ABSTRACT
AIMS: A three-dimensional electroanatomic mapping system-guided transseptal puncture (3D-TSP), without fluoroscopy or echocardiography, has been only minimally reported. Indications for 3D-TSP remain unclear. Against this background, this study aims to establish a precise technique and create a workflow for validating and selecting eligible patients for fluoroless 3D-TSP. METHODS AND RESULTS: We developed a new methodology for 3D-TSP based on a unipolar electrogram derived from a transseptal needle tip (UEGM tip) in 102 patients (the derivation cohort) with intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) from March 2018 to February 2019. The apparent current of injury (COI) was recorded at the muscular limbus of the foramen ovalis (FO) on the UEGM tip (sinus rhythm: 2.57 ± 0.95â mV, atrial fibrillation: 1.92 ± 0.77â mV), which then disappeared or significantly reduced at the central FO. Changes in the COI, serving as a major criterion to establish a 3D-TSP workflow, proved to be the most valuable indicator for identifying the FO in 99% (101/102) of patients compared with three previous techniques (three minor criteria) of reduction in atrial unipolar or bipolar potential and FO protrusion. A total of 99.9% (1042/1043) patients in the validation cohort underwent successful 3D-TSP through the workflow from March 2019 to July 2023. Intracardiac echocardiography guidance was required for 6.6% (69/1042) of patients. All four criteria were met in 740 patients, resulting in a 100% pure fluoroless 3D-TSP success rate. CONCLUSION: In most patients, fluoroless 3D-TSP was successfully achieved using changes in the COI on the UEGM tip. Patients who met all four criteria were considered suitable for 3D-TSP, while those who met none required ICE guidance.
Subject(s)
Atrial Fibrillation , Electrophysiologic Techniques, Cardiac , Imaging, Three-Dimensional , Punctures , Humans , Male , Female , Atrial Fibrillation/surgery , Atrial Fibrillation/physiopathology , Atrial Fibrillation/diagnosis , Electrophysiologic Techniques, Cardiac/methods , Aged , Middle Aged , Catheter Ablation/methods , Catheter Ablation/instrumentation , Needles , Heart Septum/surgery , Heart Septum/diagnostic imaging , Workflow , EchocardiographyABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the utility of simultaneous multi-catheter cryotherapy for the treatment of APs that were previously resistant to standard radiofrequency (RF) catheter ablation. BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation is established in the treatment of accessory pathways (AP), with high rates of permanent procedural success with a single attempt. However, there are still instances of acute procedural failure and AP recurrences with standard RF and cryotherapy methods. METHODS: Seven consecutive cases of pre-excitation syndromes with prior failed RF catheter ablation had the novel treatment. Cryotherapy was delivered using two 8 mm tip focal cryoablation catheters (Freezor® Max, Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA). RESULTS: Accessory pathway localisation was septal in 5 cases, left posterolateral in 1, right lateral in 1. In all cases, ablation of the AP was acutely successful with no procedural complications. Median procedure and fluoroscopy durations were 199 and 35 min, sequentially. Median Procedure duration fell significantly in the second half of series (174 min) compared to the first half (233 min, P = 0.05). One patient had evidence of a recurring AP conduction with pre-excitation at 5-week follow up. After a median follow up of 66.8+-6.5 months, 6 out of 7 patients remained asymptomatic and free of pre-excitation. CONCLUSION: Simultaneous multi-catheter cryotherapy is feasible, safe and can provide definitive cure of accessory pathways that were previously resistant to standard radiofrequency ablation. Further study is required in the assessment of this novel form of advanced cryotherapy to treat complex and resistant arrhythmias.
ABSTRACT
AIMS: Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is important in the management of cardiac implantable electronic devices but carries risk. It is most commonly completed from the superior access, often with 'bail-out' support via the femoral approach. Superior and inferior access may be used in tandem, which has been proposed as an advance in safety and efficacy. The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the Tandem approach. METHOD: The 'Tandem' procedure entailed grasping of the targeted lead in the right atrium to provide countertraction as a rotational dissecting sheath was advanced over the lead from the subclavian access. Consecutive 'Tandem' procedures performed by a single operator between December 2020 and March 2023 in a single large-volume TLE centre were included and compared with the conventional superior approach (control) using 1:1 propensity score matching; patients were statistically matched for demographics. RESULTS: The Tandem in comparison with the conventional approach extracted leads of much greater dwell time (148.9 ± 79 vs. 108.6 ± 77 months, P < 0.01) in a shorter procedure duration (96 ± 36 vs. 127 ± 67â min, P < 0.01) but requiring more fluoroscopy (16.4 ± 10.9 vs. 10.8 ± 14.9â min, P < 0.01). The Tandem and control groups had similar clinical (100% vs. 94.7%, P = 0.07) and complete (94.8% vs. 92.8%, P = 0.42) success, with comparable minor (4% vs. 6.7%, P = 0.72) and major (0% vs. 4%, P = 0.25) complications; procedural (0% vs. 1.3%, P = 1) and 30-day (1.3% vs. 4%, P = 0.62) mortality were also similar. CONCLUSION: The Tandem procedure is as safe and effective as the conventional TLE. It can be applied to leads of a long dwell time with a potentially shorter procedure duration.
Subject(s)
Defibrillators, Implantable , Pacemaker, Artificial , Humans , Defibrillators, Implantable/adverse effects , Pacemaker, Artificial/adverse effects , Device Removal/adverse effects , Device Removal/methods , Time Factors , Fluoroscopy , Treatment Outcome , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
AIMS: Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is performed using non-laser and laser techniques with overall high efficacy and safety. Variation in outcomes between the two approaches does exist with limited comparative evidence in the literature. We sought to compare non-laser and laser TLE in a meta-analysis. METHODS AND RESULTS: We searched Medline, Embase, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, and CENTRAL databases for TLE studies published between 1991 and 2021. From the included 68 studies, safety and efficacy data were carefully evaluated and extracted. Aggregated cases of outcomes were used to calculate odds ratio (OR), and pooled rates were synthesized from eligible studies to compare non-laser and laser techniques. Subgroup comparison of rotational tool and laser extraction was also performed. Non-laser in comparison with laser had lower procedural mortality (pooled rate 0% vs. 0.1%, P < 0.01), major complications (pooled rate 0.7% vs. 1.7%, P < 0.01), and superior vena cava (SVC) injury (pooled rate 0% vs. 0.5%, P < 0.001), with higher complete success (pooled rate 96.5% vs. 93.8%, P < 0.01). Non-laser comparatively to laser was more likely to achieve clinical [OR 2.16 (1.77-2.63), P < 0.01] and complete [OR 1.87 (1.69-2.08), P < 0.01] success, with a lower procedural mortality risk [OR 1.6 (1.02-2.5), P < 0.05]. In the subgroup analysis, rotational tool compared with laser achieved greater complete success (pooled rate 97.4% vs. 95%, P < 0.01) with lower SVC injury (pooled rate 0% vs. 0.7%, P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Non-laser TLE is associated with a better safety and efficacy profile when compared with laser methods. There is a greater risk of SVC injury associated with laser sheath extraction.
Subject(s)
Defibrillators, Implantable , Pacemaker, Artificial , Humans , Defibrillators, Implantable/adverse effects , Vena Cava, Superior/surgery , Device Removal/adverse effects , Device Removal/methods , Lasers , Cardiac Catheterization , Pacemaker, Artificial/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
AIMS: To investigate the abnormalities of the coronary venous system in candidates for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and describe methods for circumventing the resulting difficulties. METHODS: From four implanting institutes, data of all CRT implants between October 2008 and October 2020 were screened for abnormal cardiac venous anatomy, defined as an anatomical variation not conforming to the accepted 'normal' anatomy. Patient demographics, procedural detail, and subsequent left ventricle (LV) lead pacing indices were collected. RESULTS: From a total of 3548 CRT implants, 15 (0.42%) patients (80% male) of 72.2 ± 10.6 years in age with an LV ejection fraction of 34 ± 10.3% were identified to have had an abnormal cardiac venous anatomy over the study period. There were 13 cases of persistent left side superior vena cava (pLSVC), five of which had coronary sinus ostium atresia (CSOA) including two with an "unroofed" coronary sinus (CS); one patient had a unique anomalous origin of the CS and one patient had an isolated CSOA. In total 14 patients (60% repeat attempt) had successful percutaneous implant under general anesthesia (46.7%) via the cephalic vein (59.1%), using the femoral approach (53.3%) for levophase venography and/or pull-through, including one case of endocardial LV implant. Pacing follow-up over 37.64 ± 37.6 months demonstrated LV lead threshold between 0.62 and 2.9 volts (pulsewidth 0.4-1.5 ms) in all cases; five patients died within 2.92 ± 1.6 years of a successful implant. CONCLUSION: CRT devices can be implanted percutaneously even in the presence of substantial abnormalities of coronary venous anatomy. Alternative routes of venous access may be required.
Subject(s)
Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy , Heart Failure , Persistent Left Superior Vena Cava , Vascular Malformations , Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy/methods , Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Devices , Drainage , Female , Heart Failure/diagnosis , Heart Failure/therapy , Humans , Male , Vena Cava, Superior/abnormalities , Vena Cava, Superior/diagnostic imagingABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Research evidence has shown that catheter ablation is a safe and superior treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF) compared to medical therapy, but real-world practice has been slow to adopt an early interventional approach. This study aims to determine the cost effectiveness of catheter ablation compared to medical therapy from the perspective of the United Kingdom. METHODS: A patient-level Markov health-state transition model was used to conduct a cost-utility analysis. The population included patients previously treated for AF with medical therapy, including those with heart failure (HF), simulated over a lifetime horizon. Data sources included published literature on utilization and cardiovascular event rates in real world patients, a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials for AF recurrence, and publicly available government data/reports on costs. RESULTS: Catheter ablation resulted in a favorable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £8614 per additional quality adjusted life years (QALY) gained when compared to medical therapy. More patients in the medical therapy group failed rhythm control at any point compared to catheter ablation (72% vs. 24%) and at a faster rate (median time to treatment failure: 3.8 vs. 10 years). Additionally, catheter ablation was estimated to be more cost-effective in patients with AF and HF (ICER = £6438) and remained cost-effective over all tested time horizons (10, 15, and 20 years), with the ICER ranging from £9047-£15 737 per QALY gained. CONCLUSION: Catheter ablation is a cost-effective treatment for atrial fibrillation, compared to medical therapy, from the perspective of the UK National Health Service.
Subject(s)
Atrial Fibrillation , Catheter Ablation , Anti-Arrhythmia Agents/therapeutic use , Atrial Fibrillation/diagnosis , Atrial Fibrillation/surgery , Catheter Ablation/methods , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Humans , Markov Chains , State Medicine , United KingdomABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Before ablation, predicting the site of origin (SOO) of outflow tract ventricular arrhythmia (OTVA), can inform patient consent and facilitate appropriate procedural planning. We set out to determine if OTVA variability can accurately predict SOO. METHODS: Consecutive patients with a clear SOO identified at OTVA ablation had their prior 24-h ambulatory ECGs retrospectively analysed (derivation cohort). Percentage ventricular ectopic (VE) burden, hourly VE values, episodes of trigeminy/bigeminy, and the variability in these parameters were evaluated for their ability to distinguish right from left-sided SOO. Effective parameters were then prospectively tested on a validation cohort of consecutive patients undergoing their first OTVA ablation. RESULTS: High VE variability (coefficient of variation ≥0.7) and the presence of any hour with <50 VE, were found to accurately predict RVOT SOO in a derivation cohort of 40 patients. In a validation cohort of 29 patients, the correct SOO was prospectively identified in 23/29 patients (79.3%) using CoV, and 26/29 patients (89.7%) using VE < 50. Including current ECG algorithms, VE < 50 had the highest Youden Index (78), the highest positive predictive value (95.0%) and the highest negative predictive value (77.8%). CONCLUSION: VE variability and the presence of a single hour where VE < 50 can be used to accurately predict SOO in patients with OTVA. Accuracy of these parameters compares favorably to existing ECG algorithms.
Subject(s)
Catheter Ablation , Tachycardia, Ventricular , Ventricular Premature Complexes , Electrocardiography , Heart Ventricles/surgery , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Tachycardia, Ventricular/surgeryABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is rising in parallel to cardiac implantable electronic device implantations. Persistent left side superior vena cava (PLSVC) is a relatively common anatomical variant in the healthy population; TLE in patients with a PLSVC is rare. METHOD: Data were collated from 6 European TLE institutes of 10 patients who had undergone lead extraction with a PLSVC. Patient demographics, procedural challenges and outcomes were reported. RESULTS: Ten patients aged 73.4 ± 7.8 years (60% male) underwent TLE of 20 leads (3 left ventricle, 10 right ventricle, 7 right atrium) with dwell time of 82.95 ± 39.1 months. Of the 10 cases, 4 had an infection indication and 5 were biventricular system extractions; 25% of the extracted leads were defibrillator leads. The majority of the procedures were completed in the cardiac catheterization suite (80%) under general anaesthesia (60%) by cardiologists (80%) using a rotational powered sheath (65%). The Tandem approach was used successfully in 3 cases. Complete procedural success was obtained in 100% of cases in the absence of complications within 127.4 ± 74.7 min. There was no 30-day mortality. CONCLUSION: TLE in PLSVC is feasible albeit rare. Standard extraction techniques in experienced hands are associated with favorable outcomes; the Tandem procedure may be an additional technique to improve the safety and efficacy of TLE in PLSVC.
Subject(s)
Defibrillators, Implantable , Pacemaker, Artificial , Persistent Left Superior Vena Cava , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Defibrillators, Implantable/adverse effects , Device Removal/methods , Female , Humans , Male , Pacemaker, Artificial/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome , Vena Cava, Superior/diagnostic imaging , Vena Cava, Superior/surgeryABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The IMPACT study established the role of controlled esophageal cooling in preventing esophageal thermal injury during radiofrequency (RF) ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF). The effect of esophageal cooling on ablation lesion delivery and procedural and patient outcomes had not been previously studied. The objective was to determine the effect of esophageal cooling on the formation of RF lesions, the ability to achieve procedural endpoints, and clinical outcomes. METHODS: Participants in the IMPACT trial underwent AF ablation guided by Ablation Index (30 W at 350-400 AI posteriorly, 40 W at ≥450 AI anteriorly). A blinded 1:1 randomization assigned patients to the use of the ensoETM® device to keep esophageal temperature at 4°C during ablation or standard practice using a single-sensor temperature probe. Ablation parameters and clinical outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Procedural data from 188 patients were analyzed. Procedure and fluoroscopy times were similar, and all pulmonary veins were isolated. First-pass pulmonary vein isolation and reconnection at the end of the waiting period were similar in both randomized groups (51/64 vs. 51/68; p = 0.54 and 5/64 vs. 7/68; p = 0.76, respectively). Posterior wall isolation was also similar: 24/33 versus 27/38; p = 0.88. Ablation effect on tissue, measured in impedance drop, was no different between the two randomized groups: 8.6Ω (IQR: 6-11.8) versus 8.76Ω (IQR: 6-12.2; p = 0.25). Arrhythmia recurrence was similar after 12 months (21.1% vs. 24.1%; 95% CI: 0.38-1.84; HR: 0.83; p = 0.66). CONCLUSIONS: Esophageal cooling has been shown to be effective in reducing ablation-related thermal injury during RF ablation. This protection does not compromise standard procedural endpoints or clinical success at 12 months.
Subject(s)
Atrial Fibrillation , Catheter Ablation , Pulmonary Veins , Humans , Treatment Outcome , Heart Atria/surgery , Catheter Ablation/methods , Pulmonary Veins/surgery , Atrial Fibrillation/diagnosis , Atrial Fibrillation/surgery , Atrial Fibrillation/etiology , RecurrenceABSTRACT
A 39-years old ventricular lead of a right-sided single-chamber pacemaker required extraction for infection. Angulation at the right subclavian-superior vena cava junction coupled with calcified fibrotic encapsulating tissue prevented advancement of a rotational dissecting sheath. To straighten the lead, it was pulled from the subclavian and out of the right internal jugular vein, whilst the Needle's-Eye Snare via the femoral access provided counter-traction. A 13-french rotational dissecting sheath was successfully advanced over the lead via the jugular access to complete the lead extraction without any complication.
Subject(s)
Pacemaker, Artificial , Vena Cava, Superior , Humans , Adult , Device Removal , Jugular Veins/surgery , Femoral ArteryABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: With an increasing number of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), there has been a paralleled increase in demand for transvenous lead extraction (TLE). Cardiac surgeons (CS) and cardiologists perform TLE; however, data comparing the two groups of operators is scarce. OBJECTIVE: We compared the outcomes of TLE performed by cardiologists and CS from six European lead extraction units. METHOD: Data was collected retrospectively of 2205 patients who had 3849 leads extracted (PROMET) between 2005 and 2018. Patient demographics and procedural outcomes were compared between the CS and cardiologist groups, using propensity score matching. A multivariate regression analysis was also performed for variables associated with 30-day mortality. RESULTS: CS performed the majority of extractions (59.8%), of leads with longer dwell times (90 [57-129 interquartile range (IQR)] vs. 62 [31-102 IQR] months, CS vs. cardiologists, p < .001) and with pre-dominantly non-infectious indications (57.4% vs. 50.2%, CS vs. cardiologists, p < .001). CS achieved a higher complete success per lead than the cardiologists (98.1% vs. 95.7%, respectively, p < .01), with a higher number of minor complications (5.51% vs. 2.1%, p < .01) and similar number of major complications (0.47% vs. 1.3%, p = .12). Thirty-day mortality was similarly low in the CS and cardiologist groups (1.76% vs. 0.94%, p = .21). Unmatched data multivariate analysis revealed infection indication (OR 6.12 [1.9-20.3], p < .01), procedure duration (OR 1.01 [1.01-1.02], p < .01) and CS operator (OR 2.67, [1.12-6.37], p = .027) were associated with 30-day mortality. CONCLUSION: TLE by CS was performed with similar safety and higher efficacy compared to cardiologists in high and medium-volume lead extraction centers.
Subject(s)
Defibrillators, Implantable , Pacemaker, Artificial , Device Removal/methods , Humans , Promethazine , Retrospective Studies , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D) implantation via the cephalic vein is feasible and safe. Recent evidence has suggested a higher implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) lead failure in multi-lead defibrillator therapy via the cephalic route. We evaluated the relationship between CRT-D implantation via the cephalic and ICD lead failure. METHODS: Data was collected from three CRT-D implanting centers between October 2008 and September 2017. In total 633 patients were included. Patient and lead characteristics with ICD lead failure were recorded. Comparison of "cephalic" (ICD lead via cephalic) versus "non-cephalic" (ICD lead via non-cephalic route) cohorts was performed. Kaplan-Meier survival and a Cox-regression analysis were applied to assess variables associated with lead failure. RESULTS: The cephalic and non-cephalic cohorts were equally male (81.9% vs. 78%; p = .26), similar in age (69.7 ± 11.5 vs. 68.7 ± 11.9; p = .33) and body mass index (BMI) (27.7 ± 5.1 vs. 27.1 ± 5.7; p = .33). Most ICD leads were implanted via the cephalic vein (73.5%) and patients had a mean of 2.9 ± 0.28 leads implanted via this route. The rate of ICD lead failure was low and statistically similar between both groups (0.36%/year vs. 0.13%/year; p = .12). Female gender was more common in the lead failure cohort than non-failure (55.6% vs. 17.9%, respectively; p = .004) as was hypertension (88.9% vs. 54.2%, respectively, p = .038). On multivariate Cox-regression, female sex (p = .008; HR, 7.12 [1.7-30.2]), and BMI (p = .047; HR, 1.12 [1.001-1.24]) were significantly associated with ICD lead failure. CONCLUSION: CRT-D implantation via the cephalic route is not significantly associated with premature ICD lead failure. Female gender and BMI are predictors of lead failure.
Subject(s)
Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy , Defibrillators, Implantable , Heart Failure , Hypertension , Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Devices , Female , Heart Failure/diagnosis , Heart Failure/therapy , Humans , Male , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
AIMS: Restoring sinus rhythm (SR) by ablation alone is an endpoint used in radiofrequency (RF) ablation for long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) but not with cryotherapy. The simultaneous use of two cryotherapy catheters can improve ablation efficiency; we compared this with RF ablation in chronic persistent AF aiming for termination to SR by ablation alone. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients undergoing their first ablation for persistent AF of >6 months duration were screened. A total of 100 participants were randomized 1:1 to multi-catheter cryotherapy or RF. For cryotherapy, a 28-mm Arctic Front Advance was used in tandem with focal cryoablation catheters. Open-irrigated, non-force sensing catheters were used in the RF group with a 3D mapping system. Pulmonary vein (PV) isolation and non-PV triggers were targeted. Participants were followed up at 6 and 12 months, then yearly. Acute PVI was achieved in all cases. More patients in the multi-catheter cryotherapy group were restored to SR by ablation alone, with a shorter procedure duration. Sinus rhythm continued to the last available follow-up in 16/49 patients (33%) in the multi-catheter at 3.0 ± 1.6 years post-ablation and in 12/50 patients (24%) in the RF group at 4.0 ± 1.2 years post-ablation. The yearly rate of arrhythmia recurrence was similar. CONCLUSION: Multi-catheter cryotherapy can restore SR by ablation alone in more cases and more quickly than RF ablation. Long-term success is difficult to achieve by either methods and is similar with both.
Subject(s)
Atrial Fibrillation , Catheter Ablation , Pulmonary Veins , Radiofrequency Ablation , Atrial Fibrillation/diagnosis , Atrial Fibrillation/surgery , Catheters , Cryotherapy , Humans , Pulmonary Veins/surgery , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
AIMS: Thermal injury to the oesophagus is an important cause of life-threatening complication after ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF). Thermal protection of the oesophageal lumen by infusing cold liquid reduces thermal injury to a limited extent. We tested the ability of a more powerful method of oesophageal temperature control to reduce the incidence of thermal injury. METHODS AND RESULTS: A single-centre, prospective, double-blinded randomized trial was used to investigate the ability of the ensoETM device to protect the oesophagus from thermal injury. This device was compared in a 1:1 randomization with a control group of standard practice utilizing a single-point temperature probe. In the protected group, the device maintained the luminal temperature at 4°C during radiofrequency (RF) ablation for AF under general anaesthesia. Endoscopic examination was performed at 7 days post-ablation and oesophageal injury was scored. The patient and the endoscopist were blinded to the randomization. We recruited 188 patients, of whom 120 underwent endoscopy. Thermal injury to the mucosa was significantly more common in the control group than in those receiving oesophageal protection (12/60 vs. 2/60; P = 0.008), with a trend toward reduction in gastroparesis (6/60 vs. 2/60, P = 0.27). There was no difference between groups in the duration of RF or in the force applied (P value range= 0.2-0.9). Procedure duration and fluoroscopy duration were similar (P = 0.97, P = 0.91, respectively). CONCLUSION: Thermal protection of the oesophagus significantly reduces ablation-related thermal injury compared with standard care. This method of oesophageal protection is safe and does not compromise the efficacy or efficiency of the ablation procedure.
Subject(s)
Atrial Fibrillation , Catheter Ablation , Atrial Fibrillation/diagnosis , Atrial Fibrillation/surgery , Catheter Ablation/adverse effects , Esophagus/surgery , Humans , Prospective Studies , Temperature , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The Sars-Cov-2 infection is a multisystem illness that can affect the cardiovascular system. Tachyarrhythmias have been reported but the prevalence of bradyarrhythmia is unclear. Cases have been described of transient high-degree atrioventricular (AV) block in COVID-19 that were managed conservatively. METHOD: A database of all patients requiring temporary or permanent pacing in two linked cardiac centers was used to compare the number of procedures required during the first year of the pandemic compared to the corresponding period a year earlier. The database was cross-referenced with a database of all patients testing positive for Sars-Cov-2 infection in both institutions to identify patients who required temporary or permanent pacing during COVID-19. RESULTS: The number of novel pacemaker implants was lower during the COVID-19 pandemic than the same period the previous year (540 vs. 629, respectively), with a similar proportion of high-degree AV block (38.3% vs. 33.2%, respectively, p = .069). Four patients with the Sars-Cov-2 infection had a pacemaker implanted for high-degree AV block, two for sinus node dysfunction. Of this cohort of six patients, two succumbed to the COVID-19 illness and one from non-COVID sepsis. Device interrogation demonstrated a sustained pacing requirement in all cases. CONCLUSION: High-degree AV block remained unaltered in prevalence during the COVID-19 pandemic. There was no evidence of transient high-degree AV block in patients with the Sars-Cov-2 infection. Our experience suggests that all clinically significant bradyarrhythmia should be treated by pacing according to usual protocols regardless of the COVID status.
Subject(s)
Bradycardia/epidemiology , Bradycardia/therapy , COVID-19/complications , Cardiac Pacing, Artificial , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Bradycardia/etiology , Humans , Male , PrevalenceABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED)-related perforation is uncommon but potentially lethal. Management typically includes the use of computed tomography (CT) scanning and often involves cardiac surgery. METHODS: Patients presenting to a single referral centre with CIED-related cardiac perforation between 2013 and 2019 were identified. Demographics, diagnostic modalities, the method of lead revision, and 30-day complications were examined. RESULTS: A total of 46 cases were identified; median time from implantation to diagnosis was 14 days (interquartile range = 4-50). Most were females (29/46, 63%), 9/46 (20%) had cancer, 18 patients (39%) used oral anticoagulants, and no patients had prior cardiac surgery. Active fixation was involved in 98% of cases; 9% involved an implantable cardioverter defibrillator lead. Thirty-seven leads perforated the right ventricle (apex: 24) and 9 punctured the right atrium (lateral wall: 5). Abnormal electrical parameters were noted in 95% of interrogated cases. Perforation was visualized in 41% and 6% of cases with chest X-ray (CXR) and transthoracic echocardiography, respectively. CXR revealed a perforation, gross lead displacement, or left-sided pleural effusion in 74% of cases. Pericardial effusion occurred in 26 patients (57%) of whom 11 (24%) developed tamponade, successfully drained percutaneously. Pre-extraction CT scan was performed in 19 patients but was essential in four cases. Transvenous lead revision (TLR) was successfully performed in all cases with original leads repositioned in six patients, without recourse to surgery. Thirty-day mortality and complications were low (0% and 26%, respectively). CONCLUSION: CT scanning provides incremental diagnostic value in a minority of CIED-related perforations. TLR is a safe and effective strategy.
Subject(s)
Defibrillators, Implantable/adverse effects , Heart Injuries/diagnostic imaging , Heart Injuries/surgery , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Aged , Device Removal , Echocardiography , Female , Heart Injuries/etiology , Humans , Male , Prospective Studies , Reoperation , Risk FactorsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) causes severe illness and multi-organ dysfunction. An abnormal electrocardiogram is associated with poor outcome, and QT prolongation during the illness has been linked to pharmacological effects. This study sought to investigate the effects of the COVID-19 illness on the corrected QT interval (QTc). METHOD: For 293 consecutive patients admitted to our hospital via the emergency department for COVID-19 between 01/03/20 -18/05/20, demographic data, laboratory findings, admission electrocardiograph and clinical observations were compared in those who survived and those who died within 6 weeks. Hospital records were reviewed for prior electrocardiograms for comparison with those recorded on presentation with COVID-19. RESULTS: Patients who died were older than survivors (82 vs 69.8 years, p < 0.001), more likely to have cancer (22.3% vs 13.1%, p = 0.034), dementia (25.6% vs 10.7%, p = 0.034) and ischemic heart disease (27.8% vs 10.7%, p < 0.001). Deceased patients exhibited higher levels of C-reactive protein (244.6 mg/L vs 146.5 mg/L, p < 0.01), troponin (1982.4 ng/L vs 413.4 ng/L, p = 0.017), with a significantly longer QTc interval (461.1 ms vs 449.3 ms, p = 0.007). Pre-COVID electrocardiograms were located for 172 patients; the QTc recorded on presentation with COVID-19 was longer than the prior measurement in both groups, but was more prolonged in the deceased group (448.4 ms vs 472.9 ms, pre-COVID vs COVID, p < 0.01). Multivariate Cox-regression analysis revealed age, C-reactive protein and prolonged QTc of >455 ms (males) and >465 ms (females) (p = 0.028, HR 1.49 [1.04-2.13]), as predictors of mortality. QTc prolongation beyond these dichotomy limits was associated with increased mortality risk (p = 0.0027, HR 1.78 [1.2-2.6]). CONCLUSION: QTc prolongation occurs in COVID-19 illness and is associated with poor outcome.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Long QT Syndrome , Azithromycin , Electrocardiography , Female , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine , Long QT Syndrome/diagnosis , Male , Prognosis , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) therapy contributes to an improvement in morbidity and mortality across all patient demographics. Patient age is a recognized risk factor for unfavorable outcomes in invasive procedures. This is the largest series of non-laser transvenous lead extraction (TLE) evaluating the association between patient age and procedure outcomes. METHODS: Data of 2205 (3849 leads) patients was collected retrospectively from six European TLE centers between January 2005-December 2018 in the PROMET study. Of these, 153 patients with 319 leads were excluded for incomplete data. A comparison of outcomes was performed between the age groups young [< 50 years], young intermediate [50-69 years], older intermediate [70-79 years], and octogenarian [≥80 years]. RESULTS: Infection was most common indication for TLE in the octogenarian cohort, less common in the younger population (60.1% vs. 33.2%, respectively, p < .01). High-voltage leads were extracted most frequently from young patients, less frequently from octogenarians (31.6% vs. 10%, p < .001), while the opposite was evident for pacemaker leads (p < .001). Rotational sheath use was equally prevalent across all patient groups (p = .79). Minor and major complications across all the age groups were statistically similar, as was procedural success; the 30-day mortality was most significant in the octogenarian and least in the young patients (4.9% vs. 0.4%, p = .005). Propensity matching multivariate analysis found systemic infection, lead dwell time, and patient age (p = .013, OR 1.064 [1.013-1.116]) increased risk of 30-day mortality. CONCLUSION: TLE is safe and effective across all age groups. 30-day mortality risk is significantly higher in the older patients.
Subject(s)
Device Removal/methods , Electrodes, Implanted , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Europe , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
AIMS: To chart the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the activity of interventional electrophysiology services in affected regions. METHODS AND RESULTS: We reviewed the electrophysiology laboratory records in three affected cities: Wenzhou in China, Milan in Italy, and London in the UK. We inspected catheter lab records and interviewed electrophysiologists in each centre to gather information on the impact of the pandemic on working patterns and on the health of staff members and patients. There was a striking decline in interventional electrophysiology activity in each of the centres. The decline occurred within a week of the recognition of widespread community transmission of the virus in each region and shows a striking correlation with the national figures for new diagnoses of COVID-19 in each case. During the period of restriction, workflow dropped to <5% of normal, consisting of emergency cases only. In two of three centres, electrophysiologists were redeployed to perform emergency work outside electrophysiology. Among the centres studied, only Wenzhou has seen a recovery from the restrictions in activity. Following an intense nationwide programme of public health interventions, local transmission of COVID-19 ceased to be detectable after 18 February allowing the electrophysiology service to resume with a strict testing regime for all patients. CONCLUSION: Interventional electrophysiology is vulnerable to closure in times of great social difficulty including the COVID-19 pandemic. Intense public health intervention can permit suppression of local disease transmission allowing resumption of some normal activity with stringent precautions.
Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Cardiac Electrophysiology , Cardiology Service, Hospital/organization & administration , COVID-19 Testing , China/epidemiology , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , London/epidemiology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , WorkflowABSTRACT
AIMS: Several large studies have documented the outcome of transvenous lead extraction (TLE), focusing on laser and mechanical methods. To date there has been no large series addressing the results obtained with rotational lead extraction tools. This retrospective multicentre study was designed to investigate the outcomes of mechanical and rotational techniques. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data were collected on a total of 2205 patients (age 66.0 ± 15.7 years) with 3849 leads targeted for extraction in six European lead extraction centres. The commonest indication was infection (46%). The targeted leads included 2879 pacemaker leads (74.8%), 949 implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads (24.6%), and 21 leads for which details were unknown; 46.6% of leads were passive fixation leads. The median lead dwell time was 74 months [interquartile range (IQR) 41-112]. Clinical success was obtained in 97.0% of procedures, and complete extraction was achieved for 96.5% of leads. Major complications occurred in 22/2205 procedures (1%), with a peri-operative or procedure-related mortality rate of 4/2205 (0.18%). Minor complications occurred in 3.1% of procedures. A total of 1552 leads (in 992 patients) with a median dwell time of 106 months (IQR 66-145) were extracted using the Evolution rotational TLE tool. In this subgroup, complete success was obtained for 95.2% of leads with a procedural mortality rate of 0.4%. CONCLUSION: Patient outcomes in the PROMET study compare favourably with other large TLE trials, underlining the capability of rotational TLE tools and techniques to match laser methods in efficacy and surpass them in safety.