Comparison of novel intrinsic versus conventional antitachycardia pacing for ventricular tachycardia among implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients.

INTRODUCTION: Intrinsic antitachycardia pacing (iATP) is a novel automated antitachycardia pacing (ATP) that provides individual treatment to terminate ventricular tachycardia (VT). However, the clinical efficacy of iATP in comparison with conventional ATP is unknown. We aim to compare the termination rate of VT between iATP and conventional ATP in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators using a unique setting of different sequential orders of both ATP algorisms. METHODS: Patients with the iATP algorithm were assigned to iATP-first and conventional ATP-first groups sequentially. In the iATP-first group, a maximum of seven iATP sequences were delivered, followed by conventional burst and ramp pacing. In contrast, in the conventional ATP-first group, two bursts and ramp pacing were initially programmed, followed by iATP sequences. We compared the success rates of VT termination in the first and secondary programmed ATP zones between the two groups. RESULTS: Fifty-eight and 56 patients were enrolled in the iATP-first and conventional ATP-first groups, and 67 and 44 VTs were analyzed in each group, respectively. At the first single ATP therapy, success rates were 64% and 70% in the iATP and conventional groups, respectively. At the end of the first iATP treatment zone, the success rate increased from 64% to 85%. Moreover, secondary iATP therapy following the failure of conventional ATPs increased the success rate from 80% to 93%. There was a significant benefit of alternative iATP for VT termination compared to secondary conventional ATP (100% vs. 33%, p = .028). CONCLUSIONS: iATP may be beneficial as a secondary therapy after failure of conventional ATP to terminate VT.

Feasibility and efficacy of real-time ultrasound-guided venous closure with suture-mediated vascular closure device.

BACKGROUND: Venous vascular access complications are usually nonfatal but are the most common complications after transvenous catheter intervention. Vascular closure devices (VCDs) have recently become available for venous closure. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of real-time ultrasound-guided venous closure with suture-mediated VCDs in patients who underwent catheter ablation. METHODS: This single-center observational study enrolled 226 consecutive patients who underwent elective catheter ablation with femoral venipuncture. For hemostasis, vessel closure by VCD was performed with real-time ultrasound guidance after 2022 (n = 123) and without ultrasound guidance in 2021 (n = 103). The occurrence of venous access site-related complications (major, minor, or other) was compared. RESULTS: The rate of device failure was significantly lower in patients with ultrasound guidance than in those without (1.6% vs 6.3%; P = .048). The occurrence of all venous access site-related complications was significantly lower in patients with ultrasound guidance than in those without (4.9% vs 18.4%; P = .001). Time to ambulation was shorter in patients with ultrasound guidance than in those without (2.0 ± 0.1 hours vs 2.2 ± 0.6 hours; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Real-time ultrasound guidance can reduce device failure, access site-related complications, and time to ambulation in performing venous closure with a VCD.

Percutaneous Treatment for Venous Stenosis Caused by a Vascular Closure Device.

Vascular closure devices (VCDs) are widely used as an alternative to manual compression of femoral puncture sites. In this report, we present a 73-year-old man who developed symptomatic venous stenosis related to VCD after pulmonary vein isolation. We performed percutaneous treatment with balloon angioplasty. This case suggests that balloon angioplasty with proper safety measures can be an option for treating venous stenosis related to VCDs.