Occurrence of premature battery depletion in a large multicentre registry of subcutaneous cardioverter-defibrillator patients.

AIMS: Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (S-ICDs) have become established in preventing sudden cardiac death, with some advantages over transvenous defibrillator systems, including a lower incidence of lead failures. Despite technological advancements, S-ICD carriers may suffer from significant complications, such as premature battery depletion (PBD), that led to an advisory for nearly 40 000 patients. This multicentre study evaluated the incidence of PBD in a large set of S-ICD patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from patients implanted with S-ICD models A209 and A219 between October 2012 and July 2023 across nine centres in Europe and the USA were reviewed. Incidence and implications of PBD, defined as clinically observed sudden drop in battery longevity, were analysed and compared to PBD with the definition of battery depletion within 60 months. Prospectively collected clinical data were obtained retrospectively from medical records, device telemetry, and manufacturer reports. This registry is listed on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05713708). Of the 1112 S-ICD devices analysed, 547 (49.2%) were equipped with a potentially affected capacitor linked to PBD occurrence, currently under Food and Drug Administration advisory. The median follow-up time for all patients was 46 [inter-quartile range (IQR) 24-63] months. Clinically suspected PBD was observed in 159 (29.1%) of cases, with a median time to generator removal or replacement of 65 (IQR 55-72) months, indicative of significant deviations from expected battery lifespan. Manufacturer confirmation of PBD was made in 91.7% of devices returned for analysis. No cases of PBD were observed in devices that were not under advisory. CONCLUSION: This manufacturer-independent analysis highlights a notable incidence of PBD in patients equipped with S-ICD models under advisory, and the rate of PBD in this study corresponds to the rate currently estimated by the manufacturer. To the best of our knowledge, this provides the largest contemporary peer-reviewed study cohort investigating the actual incidence of PBD in S-ICD patients. These findings emphasize the importance of post-market registries in collaboration between clinicians and the manufacturer to optimize safety and efficacy in S-ICD treatment.

Incidence, implications, and management of sense-B-noise failure in subcutaneous cardioverter-defibrillator patients: insights from a large multicentre registry.

AIMS: Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (S-ICDs) offer potentially distinct advantages over transvenous defibrillator systems. Recent randomized trials showed significantly lower lead failure rates than transvenous ICD. Still, S-ICDs remain associated with the risk of inappropriate shocks (IAS). While previous studies have reported varying causes of IAS, this study explores a rare cause of IAS, referred to as 'sense-B-noise.' It was recently described in case series, but its incidence has not been studied in a large cohort of S-ICD patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively reviewed data from patients implanted with S-ICD models 1010, A209, and A219 between October 2009 and July 2023 across nine centres in Europe and the USA. The analysis concentrated on determining the incidence and understanding the implications of sense-B-noise events. Sense-B-noise represents a rare manifestation of distinct electrogram abnormalities within the primary and alternate sensing vectors. Data were collected from medical records, device telemetry, and manufacturer reports for investigation. This registry is registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05713708). Subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator devices of the 1158 patients were analysed. The median follow-up time for all patients was 46 (IQR 23-64) months. In 107 patients (9.2%) ≥1 IAS was observed during follow-up. Sense-B-noise failure was diagnosed in six (0.5 and 5.6% of all IAS) patients, in all patients, the diagnosis was made after an IAS episode. Median lead dwell time in the affected patients was 23 (2-70) months. To resolve the sense-B-noise defect, in three patients reprogramming to the secondary vector was undertaken, and two patients underwent system removal with subsequent S-ICD reimplantation due to low amplitude in the secondary vector. In one patient, the secondary vector was initially programmed, and subsequently, an S-ICD system exchange was performed due to T-wave-oversensing IAS episodes. CONCLUSION: This multicentre analysis' findings shed light on a rare but clinically highly significant adverse event in S-ICD therapy. To our knowledge, we provide the first systematic multicentre analysis investigating the incidence of sense-B-noise. Due to being difficult to diagnose and limited options for resolution, management of sense-B-noise is challenging. Complete system exchange may be the only option for some patients. Educating healthcare providers involved in S-ICD patient care is crucial for ensuring accurate diagnosis and effective management of sense-B-noise issues.

Safety and Effectiveness of Pulsed Field Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation in Patients with Heart Failure: A MANIFEST-PF Sub-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) coexist, increasing morbidity and mortality. Studies have demonstrated improved outcomes following AF ablation in HF patients with reduced ejection fraction (EF). OBJECTIVE: To assess the outcomes of pulsed-field ablation (PFA) in HF. METHODS: MANIFEST-PF is a multicenter patient-level registry of consecutive patients undergoing PFA for paroxysmal (PAF) or persistent AF (PerAF). In this sub-study, patients were stratified as: no history of HF (no-HF), HF with preserved EF (HFPEF; LVEF≥50%) or HF with reduced/mildly-reduced EF (HFMR/REF; LVEF<50%). The primary effectiveness and safety endpoints were freedom from documented atrial arrhythmias lasting ≥30s and major adverse events (MAEs), respectively. RESULTS: Of the 1,381 patients, 85% (n=1,174) were no-HF, 6.2% (n=87) were HFPEF, and 8.6% (n=120) were HFMR/REF. No-HF patients had less PerAF than patients with HF (p<0.001), with no difference between HF subtypes (p=1.00). The 1-year freedom from atrial arrhythmia was significantly higher in no-HF than with HFPEF or HFMR/REF (79.9%, 71.3%, 67.5%, p<0.001), but similar between HFMR/REF and HFPEF (p=0.26). However, there was no significant difference in freedom from atrial arrhythmia among patients with no-HF vs HFPEF vs HFMR/REF for those with PAF (82.8%/82.4%/71.7%, p=0.09) and PerAF (73.3%, 64.2%, and 64.9%, p=0.14.MAE rates were similar between the no-HF, HFPEF and HFMR/REF groups (1.9%, 0%, and 2.5%, respectively). CONCLUSION: PFA appears to be potentially safe and effective in AF patients with HF. Freedom from atrial arrhythmia post-PFA was higher in patients without a history of HF, with no significant difference between HF subtypes.

Safety and Effectiveness of Pulsed Field Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) coexist, increasing morbidity and mortality. Studies have demonstrated improved outcomes following AF ablation in HF patients with reduced ejection fraction (EF). OBJECTIVE: This study sought to assess the outcomes of pulsed field ablation (PFA) in HF. METHODS: MANIFEST-PF (Multi-National Survey on the Methods, Efficacy, and Safety on the Post-Approval Clinical Use of Pulsed Field Ablation) is a multicenter, patient-level registry of consecutive patients undergoing PFA for paroxysmal AF or persistent AF (PerAF). In this substudy, patients were stratified as no history of HF (no-HF), HF with preserved EF (HFpEF) (left ventricular EF of ≥50%) or HF with reduced/mildly reduced EF (HFmr/rEF) (left ventricular EF of <50%). The primary effectiveness and safety endpoints were freedom from documented atrial arrhythmias lasting ≥30 seconds and major adverse events, respectively. RESULTS: Of the 1,381 patients, 85% (n = 1,174) were no-HF, 6.2% (n = 87) were HFpEF, and 8.6% (n = 120) were HFmr/rEF. No-HF patients had less PerAF than patients with HF (P < 0.001), with no difference between HF subtypes (P = >0.99). The 1-year freedom from atrial arrhythmia was significantly higher in no-HF patients than in those with HFpEF or HFmr/rEF (79.9%, 71.3%, and 67.5%, respectively; P < 0.001) but similar between patients with HFmr/rEF and HFpEF (P = 0.26). However, there was no significant difference in freedom from atrial arrhythmia among patients with no-HF vs HFpEF vs HFmr/rEF for those with paroxysmal AF (82.8%, 82.4%, and 71.7%, respectively; P = 0.09) and PerAF (73.3%, 64.2%, and 64.9%, respectively; P = 0.14). Major adverse event rates were similar between the no-HF, HFpEF, and HFmr/rEF groups (1.9%, 0%, and 2.5%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: PFA appears to be potentially safe and effective in AF patients with HF. Freedom from atrial arrhythmia post-PFA was higher in patients without a history of HF, with no significant difference between HF subtypes.

Balloon technologies for pulmonary vein isolation-12-month outcome and comparison of the novel radiofrequency balloon with the cryoballoon in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: The cryoballoon (CB) has become a standard tool for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), but the technology is limited in certain ways. A novel RF-balloon (Heliostar™, Biosense Webster, CA, USA) promises the advantages of a balloon technology in combination with 3D mapping. METHODS: To assess procedural data and outcome, all patients undergoing RF-balloon PVI were included and compared with data from consecutive patients undergoing CB PVI for paroxysmal AF. RESULTS: A total of 254 patients (63 ± 13 years, 54% male) were included: 30 patients undergoing RF-balloon and 224 patients CB PVI. Baseline parameters were comparable. Procedure duration (104.3 ± 35.3 min vs. 69.9 ± 23.1 min; p ≤ 0.001) and fluoroscopy time (16.3 ± 7.1 min vs. 11.6 ± 4.9 min; p ≤ 0.001) were longer using the RF-balloon; ablation time (43.5 ± 17.9 vs. 36.4 ± 15.6; p = 0.08) did not differ, and time-to-isolation (TTI) was shorter (18.2 ± 7.0 s vs. 62.8 ± 35.1 s; p ≤ 0.001). Second-generation RF-balloon cases showed shorter ablation time and TTI at comparable procedure duration and fluoroscopy time. One pericardial effusion occurred with the RF-balloon due to complicated transseptal access. During CB PVI in 4/224 patients (1.8%), a phrenic nerve palsy was observed. After 12 months, 78% of patients after RF-balloon and 81% of patients after CB PVI (p = 0.5) were free from atrial arrhythmias. CONCLUSION: The RF-balloon was safe and effective. Compared with the CB, TTI was shorter, but procedure durations and fluoroscopy times were longer. This can be attributed to a learning curve and the initial necessity for separate 3D map preparation. Considering the results with the second-generation RF-balloon, more experience is needed to determine the potential benefits.

Impact of Left Atrial Posterior Wall Ablation During Pulsed-Field Ablation for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) alone is insufficient to treat many patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (PersAF). Adjunctive left atrial posterior wall (LAPW) ablation with thermal technologies has revealed lack of efficacy, perhaps limited by the difficulty in achieving lesion durability amid concerns of esophageal injury. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to compare the safety and effectiveness of PVI + LAPW ablation vs PVI in patients with PersAF using pulsed-field ablation (PFA). METHODS: In a retrospective analysis of the MANIFEST-PF (Multi-National Survey on the Methods, Efficacy, and Safety on the Post-approval Clinical Use of Pulsed Field Ablation) registry, we studied consecutive PersAF patients undergoing post-approval treatment with a pentaspline PFA catheter. The primary effectiveness outcome was freedom from any atrial arrhythmia of ≥30 seconds. Safety outcomes included the composite of acute and chronic major adverse events. RESULTS: Of the 547 patients with PersAF who underwent PFA, 131 (24%) received adjunctive LAPW ablation. Compared to PVI-alone, patients receiving adjunctive LAPW ablation were younger (65 vs 67 years of age, P = 0.08), had a lower CHA2DS2-VASc score (2.3 ± 1.6 vs 2.6 ± 1.6, P = 0.08), and were more likely to receive electroanatomical mapping (48.1% vs 39.0%, P = 0.07) and intracardiac echocardiography imaging (46.1% vs 17.1%, P < 0.001). The 1-year Kaplan-Meier estimate for freedom from atrial arrhythmias was not statistically different between groups in the full (PVI + LAPW: 66.4%; 95% CI: 57.6%-74.4% vs PVI: 73.1%; 95% CI: 68.5%-77.2%; P = 0.68) and propensity-matched cohorts (PVI + LAPW: 71.7% vs PVI: 68.5%; P = 0.34). There was also no significant difference in major adverse events between the groups (2.2% vs 1.4%, respectively, P = 0.51). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with PersAF undergoing PFA, as compared to PVI-alone, adjunctive LAPW ablation did not improve freedom from atrial arrhythmia at 12 months.

Management of ventricular tachycardias: insights on centre settings, procedural workflow, endpoints, and implementation of guidelines-results from an EHRA survey.

Ventricular tachycardia (VT), and its occurrence, is still one of the main reasons for sudden cardiac death and, therefore, for increased mortality and morbidity foremost in patients with structural heart [Kahle A-K, Jungen C, Alken F-A, Scherschel K, Willems S, Pürerfellner H et al. Management of ventricular tachycardia in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy: contemporary armamentarium. Europace 2022;24:538-51]. Catheter ablation has become a safe and effective treatment option in patients with recurrent VT [Cronin EM, Bogun FM, Maury P, Peichl P, Chen M, Namboodiri N et al. 2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS expert consensus statement on catheter ablation of ventricular arrhythmias. Heart Rhythm 2020;17:e2-154]. Previous and current guidelines provide guidance on indication for VT ablation and risk assessment and evaluation of underlying disease. However, no uniform recommendation is provided regarding procedural strategies, timing of ablation, and centre setting. Therefore, these specifics seem to differ largely, and recent data are sparse. This physician-based European Heart Rhythm Association survey aims to deliver insights on not only infrastructural settings but also procedural specifics, applied technologies, ablation strategies, and procedural endpoints. Therefore, these findings might deliver a real-world scenario of VT management and potentially are of guidance for other centres.

Current management of atrial fibrillation in routine practice according to the last ESC guidelines: an EHRA physician survey-how are we dealing with controversial approaches?

AIMS: Although guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation (AF) are regularly published, many controversial issues remain, limiting their implementation. We aim to describe current clinical practice among European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) community according to last guidelines. METHODS AND RESULTS: A 30 multiple-choice questionnaire covering the most controversial topics related to AF management was distributed through the EHRA Research Network, National Societies, and social media between January and February 2023. One hundred and eighty-one physicians responded the survey, 61% from university hospitals. Atrial fibrillation screening in high-risk patients is regularly performed by 57%. Only 42% has access to at least one programme aiming at diagnosing/managing comorbidities and lifestyle modifications, with marked heterogeneity between countries. Direct oral anticoagulants are the preferred antithrombotic (97%). Rhythm control is the preferred strategy in most AF phenotypes: symptomatic vs. asymptomatic paroxysmal AF (97% vs. 77%), low vs. high risk for recurrence persistent AF (90% vs. 72%), and permanent AF (20%). I-C drugs and amiodarone are preferred while dronedarone and sotalol barely used. Ablation is the first-line therapy for symptomatic paroxysmal AF (69%) and persistent AF with markers of atrial disease (57%) and is performed independently of symptoms by 15%. In persistent AF, 68% performs only pulmonary vein isolation and 32% also additional lesions. CONCLUSION: There is marked heterogeneity in AF management and limited accordance to last guidelines in the EHRA community. Most of the discrepancies are related to the main controversial issues, such as those related to AF screening, management of comorbidities, pharmacological treatment, and ablation strategy.

The omnipolar mapping technology-a new mapping tool to overcome "bipolar blindness" resulting in true high-density maps.

BACKGROUND: Omnipolar mapping (OT) is a novel tool to acquire omnipolar signals for electro-anatomical mapping, displaying true voltage and real-time wavefront direction and speed independent of catheter orientation. The aim was to analyze previously performed left atrial (LA) and left ventricular (LV) maps for differences using automated OT vs. standard bipolar settings (SD) and HD wave (HDW) algorithm. METHODS: Previously obtained SD and HDW maps of the LA and LV using a 16-electrode, grid-shaped catheter were retrospectively analyzed by applying automated OT, comparing voltage, point density, pulmonary vein (PV) gaps, and LV scar area. RESULTS: In this analysis, 135 maps of 45 consecutive patients (30 treated for LA, 15 for LV arrhythmia) were included. Atrial maps revealed significantly higher point densities using OT (21471) vs. SD (6682) or HDW (12189, p < 0.001). Mean voltage was significantly higher using OT (0.75 mV) vs. SD (0.61 mV) or HDW (0.64 mV, p < 0.001). OT maps detected significantly more PV gaps per patient vs. SD (4 vs. 2), p = 0.001. In LV maps, OT revealed significantly higher point densities (25951) vs. SD (8582) and HDW (17071), p < 0.001. Mean voltage was significantly higher for OT (1.49 mV) vs. SD (1.19 mV) and HDW (1.2 mV), p < 0.001. Detected scar area was significantly smaller using OT (25.3%) vs. SD (33.9%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: OT mapping leads to significantly different substrate display, map density, voltage, detection of PV gaps, and scar size, compared to SD and HDW in LA and LV procedures. Successful CA might be facilitated due to true HD maps.

Clinical Outcomes by Sex After Pulsed Field Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation.

Importance: Previous studies evaluating the association of patient sex with clinical outcomes using conventional thermal ablative modalities for atrial fibrillation (AF) such as radiofrequency or cryoablation are controversial due to mixed results. Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a novel AF ablation energy modality that has demonstrated preferential myocardial tissue ablation with a unique safety profile. Objective: To compare sex differences in patients undergoing PFA for AF in the Multinational Survey on the Methods, Efficacy, and Safety on the Postapproval Clinical Use of Pulsed Field Ablation (MANIFEST-PF) registry. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a retrospective cohort study of MANIFEST-PF registry data, which included consecutive patients undergoing postregulatory approval treatment with PFA to treat AF between March 2021 and May 2022 with a median follow-up of 1 year. MANIFEST-PF is a multinational, retrospectively analyzed, prospectively enrolled patient-level registry including 24 European centers. The study included all consecutive registry patients (age ≥18 years) who underwent first-ever PFA for paroxysmal or persistent AF. Exposure: PFA was performed on patients with AF. All patients underwent pulmonary vein isolation and additional ablation, which was performed at the discretion of the operator. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary effectiveness outcome was freedom from clinically documented atrial arrhythmia for 30 seconds or longer after a 3-month blanking period. The primary safety outcome was the composite of acute (<7 days postprocedure) and chronic (>7 days) major adverse events (MAEs). Results: Of 1568 patients (mean [SD] age, 64.5 [11.5] years; 1015 male [64.7%]) with AF who underwent PFA, female patients, as compared with male patients, were older (mean [SD] age, 68 [10] years vs 62 [12] years; P < .001), had more paroxysmal AF (70.2% [388 of 553] vs 62.4% [633 of 1015]; P = .002) but had fewer comorbidities such as coronary disease (9% [38 of 553] vs 15.9% [129 of 1015]; P < .001), heart failure (10.5% [58 of 553] vs 16.6% [168 of 1015]; P = .001), and sleep apnea (4.7% [18 of 553] vs 11.7% [84 of 1015]; P < .001). Pulmonary vein isolation was performed in 99.8% of female (552 of 553) and 98.9% of male (1004 of 1015; P = .90) patients. Additional ablation was performed in 22.4% of female (124 of 553) and 23.1% of male (235 of 1015; P = .79) patients. The 1-year Kaplan-Meier estimate for freedom from atrial arrhythmia was similar in male and female patients (79.0%; 95% CI, 76.3%-81.5% vs 76.3%; 95% CI, 72.5%-79.8%; P = .28). There was also no significant difference in acute major AEs between groups (male, 1.5% [16 of 1015] vs female, 2.5% [14 of 553]; P = .19). Conclusion and Relevance: Results of this cohort study suggest that after PFA for AF, there were no significant sex differences in clinical effectiveness or safety events.

Comparison of pulsed-field ablation versus very high power short duration-ablation for pulmonary vein isolation.

BACKGROUND: The newly introduced nonthermal pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a promising technology to achieve fast pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) with high acute success rates and good safety features. However, previous studies have shown that very high power short duration ablation (VHPSD) is also highly effective and fast to achieve PVI with potentially less arrhythmia recurrence compared to conventional radiofrequency ablation. Data comparing PFA to VHPSD-PVI is lacking. OBJECTIVE: This study compared procedural and outcome data for PFA-PVI to VHPSD-PVI in patients with paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation (PAF/persAF). METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing de novo PVI (PFA or VHPSD) were included in this analysis. For PFA-PVI a pentaspline 20 electrode catheter was used. For VHPSD-PVI an enhanced irrigated catheter with a power setting of 70 W/7 s (70 W/5 s at posterior wall) was employed in conjunction with electro-anatomical mapping. All procedures were performed in deep analgo-sedation. RESULTS: A total of n = 114 patients (n = 57[50%] PFA, n = 17[30%] PAF; n = 40[70%] persAF) were included in this analysis. PVI was successful in all patients. The PFA group revealed a significantly shorter procedure duration (65 ± 17 min vs. 95 ± 23 min, p < 0.01) but longer fluoroscopy time (PFA 15 ± 5 min and VHPSD 12 ± 3 min; p < 0.001). At follow-up after median 125 days (interquartile range: 109-162) n = 46 PFA (80.7%) and n = 44 VHPSD pts (77.2%) were free from atrial arrhythmia after a single procedure (p = 0.819). Two tamponades occurred in the PFA while in VHPSD two pts suffered groin bleedings. One clinically nonsignificant PV stenosis occurred in the VHPSD group. CONCLUSION: Pulsed-field ablation and VHPSD-PVI seem to be highly effective and safe to achieve PVI in the setting of PAF and persAF with comparable arrhythmia-free survival. However, procedure duration for PFA PVI is significantly shorter and therefore may be of potential benefit. Compared to PFA VHPSD-PVI might ensure information on left atrial substrate allowing to target concomitant secondary tachycardias.

Comparison of pulsed field ablation and cryoballoon ablation for pulmonary vein isolation.

INTRODUCTION: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) remains the cornerstone in the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). PVI using cryoballoon (CB) technology has emerged as a standard procedure in many centers. Recently, pulsed field ablation (PFA) has been introduced and used to achieve PVI. First data show high acute and favorable long-term outcomes. So far, data comparing these new "single shot" devices are sparse. We sought to compare procedural and outcome data for first time PFA users versus CB in patients undergoing de novo PVI. Furthermore, potentially postprocedural discomfort and affection of autonomic ganglia were assessed. METHODS AND RESULTS: A retrospective analysis and comparison of all de novo PVIs with PFA and CB was performed. Furthermore, PFA PVI learning curve was evaluated. During follow-up, repeat outpatient visits and Holter electrocardiogram were performed to analyze arrhythmia-free survival. Discomfort analysis was obtained by prescribed analgesic medication within first 48 h after PVI. Potential changes in heart rate (HR) between baseline and at 3-month follow-up were evaluated. A total of 108 patients (54 PFA and 54 CB; PFA; 33 (30%) female) with paroxysmal and persistent AF were analyzed. Type of AF was comparable (Patients suffering from PAF: PFA: 16 (30%), CB: 17 (31%), p = 1.0). In 107 (99%) patients, successful PVI was achieved. Transient phrenic palsy omitted complete PVI in one CB patient. A trend for a shorter overall procedure duration was observed in the PFA group (PFA: 64.5 ± 17.5 min; CB: 73.0 ± 24.8 min; p = 0.07). Excluding LA mapping time (first 14 cases), procedure time was significantly shorter using PFA (PFA: 58.0 ± 12.5 min, CB: 73.0 ± 24.8 min, p = 0.0001). Fluoroscopy time was significantly longer for PFA (PFA: 15.3 ± 4.7 min, CB: 12.3 ± 5.3 min; p = 0.001), but significantly less contrast medium was used (PFA: 12 ± 6 mL; CB: 51 ± 29 mL, p < 0.0001). Subgroup analysis of the PFA group revealed a significant shortening of procedure duration over time (first tertile: 72.7 ± 13.5 min, second tertile: 67.3 ± 21.7 min, third tertile: 53.4 ± 9.8 min, first vs. third tertile p < 0.0001). Two cardiac tamponades occurred in the PFA group (p = 0.495), of which one was most likely related to complex transseptal puncture. In the first 48 h after PVI, the number of prescribed analgesics due to postprocedural pain was equal between both groups (PFA: 7 (13%) patients, CB: 10 (19%) patients, p = 0.598). After a FU of 273 ± 129 days, 35 of 47 patients (74%) after PFA and 36 of 50 patients (72%) after CB PVI were free of any atrial arrhythmia (HR: 0.98, p = 0.88). Only in the PFA group, a significant increase in HR 3 months after PVI was observed (pre-PVI: 61 ± 8 beats/min, post-PVI: 65 ± 9 beats/min, p = 0.008). CONCLUSION: The new PFA technology is equally effective and safe as compared to CB for complete PVI with potentially shorter procedure time and significantly less contrast medium. However, AF recurrence rates after PFA PVI seem to be comparable to CB PVI.

Implementation and first outcomes of a novel standard operating procedure for preprocedural transoesophageal echocardiography screening in course of atrial arrhythmia ablation.

AIMS: Preprocedural transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE) screening for left atrial (LA) thrombi is the standard of care in many centres performing atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. However, TEE imposes procedural risks for patients and is often challenging to implement in daily practice, besides causing patient discomfort. At our centre, a novel standard operating procedure (SOP) was implemented, aiming to identify patients that can be exempt from TEE screening. We aimed to assess whether this screening approach may reduce preprocedural TEEs without imposing patients of higher risks for cerebrovascular events (CVEs). METHODS AND RESULTS: Data of 1874 consecutive patients treated by catheter ablation of LA arrhythmias between 2018 and 2022 were retrospectively analysed. A cohort of 937 patients, where decision to perform TEE screening was based on a new SOP (considering rhythm at admission, CHA2DS2-VASc score, and sufficient anticoagulation), was compared to a matched cohort receiving TEE before every procedure. Number of performed TEEs and incidences of CVEs were compared. Implementation of the new SOP led to a 67% reduction in TEEs performed (old SOP: 933 vs. new SOP: 305). No significant differences between the groups were detected regarding transitory ischaemic attack (old SOP: 5 vs. new SOP: 3; P = 0.48) and stroke (no events). No solid thrombi were detected during TEE screening. CONCLUSION: The number of preprocedural screening TEEs before AF ablation procedures can be safely reduced by applying risk stratification based on rhythm at admission and CHA2DS2-VASc score, if anticoagulation was performed properly.

First long-term outcome data for the MicraVR™ transcatheter pacing system: data from the largest prospective German cohort.

AIMS: The MicraVR™ transcatheter pacing system (TPS) has been implemented into clinical routine for several years. The primary recipients are patients in need for VVI pacing due to bradycardia in the setting of atrial fibrillation (AF). Implantation safety and acute success have been proven in controlled studies and registries. So far only few long-term real-life data on TPS exist. We report indication, procedure and outcome data from two high-volume implanting German centers. METHODS: Between 2016 and 2019, 188 (of 303) patients were included. During follow-up (FU), TPS interrogation was performed after 4 weeks and thereafter every 6 months. RESULTS: Indication for TPS implantation in 159/188 (85%) patients was permanent or intermittent AV block III° in the setting of atrial fibrillation. The mean procedure duration was 50 min [35.0-70.0]. The average acute values after system release were: thresholds: 0.5V [0.38-0.74]/0.24ms; R-wave sensing: 10.0mV [8.1-13.5]; impedance: 650 Ohm [550-783]; RV-pacing demand: 16.9% [0.9-75.9]; and battery status: 3.15 V [3.12-3.16]. During FU of 723.4 ± 597.9 days, neither pacemaker failure nor infections were reported. Long-term FU revealed: thresholds: 0.5V [0.38-0.63]/0.24 ms; sensing: 12.3mV [8.9-17.2]; impedance: 570 Ohm [488-633]; RV-pacing demand: 87.1% [29.5-98.6]; and battery status 3.02 V [3.0-3.1]. Forty-three patients died from not-device-related causes. CONCLUSION: This to date largest German long-term dataset for MicraVR™ TPS implantation revealed stable device parameter. Foremost, battery longevity seems to fulfill predicted values despite a significant increase in RV-pacing demand over time and even in patients with consecutive AV-node ablation. Of note, no infections or system failure were observed.

Safety and Effectiveness of Pulsed Field Ablation to Treat Atrial Fibrillation: One-Year Outcomes From the MANIFEST-PF Registry.

BACKGROUND: Pulsed field ablation is a novel nonthermal cardiac ablation modality using ultra-rapid electrical pulses to cause cell death by a mechanism of irreversible electroporation. Unlike the traditional ablation energy sources, pulsed field ablation has demonstrated significant preferentiality to myocardial tissue ablation, and thus avoids certain thermally mediated complications. However, its safety and effectiveness remain unknown in usual clinical care. METHODS: MANIFEST-PF (Multi-National Survey on the Methods, Efficacy, and Safety on the Post-Approval Clinical Use of Pulsed Field Ablation) is a retrospective, multinational, patient-level registry wherein patients at each center were prospectively included in their respective center registries. The registry included all patients undergoing postapproval treatment with a multielectrode 5-spline pulsed field ablation catheter to treat atrial fibrillation (AF) between March 1, 2021, and May 30, 2022. The primary effectiveness outcome was freedom from clinical documented atrial arrhythmia (AF/atrial flutter/atrial tachycardia) of ≥30 seconds on the basis of electrocardiographic data after a 3-month blanking period (on or off antiarrhythmic drugs). Safety outcomes included the composite of acute (<7 days postprocedure) and latent (>7 days) major adverse events. RESULTS: At 24 European centers (77 operators) pulsed field ablation was performed in 1568 patients with AF: age 64.5±11.5 years, female 35%, paroxysmal/persistent AF 65%/32%, CHA2DS2-VASc 2.2±1.6, median left ventricular ejection fraction 60%, and left atrial diameter 42 mm. Pulmonary vein isolation was achieved in 99.2% of patients. After a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 367 (289-421) days, the 1-year Kaplan-Meier estimate for freedom from atrial arrhythmia was 78.1% (95% CI, 76.0%-80.0%); clinical effectiveness was more common in patients with paroxysmal AF versus persistent AF (81.6% versus 71.5%; P=0.001). Acute major adverse events occurred in 1.9% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this large observational registry of the postapproval clinical use of pulsed field technology to treat AF, catheter ablation using pulsed field energy was clinically effective in 78% of patients with AF.

Pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation using true high-power short-duration vs. cryoballoon ablation.

AIMS: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is achievable and effective using radiofrequency (RF) catheter (CA) or cryoballoon (CB) ablation. The newly introduced high RF-power short-duration ablation (HPSD) technique has shown promising results. Data comparing HPSD- to CB-PVI is sparse. We sought to investigate success rates and procedural differences of HPSD-PVI vs. CB-PVI in patients undergoing ablation for PAF and persAF. METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing de novo PVI (HPSD or CB) were included. A power setting of 70W/7 s (70W/5 s at posterior wall) using a flexible tip catheter with enhanced irrigation was considered as true HPSD. Follow-up consisted of out-clinic pts visits, tele-consultation, 48-h Holter ECG, app-based telemonitoring and cardiac implanted electronic devices (CIED) interrogation. RESULTS: 721 patients (46 HPSD, 675 CB) were analyzed. In all HPSD (27 persAF [59%]) and CB patients (423 persAF [63%]), PVI was successfully achieved. Procedure duration was significantly longer for HPSD (91 ± 19 min vs. 72 ± 18 min, p < 0.01). Ablation time was similar in both groups (HPSD: 44 ± 19 min vs. CB: 40 ± 17 min; p = 0.347). No major complications occurred in HPSD. For CB-PVI, in 25 (3.7%; p = 0.296) patients, complications occurred. At a follow-up of 290 ± 135 days, arrhythmia-free survival using HPSD was non-inferior to CB-PVI in the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis (p = 0.096). CONCLUSION: PVI using HPSD is equally effective and safe to CB-PVI. This analysis revealed a similar arrhythmia-free survival after HPSD and CB with low complication rates. Procedure duration for CB was significantly shorter while LA dwell time excluding mapping was equal. Currently, a prospective trial is conducted to corroborate these findings.

Treatment of pathophysiologic propagation outside of the pulmonary veins in retreatment of atrial fibrillation patients: RECOVER AF study.

AIMS: RECOVER AF evaluated the performance of whole-chamber non-contact charge-density mapping to guide the ablation of non-pulmonary vein (PV) targets in persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) patients following either a first or second failed procedure. METHODS AND RESULTS: RECOVER AF was a prospective, non-randomized trial that enrolled patients scheduled for a first or second ablation retreatment for recurrent AF. The PVs were assessed and re-isolated if necessary. The AF maps were used to guide the ablation of non-PV targets through elimination of pathologic conduction patterns (PCPs). Primary endpoint was freedom from AF on or off antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) at 12 months. Patients undergoing retreatment with the AcQMap System (n = 103) were 76% AF-free at 12 months [67% after single procedure (SP)] on or off AADs (80% free from AF on AADs). Patients who had only received a pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) prior to study treatment of non-PV targets with the AcQMap System were 91% AF-free at 12 months (83% SP). No major adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Non-contact mapping can be used to target and guide the ablation of PCPs beyond the PVs in persistent AF patients returning for a first or second retreatment with 76% freedom from AF at 12 months. The AF freedom was particularly high, 91% (43/47), for patients enrolled having only a prior de novo PVI, and freedom from all atrial arrhythmias for this cohort was 74% (35/47). These early results are encouraging and suggest that guiding individualized targeted ablation of PCPs may therefore be advantageous to target at the earliest opportunity in patients with persistent AF.

Incidence of premature battery depletion in subcutaneous cardioverter-defibrillator patients: insights from a multicenter registry.

BACKGROUND: The subcutaneous ICD established its role in the prevention of sudden cardiac death in recent years. The occurrence of premature battery depletion in a large subset of potentially affected devices has been a cause of concern. The incidence of premature battery depletion has not been studied systematically beyond manufacturer-reported data. METHODS: Retrospective data and the most recent follow-up data on S-ICD devices from fourteen centers in Europe, the US, and Canada was studied. The incidence of generator removal or failure was reported to investigate the incidence of premature S-ICD battery depletion, defined as battery failure within 60 months or less. RESULTS: Data from 1054 devices was analyzed. Premature battery depletion occurred in 3.5% of potentially affected devices over an observation period of 49 months. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of premature battery depletion of S-ICD potentially affected by a battery advisory was around 3.5% after 4 years in this study. Premature depletion occurred exclusively in devices under advisory. This is in line with the most recently published reports from the manufacturer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04767516 .

Impact of ventricular arrhythmia management on suboptimal biventricular pacing in cardiac resynchronization therapy.

BACKGROUND: Reduced biventricular pacing (BiVP) is a common phenomenon in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with impact on CRT-response and patients' prognosis. Data on treatment strategies for patients with ventricular arrhythmia and BiVP reduction is sparse. We sought to assess the effects of ventricular arrhythmia treatment on BiVP. METHODS: In this retrospective analysis, the data of CRT patients with a reduced BiVP ≤ 97% due to ventricular arrhythmia were analyzed. Catheter ablation or intensified medical therapy was performed to optimize BiVP. RESULTS: We included 64 consecutive patients (73 ± 10 years, 89% male, LVEF 30 ± 7%). Of those, 22/64 patients (34%) underwent ablation of premature ventricular contractions (PVC) and 15/64 patients (23%) underwent ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation while 27/64 patients (42%) received intensified medical treatment. Baseline BiVP was 88.1% ± 10.9%. An overall increase in BiVP percentage points of 8.8% (range - 5 to + 47.6%) at 6-month follow-up was achieved. No changes in left ventricular function were observed but improvement in BiVP led to an improvement in NYHA class in 24/64 patients (38%). PVC ablation led to a significantly better improvement in BiVP [9.9% (range 4 to 22%) vs. 3.2% (range - 5 to + 10.7%); p = < 0.001] and NYHA class (12/22 patients vs. 4/27 patients; p = 0.003) than intensified medical therapy. All patients with VT and reduced BiVP underwent VT ablation with an increase of BiVP of 16.3 ± 13.4%. CONCLUSION: In this evaluation of ventricular arrhythmia treatment aiming for CRT optimization, both medical therapy and catheter ablation were shown to be effective. Compared to medical therapy, a higher increase in BiVP was observed after PVC ablation, and more patients improved in NYHA class. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered at clinical trials.org in August 2019: NCT04065893.