Fluoroless Catheter Ablation of Left Ventricular Summit Arrhythmias: A Step-by-Step Approach.

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.

Endo-epicardial ablation vs endocardial ablation for the management of ventricular tachycardia in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

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 I2 < 25 and the Random-Effects Model was used if I2 ≥ 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.

Fluoroless Atrial Fibrillation Catheter Ablation: Technique and Clinical Outcomes.

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.

Imaging Integration to Localize and Protect the Left Coronary Artery in Patients Undergoing LAAEI.

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.