Prolonged care delivery time and reduced rate of electrophysiological procedures during the lockdown period due to Covid-19 outbreak.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to demonstrate how Electrophysiology activity has been impacted by the pandemic Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: In this multicenter retrospective study, we analyze all consecutive patients admitted for electrophysiological procedures during the COVID-19 lockdown in the Tuscany region of Italy, comparing them to patients hospitalized in the corresponding period of the previous year. RESULTS: The impact of COVID-19 on cardiac arrhythmia management was impressive, with a reduction of more than 50% in all kinds of procedures. A gender gap was observed, with a more relevant reduction for female patients. Arrhythmic urgencies requiring a device implant showed a reduced time from symptoms to first medical contact but the time from first medical contact to procedure was significantly prolonged. CONCLUSION: Hospitals need to consider how outbreaks may affect health systems beyond the immediate infection. Routine activity should be based on a risk assessment between the prompt performance of procedure and its postponement. Retrospective observational analysis such as this study could be decisive in evidence-based medicine of any future pathogen outbreak.Nonstandard Abbreviations and Acronyms PM= pacemakerICD= implantable cardioverter defibrillatorECV= electrical cardioversionEPS= electrophysiological studyAP= ablations proceduresCIED= cardiac implantable electronic devicesWCD= wearable cardioverter defibrillatorEP Lab= Electrophysiology LaboratoriesAVNRT =atrioventricular nodal reentry tachycardiaAVRT= atrioventricular reentry tachycardiaAFL= atrial flutterAF= atrial fibrillationVT= ventricular tachycardiaAT= atrial tachycardia.

Efficacy of low interatrial septum and right atrial appendage pacing for prevention of permanent atrial fibrillation in patients with sinus node disease: results from the electrophysiology-guided pacing site selection (EPASS) study.

BACKGROUND: The role of pacing sites and atrial electrophysiology on the progression of atrial fibrillation (AF) to the permanent form in patients with sinus node dysfunction (SND) has never been investigated. The aim of the study was to investigate the relationship between atrial electrophysiology and the efficacy of atrial pacing at the low interatrial septum (IAS) or at the right atrial appendage (RAA) to prevent persistent/permanent AF in patients with SND. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Electrophysiology-Guided Pacing Site Selection (EPASS) Study was a prospective, controlled, randomized study. Atrial refractoriness, basal and incremental conduction times from the RAA to the coronary sinus ostium were measured before implantation, and the difference (ΔCTos) was calculated. Patients with ΔCTos ≥ 50 ms (study group) and those with ΔCTos <50 ms (control group) were randomly assigned to RAA or IAS with algorithms for continuous atrial stimulation "on." The primary end point was time to development of permanent or persistent AF within a 2-year follow-up in the study group, IAS versus RAA. Data were analyzed by intention to treat. One hundred two patients (77 ± 7 years, 44 mol/L) were enrolled, 69 (68%) in the study group and 33 (32%) in the control group. Of these, 97 ended the study, respectively, randomly assigned: 29 IAS versus 36 RAA and 18 IAS versus 14 RAA. After a mean follow-up of 15 ± 7 (median, 17) months, 11 (16.6%) patients in the study group met the primary end point: 2 IAS versus 9 RAA (log rank=3.93, P=0.047). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with SND and intra-atrial conduction delay, low IAS pacing was superior to RAA pacing in preventing progression to persistent or permanent AF. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00239226.