The Maine vein of Marshall ethanol experience: learning curve and safety.

BACKGROUND: The marginal benefit of ethanol infusion into the vein of Marshall (VOM) as an adjunct to atrial fibrillation ablation has shown promise in a single randomized study and case series from very experienced centers. However, adoption has not been widespread and the impact on real-world outcomes outside of leading centers is not established. The objective in this study is to understand the learning curve, and explore procedural outcomes and safety with VOM ethanol infusion from a large single medical center. METHODS: One hundred twenty nine atrial ablation cases wherein VOM ethanol infusion was attempted were identified from the time of the program's inception in 2019 at Maine Medical Center (Portland, ME). Our technical approach, procedural success, and complications were adjudicated from the medical record. RESULTS: The overall VOM ethanol infusion success was 90%. Infusion success rates improved and fluoroscopy utilization decreased with experience. Arrhythmia recurrence was 14% after a mean follow-up of 9.5 months. Complications occurred in 5.4% of patients, including a 3.1% risk of delayed tamponade. CONCLUSION: In our single center experience, VOM ethanol infusion was feasible with a high technical success rate. These positive results are balanced against a concerning rate of delayed tamponade.

Ventricular arrhythmia storms in postinfarction patients with implantable defibrillators for primary prevention indications: a MADIT-II substudy.

BACKGROUND: Much of prognostic implications of ventricular arrhythmia storms remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the risk associated with electrical storm in patients with defibrillators in the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial II (MADIT-II) study. METHODS: Electrical storm was defined as > or =3 episodes of ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) in 24 hours. RESULTS: Of the 719 patients who received internal cardiac defibrillator (ICD) implants and had follow-up in the MADIT-II, 27 patients (4%) had electrical storm, 142 (20%) had isolated episodes of VT/VF, and the remaining 550 patients had no ICD-recorded VT events. Baseline clinical characteristics among the groups were similar. Patients who experienced electrical storm had a significantly higher risk of death. After adjustments for relevant clinical covariates, the hazard ratio (HR) for death in the first 3 months after the storm event was 17.8 (95% confidence interval [CI] 8.0 to 39.5, P <.01) in comparison with those with no VT/VF. This risk continued even after 3 months for those with electrical storm (HR of 3.5, 95% CI 1.2 to 9.8, P = .02). Study patients with isolated VT/VF episodes also were at an increased risk of dying (HR = 2.5, 95% CI 1.5 to 4.0, P <.01) when compared with patients without VT/VF episodes. Statistically significant predictors of electrical storm were interim postenrollment coronary events (myocardial infarction or angina) HR 3.1 (95% CI 1.2 to 8.1, P = .02) and isolated VT or VF HR 9.2 (95% CI 4.0 to 20.9, P <.01). CONCLUSION: Postinfarction patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction in whom electrical storm developed have significantly higher mortality than patients with only isolated VT/VF as well as those without any episodes of VT/VF. Patients who experienced postenrollment ventricular arrhythmias and/or interim coronary events during follow-up were at higher risk for VT/VF storms.

Improved survival associated with prophylactic implantable defibrillators in elderly patients with prior myocardial infarction and depressed ventricular function: a MADIT-II substudy.

INTRODUCTION: We aim to evaluate the mortality benefit from defibrillator therapy in eligible elderly patients. Effective primary prevention of sudden cardiac death with implantable cardioverter defibrillators is well demonstrated in patients with coronary disease and depressed ventricular function. METHODS AND RESULTS: Among 1,232 patients enrolled with prior infarct and left ventricular ejection fraction < or = 0.30, 204 were > or = 75 years old. Of these 204 patients, 121 underwent defibrillator implant. Relative to the younger patients, those > or = 75 years had a higher incidence of atrial fibrillation, elevated blood urea nitrogen (BUN), widened QRS, and lower use of beta-blockers and HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors. Relevant clinical covariates were similar in elderly patients randomized to conventional and defibrillator therapy. The hazard ratio for the mortality risk in patients > or = 75 years assigned to defibrillator implant compared with those in conventional therapy was 0.56 (95 confidence interval 0.29-1.08; P = 0.08) after a mean follow-up of 17.2 months. Comparatively, the hazard ratio in patients < 75 years assigned to defibrillator implant was 0.63 (0.45-0.88; P = 0.01) after 20.8 months. Elderly patients had similar reductions in quality of life (QoL) regardless of treatment randomization. Scores through Health Utilities Index Mark III (HUI) Questionnaire changes from baseline to 1 year were -0.22 for patients with conventional therapy versus -0.20 for patients with ICD, and -0.36 versus -0.27 at 2 years, respectively (P = NS). CONCLUSION: The implantable defibrillator is associated with an equivalent reduction of mortality in elderly and younger patients, with no compromise in the QoL in the older age subjects.

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators for primary prevention: how do the data pertain to the aged?

The incidence of sudden cardiac death increases with age and the proportion of the US population in progressively more advanced age strata is dramatically increasing. While several randomized controlled trials support the use of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) to reduce sudden cardiac death, no randomized trials have been done to evaluate whether there is a mortality benefit of ICDs in an elderly population. In the current review, the authors examined six of the major primary prophylaxis ICD trials for evidence pertaining to the elderly. A majority of these trials suggest a mortality benefit in the elderly patients who have met the stringent inclusion and exclusion criteria to be eligible for enrollment. Subset analysis seems to support ICD implantation in a highly select elderly subgroup, but a prospective randomized trial may be warranted.