Continuous stellate ganglion block for ventricular arrhythmias: case series, systematic review, and differences from thoracic epidural anaesthesia.

AIMS: Percutaneous stellate ganglion block (PSGB) through single-bolus injection and thoracic epidural anaesthesia (TEA) have been proposed for the acute management of refractory ventricular arrhythmias (VAs). However, data on continuous PSGB (C-PSGB) are scant. The aim of this study is to report our dual-centre experience with C-PSGB and to perform a systematic review on C-PSGB and TEA. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients receiving C-PSGB at two centres were enrolled. The systematic literature review follows the latest Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria. Our case series (26 patients, 88% male, 60 ± 16 years, all with advanced structural heart disease, left ventricular ejection fraction 23 ± 11%, 32 C-PSGBs performed, with a median duration of 3 days) shows that C-PSGB is feasible and safe and leads to complete VAs suppression in 59% and to overall clinical benefit in 94% of cases. Overall, 61 patients received 68 C-PSGBs and 22 TEA, with complete VA suppression in 63% of C-PSGBs (61% of patients). Most TEA procedures (55%) were performed on intubated patients, as opposed to 28% of C-PSGBs (P = 0.02); 63% of cases were on full anticoagulation at C-PSGB, none at TEA (P < 0.001). Ropivacaine and lidocaine were the most used drugs for C-PSGB, and the available data support a starting dose of 12 and 100 mg/h, respectively. No major complications occurred, yet TEA discontinuation rate due to side effects was higher than C-PSGB (18 vs. 1%, P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Continuous PSGB seems feasible, safe, and effective for the acute management of refractory VAs. The antiarrhythmic effect may be accomplished with less concerns for concomitant anticoagulation compared with TEA and with a lower side-effect related discontinuation rate.

Electrical storm treatment by percutaneous stellate ganglion block: the STAR study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: An electrical storm (ES) is a clinical emergency with a paucity of established treatment options. Despite initial encouraging reports about the safety and effectiveness of percutaneous stellate ganglion block (PSGB), many questions remained unsettled and evidence from a prospective multicentre study was still lacking. For these purposes, the STAR study was designed. METHODS: This is a multicentre observational study enrolling patients suffering from an ES refractory to standard treatment from 1 July 2017 to 30 June 2023. The primary outcome was the reduction of treated arrhythmic events by at least 50% comparing the 12 h following PSGB with the 12 h before the procedure. STAR operators were specifically trained to both the anterior anatomical and the lateral ultrasound-guided approach. RESULTS: A total of 131 patients from 19 centres were enrolled and underwent 184 PSGBs. Patients were mainly male (83.2%) with a median age of 68 (63.8-69.2) years and a depressed left ventricular ejection fraction (25.0 ± 12.3%). The primary outcome was reached in 92% of patients, and the median reduction of arrhythmic episodes between 12 h before and after PSGB was 100% (interquartile range -100% to -92.3%). Arrhythmic episodes requiring treatment were significantly reduced comparing 12 h before the first PSGB with 12 h after the last procedure [six (3-15.8) vs. 0 (0-1), P < .0001] and comparing 1 h before with 1 h after each procedure [2 (0-6) vs. 0 (0-0), P < .001]. One major complication occurred (0.5%). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this large, prospective, multicentre study provide evidence in favour of the effectiveness and safety of PSGB for the treatment of refractory ES.

[Electrical storm management in the cardiac care unit]. / Gestione della tempesta aritmica in terapia intensiva cardiologica.

Electrical storm (ES) is characterized by at least three separate episodes of ventricular arrhythmia (VA) over 24 h that require treatment or an incessant VA lasting >12 h. The incidence is higher in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) in secondary prevention and the main manifestation is monomorphic VA. ES onset represents a major event in the history of patients with cardiomyopathies that significantly worsens prognosis. The management of ES is complex and requires a multidisciplinary approach including a comprehensive clinical assessment, resuscitation and sedation management skills, ICD reprogramming, ablation, and neuromodulation procedures. ES early recognition and prompt treatment initiation increase the chances of therapeutic success. Each one of these aspects will be properly discussed in the present decalogue. Notably, ES management remains a challenge, with only limited available evidence from small retrospective series and a substantial lack/limited number of randomized or prospective trials. The spectrum of available antiarrhythmic drugs is limited, as well as their efficacy. The future hope is that larger prospective studies will be able to answer important questions, concerning the most effective pharmacologic strategies, the timing for the invasive treatment, the indications for acute neuromodulation strategies and for the circulatory support tools.

Electrical storm management in structural heart disease.

Electrical storm (ES) is a life-threatening condition characterized by at least three separate episodes of ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) over 24 h, each requiring therapeutic intervention, including implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapies. Patients with ICDs in secondary prevention are at higher risk of ES and the most common presentation is that of scar-related monomorphic VAs. Electrical storm represents a major unfavourable prognostic marker in the history of patients with structural heart disease, with an associated two- to five-fold increase in mortality, heart transplant, and heart failure hospitalization. Early recognition and prompt treatment are crucial to improve the outcome. Yet, ES management is complex and requires a multidisciplinary approach and well-defined protocols and networks to guarantee a proper patient care. Acute phase stabilization should include a comprehensive clinical assessment, resuscitation and sedation management skills, ICD reprogramming, and acute sympathetic modulation, while the sub-acute/chronic phase requires a comprehensive heart team evaluation to define the better treatment option according to the haemodynamic and overall patient's condition and the type of VAs. Advanced anti-arrhythmic strategies, not mutually exclusive, include invasive ablation, cardiac sympathetic denervation, and, for very selected cases, stereotactic ablation. Each of these aspects, as well as the new European Society of Cardiology guidelines recommendations, will be discussed in the present review.

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy With or Without Defibrillation: A Long-Standing Debate.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) was shown to improve cardiac function, reduce heart failure hospitalizations, improve quality of life and prolong survival in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction and intraventricular conduction disturbances, mainly left bundle branch block, on optimal medical therapy with ACE-inhibitors, ß-blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists up-titrated to maximum tolerated evidence-based doses. CRT can be achieved by means of pacemaker systems (CRT-P) or devices with defibrillation capabilities (CRT-D). CRT-Ds offer an undoubted advantage in the prevention of arrhythmic death, but such an advantage may be of lesser degree in nonischemic heart failure etiologies. Moreover, the higher CRT-D hardware complexity compared to CRT-P may predispose to device/lead malfunctions and the higher current drainage may cause a shorter battery duration with consequent premature replacements and the well-known incremental complications. In a period of financial constraints, also device costs should be carefully evaluated, with recent reports suggesting that CRT-Ps may be favored over CRT-Ds in patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy and no prior history of cardiac arrhythmias from a cost-effectiveness point of view. The choice between a CRT-P or a CRT-D device should be patient-tailored whenever straightforward defibrillator indications are not present. The Goldenberg score may facilitate this decision-making process in ambiguous settings. Age, comorbidities, kidney disease, atrial fibrillation, advanced functional class, inappropriate therapy risk, implantable device infections, and malfunctions are factors potentially reducing the expected benefit from defibrillating capabilities. In the future, prospective randomized controlled trials are warranted to directly compare the efficacy and safety of CRT-Ps and CRT-Ds.

Comparative external validation of the PRECISE-DAPT and PARIS risk scores in 4424 acute coronary syndrome patients treated with prasugrel or ticagrelor.

BACKGROUND: The PRECISE-DAPT and PARIS risk scores (RSs) were recently developed to help clinicians at individualizing the optimal dual antiplatelet therapy duration (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Nevertheless, external validation of these RSs it has not yet been performed in ACS (acute coronary syndrome) patients treated with prasugrel or ticagrelor in a real- world scenario. METHODS: 4424 ACS patients who underwent PCI and survived to hospital discharge, from January 2012 to December 2016 at 12 European centers, were included. PRECISE-DAPT and PARIS bleeding RS, as well as PARIS ischemic RS, were computed, and their performance at predicting major bleeding (MB; BARC type 3 or 5) and ischemic events (MI and stent thrombosis) during follow up was compared. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 14 (interquartile range 12-20.9) months, 83 (1.88%) patients developed MB and 133 (3.0%) suffered an ischemic episode. PRECISE-DAPT performed better than PARIS bleeding RS (c-statistic = 0.653 vs. 0.593; p = .01 for comparison) in predicting MB. The RSs performance for MB prediction remained consistent in STEMI patients (c-statistic = 0.632 vs 0.575) or in those treated with prasugrel (c-statistic = 0.623 vs 0.586). PARIS ischemic RS exhibited superior discrimination in predicting ischemic complications compared to PRECISE-DAPT (c-statistic = 0.604 vs 0.568 p = .05 for comparison). CONCLUSION: Our data provide support to the use of PRECISE-DAPT in MB risk stratification for patients receiving DAPT in form of aspirin and prasugrel or ticagrelor whereas the PARIS ischemic RS has potential to complement the risk prediction with respect to ischemic events.

Management of aspirin intolerance in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The role of mono-antiplatelet therapy: a retrospective, multicenter, study.

BACKGROUND: The optimal management of patients with aspirin intolerance undergoing stent implantation represents a challenge for physicians. The aim of this study was to assess the overall number of patients discharged with mono antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The most frequent aspirin intolerance symptoms in this population and the overall incidence of patient-oriented composite endpoints (POCE). METHODS: From January 2006 to June 2016 all patients discharged with mono-antiplatelet therapy because of aspirin intolerance/hypersensitivity/allergy and treated by means of PCI were included. Data about percutaneous treatments and aspirin intolerance were collected. POCE were evaluated at a twelve-month clinical follow-up comparing safety and efficacy of clopidogrel monotherapy versus new P2Y12 inhibitors. RESULTS: We collected 70 patients, that is 0.3% of the total amount of PCI in the considered period, 25 (35%) of them were women and the remaining 45 (65%) were men. An acute coronary syndrome (ACS) was the clinical presentation in 47 (67.1%) patients, with NSTEMI in 19 (27.1%) of them. Forty-six patients (65.7%) were treated with clopidogrel and 24 (34.3%) with new P2Y12 inhibitors. At one-year follow-up, 18 (25.7%) patients suffered a new clinically relevant adverse event, 5 (7.1%) died, 3 (4.3%) required a target vessel revascularization and 10 (14.3%) patients a target lesion revascularization. CONCLUSIONS: Our study evaluated patients with ACS or stable coronary artery disease undergoing PCI and treated with mono-antiplatelet therapy with P2Y12 inhibitors due to aspirin intolerance shows a 25% incidence of POCE at one year. Further studies with adequate sample size are required to evaluate the efficacy and safety of mono antiplatelet therapy in this clinical scenario.

Short term outcome following acute phase switch among P2Y12 inhibitors in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome treated with PCI: A systematic review and meta-analysis including 22,500 patients from 14 studies.

INTRODUCTION: The efficacy and safety of switching P2Y12 receptor antagonists in patients admitted for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remain unclear. We assessed the short-term clinical outcomes (in-hospital and within 30 days) of switching P2Y12 inhibitor (P2Y12I) drugs versus maintaining the same regimen by performing a comprehensive review and meta-analysis of available data. METHODS: MEDLINE/PubMed/SCOPUS/Cochrane databases were screened for studies regarding switching of P2Y12I in patients with ACS that reported 30 days follow-up. Major cardiac events (MACE) and bleeding were compared between patients who were switched/not switched. RESULTS: 22,500 patients from 14 studies were included. Unstable angina/non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (62.0%, interquartile range, 52.8%-68.0%) was the most common clinical presentation. The total number switched was 4294 (19.1%); escalation in 3416 (79.5%) patients (from clopidogrel to prasugrel, 62.9%) and de-escalation in 18.5%. Pooled analysis revealed no significant differences in MACE for any comparison; risk of bleeding was significantly increased among switched patients overall (odds ratio [OR], 1.60; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.22-2.10) and increased in the escalation group (OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.06-2.16). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients presenting with ACS, switching from one P2Y12I agent to another in the acute phase seems associated with a short-term increased risk of bleeding. Accurate upfront selection and prescription of a P2Y12I based on ischemic and bleeding risks is paramount to avoid adverse events switching-related during hospitalization and in the first 30 days.

[Intravenous epinephrine for anaphylaxis: Kounis or takotsubo syndrome?] / Adrenalina endovenosa in corso di reazione anafilattica: sindrome di Kounis o takotsubo?

The presence of an acute coronary syndrome in patients with anaphylaxis is a challenging diagnostic conundrum for the cardiologist. Both Kounis syndrome and takotsubo syndrome must be taken into account. We present here the case of a 46-year-old woman suffering from ventricular fibrillation after adrenaline infusion for an anaphylactic reaction. The case report shows the important role of a clear diagnostic work-up and the role of cardiac magnetic resonance in this clinical scenario to reach the final diagnosis of reverse takotsubo cardiomyopathy.