Survival With Continuous Outpatient Intravenous Inotrope Therapy in the Modern Era.

BACKGROUND: To describe baseline characteristics and outcomes in the largest known registry of advanced heart failure (HF) patients receiving continuous outpatient intravenous inotrope therapy. Studies evaluating the use of outpatient inotropes for palliation or as a bridge to advanced therapies were performed before current guideline directed medical and device therapy (GDMDT). There are limited data on the modern experience using outpatient inotrope (OI) therapy. STUDY QUESTION: We aimed to study current use and outcomes of OI. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective database analysis. MEASURES AND OUTCOMES: From 2015 to 2017, 1540 advanced HF patients in a largess nationwide registry received OI with either milrinone or dobutamine. Baseline characteristics of 1149 patients data were retrospectively reviewed. Unadjusted Kaplan-Meier survival estimates censored at the time of transplant or mechanical circulatory support were reported. RESULTS: Of 1149 patients, more patients were treated with milrinone than dobutamine (64.6% vs. 35.4%). Regardless of the indication for OI, estimated 1 and 2-years survival was 61.8% and 41.6%, respectively. Milrinone use was associated with a greater 1-year survival than dobutamine (70.7% vs. 46.2%, P < 0.0001). The superiority of milrinone over dobutamine extended to all indications for OI, including bridge to transplant (85.9% vs. 71.3%, P < 0.0001), bridge to mechanical support (91.4% vs. 71%, P = 0.001), and palliation (73.6% vs. 63.3%, P < 0.001). After adjusting for indication, age, gender and weight, milrinone was associated with lower mortality than dobutamine (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.39-0.64, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In the largest dataset of HF patients receiving OI, survival on OI for palliation in the current era of GDMDT is significantly higher than previously reported. Compared with dobutamine, milrinone was associated with improved survival in all cohorts.

Ablation of long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most commonly encountered arrhythmia in the clinical setting affecting nearly 6 million people in United States and the numbers are only expected to rise as the population continues to age. Broadly it is classified into paroxysmal, persistent and longstanding persistent AF. Electrical, structural and autonomic remodeling are some of the diverse pathophysiological mechanisms that contribute to the persistence of AF. Our review article emphasizes particularly on long standing persistent atrial fibrillation (LSPAF) aspect of the disease which poses a great challenge for electrophysiologists. While pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) has been established as a successful ablation strategy for paroxysmal AF, same cannot be said for LSPAF owing to its long duration, complexity of mechanisms, multiple triggers and substrate sites that are responsible for its perpetuation. The article explains different approaches currently being adopted to achieve freedom from atrial arrhythmias. These mainly include ablation techniques chiefly targeting complex fractionated atrial electrograms (CFAE), rotors, linear lesions, scars and even considering hybrid approaches in a few cases while exploring the role of delayed enhancement magnetic resonance imaging (deMRI) in the pre-procedural planning to improve the overall short and long term outcomes of catheter ablation.