High defibrillation threshold: the science, signs and solutions.

Defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing has traditionally been an integral part of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation. With the increasing number of patients receiving ICDs, physicians are encountering high DFT more often than before. Tackling the problem of high DFT, warrants an in-depth understanding of the science of defibrillation including the key electrophysiological concepts and the underlying molecular mechanisms. Numerous factors have been implicated in the causation of high DFT. Due consideration to the past medical history, pharmacotherapy, laboratory data and cardiac imaging, help in assessing the pre-procedural risk for occurrence of high DFT. Drugs, procedural changes, type and location of ICD lead system are some of the key players in predicting DFT during implantation. In the event of encountering an unacceptably high DFT, we recommend to follow a step-wise algorithm. Ruling out procedural complications like pneumothorax and tamponade is imperative before embarking on a search for potentially reversible clinical or metabolic derangements. Finally, if these attempts fail, the electrophysiologist must choose from a wide range of options for device adjustment and system modification. Although this review article is meant to be a treatise on the science, signs and solutions for high DFT, it is bound by limitations of space and scope of the article.

A comparison of endoscopic and non-endoscopic biliary intervention outcomes in patients with prior bariatric surgery.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Endoscopic biliary intervention (BI) is often difficult to perform in patients with prior bariatric surgery (BRS). We sought to analyze outcomes of patients with prior BRS undergoing endoscopic and non-endoscopic BI. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2007 - 2011) was reviewed to identify all adult inpatients (≥ 18 years) with a history of BRS undergoing BI. The clinical outcomes of interest were in-patient mortality, length of stay (LOS), and total hospital charges. RESULTS: There were 7,343 patients with prior BRS who underwent BIs where a majority were endoscopic (4,482 vs. 2,861, P  < 0.01). The mean age was 50±30.8 years and the majority were females (80.5 %). Gallstone-related disease was the most common indication for BI and managed more often with primary endoscopic management (2,146 vs. 1,132, P  < 0.01). Inpatient mortality was not significantly different between patients undergoing primary endoscopic versus non-endoscopic BI (0.2 % vs. 0.7 %, P  = 0.2). Patients with sepsis were significantly more likely to incur failed primary endoscopic BI (OR 2.74, 95 % CI 1.15, 6.53) and were more likely to be managed with non-endoscopic BI (OR 2.13, 95 % CI 1.3, 3.5). Primary non-endoscopic BI and failed endoscopic BI were both associated with longer LOS (by 1.77 days, P  < 0.01 and by 2.17 days, P  < 0.01, respectively) and higher hospitals charges (by $11,400, P  < 0.01 and by $ 14,200, P  < 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSION: Primary endoscopic management may be a safe and cost-effective approach for patients with prior BRS who need BI. While primary endoscopic biliary intervention is more common, primary non-endoscopic intervention may be used more often for sepsis.

Application of optical coherence tomography in the treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions.

Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is a novel intravascular imaging modality with excellent resolution. We report the application of OCT in 3 coronary bifurcation interventions, in which OCT allowed optimization of the final procedural result, by detecting a dissection, intracoronary thrombus and by confirming complete ostial coverage by a stent.