroke aims to reduce the risk of recurrent ischaemic stroke. Findings from randomised controlled trials assessing the optimal timing to introduce direct oral anticoagulant therapy after a stroke show that early start (ie, within 48 h for minor to moderate strokes and within 4-5 days for large strokes) seems safe and could reduce the risk of early recurrence. Other promising developments regarding early rhythm control, left atrial appendage occlusion, and novel factor XI inhibitor oral anticoagulants suggest that these therapies have the potential to further reduce the risk of stroke. Secondary prevention strategies in patients with atrial fibrillation who have a stroke despite oral anticoagulation therapy is an unmet medical need. Research advances suggest a heterogeneous spectrum of causes, and ongoing trials are investigating new approaches for secondary prevention in this vulnerable patient group. In patients with atrial fibrillation and a history of intracerebral haemorrhage, the latest data from randomised controlled trials on stroke prevention shows that oral anticoagulation reduces the risk of ischaemic stroke but more data are needed to define the safety profile.

In-Hospital Pulmonary Arterial Embolism after Catheter Ablation of Over 45,000 Cardiac Arrhythmias: Individualized Case Analysis of Multicentric Data.

OBJECTIVE AND BACKGROUND: Data on incidence of in-hospital pulmonary embolisms (PE) after catheter ablation (CA) are scarce. To gain further insights, we sought to provide new findings through case-based analyses of administrative data. METHODS: Incidences of PE after CA of supraventricular tachycardias (SVT), atrial fibrillation (AF), atrial flutter (AFlu), and ventricular tachycardias (VT) in three German tertiary centers between 2005 and 2020 were determined and coded by the G-DRG (German Diagnosis Related Groups System) and OPS (German Operation and Procedure Classification) systems. An administrative search was performed with a consecutive case-based analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 47,344 ablations were analyzed (10,037 SVT; 28,048 AF; 6,252 AFlu; 3,007 VT). PE occurred in 14 (0.03%) predominantly female (n = 9; 64.3%) patients with a mean age of 55.3 ± 16.9 years, body mass index 26.2 ± 5.1 kg/m2, and left ventricular ejection fraction of 56 ± 13.6%. PE incidences were 0.05% (n = 5) for SVT, 0.02% (n = 5) for AF, and 0.13% (n = 4) for VT ablations. No patient suffered PE after AFlu ablation. Five patients (35.7%) with PE after CA had no prior indication for oral anticoagulation (OAC). Preprocedural international normalized ratio in PE patients was 1.2 ± 0.5. Most patients with PE following CA presented with symptoms the day after the procedure (n = 9) after intraprocedural heparin application of 12,943.2 ± 5,415.5 IU. PE treatment included anticoagulation with either phenprocoumon (n = 5) or non-vitamin K-dependent OAC (n = 9). Two patients with PE died after VT/AF ablation, respectively. The remaining patients were discharged without sequels. CONCLUSION: Over a 15-year period, incidence of PE after ablation is low, particularly low in patients with ablation for AF/AFlu. This is most likely due to stricter anticoagulation management in these patients compared with those receiving SVT/VT ablation procedures and could argue for continuation of OAC prior to ablation. Optimizing periprocedural anticoagulation management should be subject of further prospective trials.

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.

Long-term outcomes of the pentaspline pulsed-field ablation catheter for the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: results of the prospective, multicentre FARA-Freedom Study.

AIMS: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is a well-established strategy for the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). Despite randomized controlled trials and real-world data showing the promise of pulsed-field ablation (PFA) for this treatment, long-term efficacy and safety data demonstrating single-procedure outcomes off antiarrhythmic drugs remain limited. The aim of the FARA-Freedom Study was to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of PFA using the pentaspline catheter for PAF. METHODS AND RESULTS: FARA-Freedom, a prospective, non-randomized, multicentre study, enrolled patients with PAF undergoing de novo PVI with PFA, who were followed for 12 months with weekly transtelephonic monitoring and a 72-h Holter ECG at 6 and 12 months. The primary safety endpoint was a composite of device- or procedure-related serious adverse events out to 7 days post-ablation and PV stenosis or atrioesophageal (AE) fistula out to 12 months. Treatment success is a composite of acute PVI and chronic success, which includes freedom from any documented atrial tachyarrhythmia longer than 30 s, use of antiarrhythmic drugs or cardioversion after a 3-month blanking period, or use of amiodarone or repeat ablation at any time. The study enrolled 179 PAF patients (62 ± 10 years, 39% female) at 13 centres. At the index procedure, all PVs were successfully isolated with the pentaspline PFA catheter. Procedure and left atrial dwell times, with a 20-min waiting period, were 71.9 ± 17.6 and 41.0 ± 13.3 min, respectively. Fluoroscopy time was 11.5 ± 7.4 min. Notably, monitoring compliance was high, with 88.4 and 90.3% with weekly events and 72-h Holter monitors, respectively. Freedom from the composite primary effectiveness endpoint was 66.6%, and 41 patients had atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence, mostly recurrent atrial fibrillation (31 patients). The composite safety endpoint occurred in two patients (1.1%), one tamponade and one transient ischaemic attack. There was no coronary spasm, PV stenosis, or AE fistula. There were four cases of transient phrenic nerve palsy, but all resolved during the index procedure. CONCLUSION: In this prospective, non-randomized, multicentre study, PVI using a pentaspline PFA catheter was effective in treating PAF patients despite rigourous endpoint definitions and high monitoring compliance and demonstrated favourable safety. REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT05072964 (sponsor: Boston Scientific Corporation).

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.

Repeat pulmonary vein isolation and anterior line ablation using a novel point-by-point pulsed-field ablation system.

BACKGROUND: Pulsed-field ablation (PFA) is a nonthermal energy source for ablation of cardiac arrhythmias. This study investigated the prospective outcomes of a novel PFA generator in conjunction with a commercially available, contact force-sensing, focal ablation catheter. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility, safety, and lesion characteristics of point-by-point PFA in consecutive patients undergoing repeat ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS: The study involved reisolation of pulmonary veins (PVs) with electrical reconnection and the creation of an anterior line (AL) in patients with anterior substrate or durable pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). RESULTS: In 24 patients (46% female; mean age 67 ± 10 years; 67% persistent AF), successful reisolation of 27 of 27 reconnected PVs (100%) was performed. In 19 patients, AL ablation was performed, with bidirectional block in 16 (84%), median ablation time 26 [21, 33] minutes, and first-pass bidirectional block in 13 patients (68%). Acute AL reconduction occurred in 8 of 19 patients (42%). Among these 8 patients, a subsequent sustained block of the AL was achieved in 5 (63%). Ultra-high-density electroanatomic mapping revealed homogeneous but relatively large low-voltage areas in the ablated regions. Median procedural, left atrial dwell, and fluoroscopy times were 100 [90, 109] minutes, 83 [75, 98] minutes, and 10 [8, 13] minutes, respectively. No major or minor complications occurred. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated feasibility, acute efficacy, and safety of point-by-point PFA for repeat PVI and AL ablation. Further studies are warranted to assess the long-term durability and comparison with established ablation methods.

Atrial Fibrillation Ablation: Current Practice and Future Perspectives.

Catheter ablation to perform pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is established as a mainstay in rhythm control of atrial fibrillation (AF). The aim of this review is to provide an overview of current practice and future perspectives in AF ablation. The main clinical benefit of AF ablation is the reduction of arrhythmia-related symptoms and improvement of quality of life. Catheter ablation of AF is recommended, in general, as a second-line therapy for patients with symptomatic paroxysmal or persistent AF, who have failed or are intolerant to pharmacological therapy. In selected patients with heart failure and reduced left-ventricular fraction, catheter ablation was proven to reduce all-cause mortality. Also, optimal management of comorbidities can reduce AF recurrence after AF ablation; therefore, multimodal risk assessment and therapy are mandatory. To date, the primary ablation tool in widespread use is still single-tip catheter radiofrequency (RF) based ablation. Additionally, balloon-based pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) has gained prominence, especially due to its user-friendly nature and established safety and efficacy profile. So far, the cryoballoon (CB) is the most studied single-shot device. CB-based PVI is characterized by high efficiency, convincing success rates, and a beneficial safety profile. Recently, CB-PVI as a first-line therapy for AF was shown to be superior to pharmacological treatment in terms of efficacy and was shown to reduce progression from paroxysmal to persistent AF. In this context, CB-based PVI gains more and more importance as a first-line treatment choice. Non-thermal energy sources, namely pulsed-field ablation (PFA), have garnered attention due to their cardioselectivity. Although initially applied via a basket-like ablation tool, recent developments allow for point-by-point ablation, particularly with the advent of a novel lattice tip catheter.

Major in-hospital complications after catheter ablation of cardiac arrhythmias: individual case analysis of 43 031 procedures.

AIMS: In-hospital complications of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF), atrial flutter (AFL), and ventricular tachycardia (VT) may be overestimated by analyses of administrative data. METHODS AND RESULTS: We determined the incidences of in-hospital mortality, major bleeding, and stroke around AF, AFL, and VT ablations in four German tertiary centres between 2005 and 2020. All cases were coded by the G-DRG- and OPS-systems. Uniform code search terms were applied defining both the types of ablations for AF, AFL, and VT and the occurrence of major adverse events including femoral vascular complications, iatrogenic tamponade, stroke, and in-hospital death. Importantly, all complications were individually reviewed based on patient-level source records. Overall, 43 031 ablations were analysed (30 361 AF; 9364 AFL; 3306 VT). The number of ablations/year more than doubled from 2005 (n = 1569) to 2020 (n = 3317) with 3 times and 2.5 times more AF and VT ablations in 2020 (n = 2404 and n = 301, respectively) as compared to 2005 (n = 817 and n = 120, respectively), but a rather stable number of AFL ablations (n = 554 vs. n = 612). Major peri-procedural complications occurred in 594 (1.4%) patients. Complication rates were 1.1% (n = 325) for AF, 1.0% (n = 95) for AFL, and 5.3% (n = 175) for VT. With an increase in complex AF/VT procedures, the overall complication rate significantly increased (0.76% in 2005 vs. 1.81% in 2020; P = 0.004); but remained low over time. Following patient-adjudication, all in-hospital cardiac tamponades (0.7%) and strokes (0.2%) were related to ablation. Major femoral vascular complications requiring surgical intervention occurred in 0.4% of all patients. The in-hospital mortality rate adjudicated to be ablation-related was lower than the coded mortality rate: AF: 0.03% vs. 0.04%; AFL: 0.04% vs. 0.14%; VT: 0.42% vs. 1.48%. CONCLUSION: Major adverse events are low and comparable after catheter ablation for AFL and AF (∼1.0%), whereas they are five times higher for VT ablations. In the presence of an increase in complex ablation procedures, a moderate but significant increase in overall complications from 2005-20 was observed. Individual case analysis demonstrated a lower than coded ablation-related in-hospital mortality. This highlights the importance of individual case adjudication when analysing administrative data.

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.

[Long-term success after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation]. / Langzeiterfolg nach Vorhofflimmerablation.

Ablation is an established treatment option for atrial fibrillation (AF) and is associated with convincing success rates and a reasonable safety profile. Ablation strategies going beyond pulmonary vein isolation in patients with chronic forms of AF are less well established and reproducible. Especially in patients with progressed AF forms multiple ablation procedures might be mandatory to achieve reasonable clinical success. An early ablation strategy might stop or prolong the progress from paroxysmal to persistent AF. In addition, ablation is more effective than drug-based treatment and comparably safe. Long-term success rates after a single and after multiple ablation procedures in paroxysmal AF are reported with 60-70% and up to 80%, while success rates in persistent or long-standing persistent AF are less favorable (single procedure 40-50%, multiple procedures 70%). However, currently non-recurrence of AF is the most established but potentially not the best endpoint. The burden of AF after ablation as assessed by novel monitoring modalities might gain further clinical importance.

The infrastructure of electrophysiology centers impacts the management of cardiac tamponade-Results from a national survey.

BACKGROUND: Although electrophysiological (EP) centers have institutional standards, evidence on management of cardiac tamponade is lacking. AIM AND METHODS: A physician-based survey was conducted by sending out questionnaires to all hospitals in Germany performing EP procedures. To evaluate the infrastructure of EP centers and the impact of center volume and onsite cardiac surgery on the management of cardiac tamponade, the results of the survey were analyzed for low-volume (0-250 procedures per year), mid-volume (250-500 procedures), and high-volume (>500 procedures) centers, as well as for centers with and without onsite cardiac surgery. RESULTS: A total of 341 centers were identified and 189/341 (55%) returned data sets were analyzed. Most types of EP procedures are performed across all kinds of centers. Ablation of ventricular tachycardia (VT) is concentrated in higher volume centers and in centers with onsite cardiac surgery. None of the participating low-volume centers and only 13% of centers without onsite cardiac surgery responded to performing epicardial VT ablation. Irrespective of center volume and onsite cardiac surgery, neither body mass index nor age was reported to be an exclusion criterion for ablation procedures. Higher volume centers and centers with onsite cardiac surgery more often have dedicated EP laboratories and EP-nursing teams. Also, differences regarding periprocedural safety precautions and management of cardiac tamponade were found for low-, mid-, and high-volume centers, as well as for centers with and without onsite cardiac surgery. CONCLUSION: While center volume and onsite cardiac surgery do not impact patient selection, there are differences in ablation spectrum, infrastructure, periprocedural safety precautions, and treatment of tamponade.

Current practice and attitudes of stroke physicians towards rhythm-control therapy for stroke prevention: results of an international survey.

BACKGROUND: Patients with ischemic stroke and atrial fibrillation (AF) are at particularly high risk for recurrent stroke and cardiovascular events. Early rhythm control has been shown to be superior to usual care for the prevention of stroke and cardiovascular events for people with early AF. There are no data on the willingness to use rhythm control for patients with AF and acute ischemic stroke in clinical practice. METHODS: An online survey was carried out among stroke physicians to assess current practice and attitudes toward rhythm control in patients with AF and acute ischemic stroke between December 22nd 2021 and March 24th 2022. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 277 physicians including 237 from 15 known countries and 40 from unspecified countries. 79% (210/266) reported that they do not regularly apply treatment for rhythm control by ablation or antiarrhythmic drugs at all or only in small numbers (≤ 10%) of patients with AF and acute ischemic stroke. In those patients treated with rhythm-control therapy, antiarrhythmic drugs were used by the majority of respondents (89%), while only a minority reported using AF ablation (11%). 88% of respondents (221/250) stated that they would be willing to randomize patients with AF after acute ischemic stroke to either early rhythm control or usual care in a clinical trial. CONCLUSION: Despite its potential benefit, few patients with AF and acute ischemic stroke appear to be treated with rhythm control, which may result from uncertainty regarding potential complications of antiarrhythmic therapy in patients with acute stroke. Together with recent data on the effectiveness of early rhythm control in patients with a history of stroke, these results call for a randomized clinical trial to assess the efficacy of early rhythm control in patients with acute ischemic stroke and AF.

Unloading, ablation, bridging and transplant: different indications and treatments using the Impella 5.5 as longer-term circulatory support in one patient-an interdisciplinary case report.

Background: In patients with cardiogenic shock the clinical treatment often involves temporary mechanical circulatory support for initial haemodynamic stabilization to enable further assessment of therapeutic strategies. The surgically implanted Impella 5.5 can be used for several indications like ventricular unloading, haemodynamic support during high-risk interventions, and as a bridge-to-transplant strategy.We present an interdisciplinary managed case of using Impella 5.5 for multiple indications and treatment strategies in one patient. Case summary: A 66-year-old patient with known dilated cardiomyopathy was admitted with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction and underwent urgent coronary bypass grafting. His native heart function did not recover and he experienced recurrent episodes of sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) and electrical storm. He was evaluated for heart transplantation (OHT) and received a VT-ablation. However, he suffered an in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) with subsequent implantation of an extracorporeal life support system (ECLS). After surgical placement of an Impella 5.5 due to left ventricular distension and pulmonary congestion, the ECLS was successfully weaned. He showed good neurological outcomes and underwent another high-risk VT-ablation. The patient was further stabilized under Impella 5.5 support in a bridge-to-transplant strategy. After 34 days he underwent a successful OHT. Discussion: In this interdisciplinary case report the surgically implanted Impella 5.5 as temporary mechanical circulatory support was used for multiple different indications and treatment strategies like ventricular unloading, haemodynamic support during high-risk interventions, and as bridge-to-transplant strategy in one patient.