Comparison of combined substrate-based mapping techniques to identify critical sites for ventricular tachycardia ablation.

BACKGROUND: Established electroanatomic mapping techniques for substrate mapping for ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation includes voltage mapping, isochronal late activation mapping (ILAM), and fractionation mapping. Omnipolar mapping (Abbott Medical, Inc.) is a novel optimized bipolar electrogram creation technique with integrated local conduction velocity annotation. The relative utilities of these mapping techniques are unknown. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relative utility of various substrate mapping techniques for the identification of critical sites for VT ablation. METHODS: Electroanatomic substrate maps were created and retrospectively analyzed in 27 patients in whom 33 VT critical sites were identified. RESULTS: Both abnormal bipolar voltage and omnipolar voltage encompassed all critical sites and were observed over a median of 66 cm2 (interquartile range [IQR] 41.3-86 cm2) and 52 cm2 (IQR 37.7-65.5 cm2), respectively. ILAM deceleration zones were observed over a median of 9 cm2 (IQR 5.0-11.1 cm2) and encompassed 22 critical sites (67%), while abnormal omnipolar conduction velocity (CV <1 mm/ms) was observed over 10 cm2 (IQR 5.3-16.6 cm2) and identified 22 critical sites (67%), and fractionation mapping was observed over a median of 4 cm2 (IQR 1.5-7.6 cm2) and encompassed 20 critical sites (61%). The mapping yield was the highest for fractionation + CV (2.1 critical sites/cm2) and least for bipolar voltage mapping (0.5 critical sites/cm2). CV identified 100% of critical sites in areas with a local point density of >50 points/cm2. CONCLUSION: ILAM, fractionation, and CV mapping each identified distinct critical sites and provided a smaller area of interest than did voltage mapping alone. The sensitivity of novel mapping modalities improved with greater local point density.

Direct autotransfusion following emergency pericardiocentesis in patients undergoing cardiac electrophysiology procedures.

INTRODUCTION: Acute hemopericardium during cardiac electrophysiology (EP) procedures may result in significant blood loss and is the most common cause of procedure-related death. Matched allogeneic blood is often not immediately available. The feasibility and safety of direct autotransfusion in cardiac electrophysiology patients requiring emergency pericardiocentesis is unknown. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed records of patients undergoing EP procedures at a single, tertiary care medical center who had procedure-related acute hemopericardium requiring emergency pericardiocentesis during a 3-year period. Procedure details, transfusion volumes, and clinical outcomes of patients who received direct autotransfusion of aspirated pericardial blood via a femoral venous sheath were compared to those of patients who did not receive direct autotransfusion. RESULTS: During the study period, 10 patients received direct autotransfusion (group 1) and outcomes were compared with those of 14 control patients who did not receive direct autotransfusion (group 2). The volume of aspirated pericardial blood was similar in groups 1 and 2 (1.6 ± 0.7 L vs 1.3 ± 1.0 L, respectively; P = .52). Amongst patients with aspirated volumes <1 L, group 1 patients (n = 4) were less likely than group 2 patients (n = 8) to require allotransfusion (0% vs 75%, P = .02). Amongst patients with aspirated volume ≥1 L, group 1 patients (n = 6) required fewer units of red cell allotransfusion than group 2 patients (n = 6) (1.5 ± 0.8 units vs 4.3 ± 2.0 units, P = .01). No procedural complications related to direct autotransfusion occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Direct autotransfusion following emergency pericardiocentesis during electrophysiology procedures requiring systemic anticoagulation is feasible and safe. The utilization of direct autotransfusion may eliminate or reduce the need for allotransfusion.

Utilization of a Radiation Safety Time-Out Reduces Radiation Exposure During Electrophysiology Procedures.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine whether a radiation safety time-out reduces radiation exposure in electrophysiology procedures. BACKGROUND: Time-outs are integral to improving quality and safety. The authors hypothesized that a radiation safety time-out would reduce radiation exposure levels for patients and the health care team members. METHODS: The study was performed at the New York University Langone Health Electrophysiology Lab. Baseline data were collected for 6 months prior to the time-out. On implementation of the time-out, data were collected prospectively with analyses to be performed every 3 months. The primary endpoint was dose area product. The secondary endpoints included reference point dose, fluoroscopy time, use of additional shielding, and use of alternative imaging such as intracardiac and intravascular ultrasound. RESULTS: A total of 1,040 patient cases were included. The median dose area product prior to time-out was 18.7 Gy∙cm2, and the median during the time-out was 14.7 Gy∙cm2, representing a 21% reduction (p = 0.007). The median reference point dose prior to time-out was 163 mGy, and during the time-out was 122 mGy (p = 0.011). The use of sterile disposable protective shields and ultrasound imaging for access increased significantly during the time-out. CONCLUSIONS: A radiation safety time-out significantly reduces radiation exposure in electrophysiology procedures. Electrophysiology laboratories, as well as other areas of cardiovascular medicine using fluoroscopy, should strongly consider the use of radiation safety time-outs to reduce radiation exposure and improve safety.