Ultrasound-guided axillary vein puncture for cardiac devices implantation in patients under antithrombotic therapy.

BACKGROUND: Ultrasound-guided axillary venous puncture (UGAVP) for cardiac devices implantation has been developed because of its rapidity, safety and potential long-term lead protection. Early work excluded defibrillators (ICD), cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and upgrade procedures. Compared to the cephalic approach, in previous studies, there was a greater use of pressure dressings with this technique, suggesting a higher risk of bleeding. AIMS: To assess UGAVP in patients under antithrombotic therapy (ATT) undergoing cardiac devices implantation including CRT/ICD. METHODS: Prospectively, consecutive patients eligible for a pacemaker or ICD implantation were included. All procedures were performed by a single operator, experienced with UGAVP for femoral access, and fluoroscopy-guided axillary vein access. Guidewires insertion time (from lidocaïne administration), and complications were systematically studied. RESULTS: From 457 cardiac device implantations, 200 patients (77.8 ± 10 y, male 58%) 360 leads were implanted by UGAVP including 36 ICD, 54 CRT and 14 upgrade procedures. A majority (90%) was under ATT: Vitamin K Antagonist or Heparin (n = 58, 29%), direct oral anticoagulant (n = 46, 23%), dual antithrombotic therapy (n = 18, 9%) and single antiplatelet drug (n = 82, 41%). UGAVP was successful in 95.78%. Mean insertion time for 1.8 guidewires per patient was 4.68 ± 3.6 min. No complication (no hematoma) was observed during the follow-up (mean of 45 ± 10 months). Guidewires insertion time reached its plateau after 15 patients. CONCLUSION: UGAVP is fast, feasible and safe for patients under ATT undergoing device implantation including CRT/ICD and upgrade procedures, with a short learning curve.

A comparison between multipolar mapping and conventional mapping of atrial tachycardias in the context of atrial fibrillation ablation.

BACKGROUND: Activation mapping can be challenging and time-consuming in patients with multiple atrial tachycardias (ATs). AIMS: To compare multielectrode mapping using a dedicated mapping catheter - PentaRay (Biosense Webster Inc.) - and the conventional technique for mapping ATs in the context of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. METHODS: All procedures where PentaRay mapping of AT were used - after or during persistent AF ablation - were analysed. These were compared to a historical group - using conventional mapping. RESULTS: A mean of 449±520 points within 14±6min were acquired per AT in the PentaRay group (n=17) versus 42±18 points (P<0.0001) within 33±25min (P=0.04) in the conventional group (n=17). All 25 AT isthmuses were easily identified and ablated in the PentaRay group (100%) versus 20/23 (87%) in the conventional group (P=0.056). The ablation time was shorter in the PentaRay group (760±540 vs 1347±962 s; P=0.037). However, procedure and fluoroscopy times were not significantly different between the PentaRay and conventional groups: 253±77 vs 267±73min (P=0.80) and 13.1±8.0min vs 15.1±10.0min (P=0.98), respectively. Recurrence occurred in less patients in the PentaRay group (0 vs 23.5%; P=0.033) during a mean follow-up of nearly 1 year. CONCLUSION: In patients with multiple ATs, multielectrode PentaRay mapping was faster than the conventional technique, with less radiofrequency delivery and a better mid-term outcome.

Selection of Critical Isthmus in Scar-Related Atrial Tachycardia Using a New Automated Ultrahigh Resolution Mapping System.

BACKGROUND: Accurate activation mapping of reentrant scar-related atrial tachycardias (AT) allows efficient radiofrequency ablation by targeting the critical isthmus (CI). We aimed to assess the electrophysiological properties of CI channels during mapping with the IntellaMap Orion basket and the Rhythmia system. METHODS AND RESULTS: We prospectively studied 33 AT (post- atrial fibrillation ablation or surgical mitral valve repair). The noise of bipolar electrogram (EGM) was systematically measured at 10 prespecified sites, as well as on a standard catheter and on the surface ECG. Bipolar EGM of CI regions were analyzed for amplitude, duration, and conduction velocity. The isthmus region to be targeted was chosen based solely on propagation. For each AT, 25 684±14 276 EGMs were automatically annotated. Noise of the Orion EGM was 0.011±0.004 mV, lower than that of a standard catheter (0.016±0.019) and surface ECG (0.02±0.01; P<0.05). For reentrant AT, within the CI, bipolar EGM amplitude (0.08±0.11 mV) and conduction velocity (0.27±0.19 m/s) were lower than those orthodromically before (0.62±0.93 mV; 1±0.49 m/s) and after (0.80±1.59 mV; 1±0.73 m/s) the isthmus (P<0.001 for all). In 97% of AT, ablation at the CI resulted in AT termination. No complications occurred. CONCLUSIONS: This new automated ultrahigh resolution mapping system produces low noise and allows accurate diagnosis of AT circuits. CI on reentrant scar-related AT showed much lower EGM amplitude with a significantly slower conduction velocity than the surrounding parts of the circuit. Ablation of the areas of slow conduction resulted in a high acute success.

Ultra-High-Definition Mapping of Atrial Arrhythmias.

The advantages of ultra-high-definition (UHD) mapping are presented in the context of different atrial arrhythmias, whether focal or macroreentrant. Not only are these sophisticated systems time-saving, but they also allow accurate identification of the substrate (scar quantification), as well as a more precise characterization of the critical isthmuses or focal sources of the atrial circuits. UHD mapping may become a standard approach for their curative treatment. This new technology allows automatic acquisition and accurate annotation of the electrograms, without the need for manual correction. Owing to better resolution, critical isthmuses and low-voltage regions of interest may now be successfully targeted without the need for entrainment maneuvers. Finally, the system also allows rapid assessment of the completeness of the lesions once delivered. (Circ J 2016; 80: 579-586).