Financing graduate medical education: challenges for training the next generation of electrophysiologists.

The system for graduate medical education (GME) in the USA is vital to maintaining a well-trained physician population to meet the needs of the nation. The funding of this system over the last several decades has been complicated, and the government's role in funding GME is controversial. In this paper, the current mechanisms for funding residency and fellowship training are outlined as well as proposed changes to system. The current system has made funding electrophysiology training difficult, and the proposed changes have profound implications. It is important for the electrophysiology community to be educated and advocate for electrophysiology fellowship training such that Americans continue to have appropriate access to arrhythmia care.

Atrial flutter after surgical maze: incidence, diagnosis, and management.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The prevalence of atrial fibrillation is increasing and surgical ablation is becoming more common, both as a stand-alone procedure and when performed concomitantly with other cardiac surgery. Although surgical ablation is effective, with it unique challenges arise, including iatrogenic macroreentrant tachycardias that are often highly symptomatic and difficult to manage conservatively. RECENT FINDINGS: Postsurgical ablation, localization of the arrhythmic circuit is difficult to determine using surface ECG alone because of alterations in the atrial myocardium, and multiple different pathways are often present. Most, however, localize to the left atrium, and percutaneous catheter ablation is emerging as an effective treatment modality. SUMMARY: Patients with complex postoperative arrhythmias should be referred to a dedicated atrial fibrillation center when possible and symptomatic arrhythmias mapped and ablated. Knowledge of the previously performed surgical lesion set is of vital importance in understanding the mechanism of the arrhythmia and increasing procedural success rates. VIDEO ABSTRACT: http://links.lww.com/HCO/A31.

Cost of a recall of a single-center experience managing the Riata defibrillator lead.

Riata and Riata ST defibrillator leads (St. Jude Medical, Sylmar, California) were recalled in 2011 due to increased risk of insulation failure leading to externalized cables. Fluoroscopic screening can identify insulation failure, although the relation between mechanical failure and electrical failure is unclear. At the time of the recall, the University of Virginia developed a screening program, including fluoroscopic evaluation, education sessions, device interrogation, and remote monitoring for patients with this defibrillator lead. The aim of this study was to review the outcomes of the screening program, including costs, which were absorbed by our institution. Costs were calculated using Medicare reimbursement estimates. Forty-eight patients participated in the screening program. At initial screening, 31% were found to have evidence of insulation failure but electrical function was normal in all leads. The cost of this program was $35,358.72. The cost per diagnosis of mechanical lead failure was $2,357.25. During 2 years of follow-up, 1 patient experienced Riata lead electrical failure without fluoroscopic evidence of insulation failure. Patients were more likely to have a lead revision if there was evidence of insulation failure. Lead revisions occurred at the time of generator change in 88% of patients with insulation failure but in only 14% of patients with a fluoroscopically normal lead (p = 0.04). The cost of recall-related defibrillator lead revisions was $81,704.55. In conclusion, our Riata screening program added expense without clear benefit to patients. In fact, patients may have been put at more risk by undergoing defibrillator lead revisions based solely on the results of the fluoroscopic screening.