Direct current cardioversion practices following percutaneous left atrial appendage closure.

INTRODUCTION: Among patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) and percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) undergoing direct current cardioversion (DCCV), the need for and use of LAA imaging and oral anticoagulation (OAC) is unclear. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the real-world use of transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) or cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) before DCCV and use of OAC pre- and post-DCCV in patients with AF status post percutaneous LAAC. METHODS: This retrospective single center study included all patients who underwent DCCV after percutaneous LAAC from 2016 to 2022. Key measures were completion of TEE or CCTA pre-DCCV, OAC use pre- and post-DCCV, incidence of left atrial thrombus (LAT) or device-related thrombus (DRT), incidence of peri-device leak (PDL), and DCCV-related complications (stroke, systemic embolism, device embolization, major bleeding, or death) within 30 days. RESULTS: A total of 76 patients with AF and LAAC underwent 122 cases of DCCV. LAAC consisted of 47 (62%), 28 (37%), and 1 (1%) case of Watchman 2.5, Watchman FLX, and Lariat, respectively. Among the 122 DCCV cases, 31 (25%) cases were identified as "non-guideline based" due to: (1) no OAC for 3 weeks and no LAA imaging within 48 h before DCCV in 12 (10%) cases, (2) no OAC for 4 weeks following DCCV in 16 (13%) cases, or (3) both in 3 (2%) cases. Among the 70 (57%) cases that underwent TEE or CCTA before DCCV, 16 (23%) cases had a PDL with a mean size of 3.0 ± 1.1 mm, and 4 (6%) cases had a LAT/DRT on TEE resulting in cancellation. There were no DCCV-related complications within 30 days. DISCUSSION: There is a widely varied practice pattern of TEE, CCTA, and OAC use with DCCV after LAAC, with a 6% rate of LAT/DRT. LAA imaging before DCCV appears prudent in all cases, especially within 1 year of LAAC, to assess for device position, PDL, and LAT/DRT.

Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for left atrial appendage closure planning.

BACKGROUND: Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) are currently utilized for left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) planning. During the recent global iodine contrast media shortage in 2022, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) was utilized for the first time for LAAC planning. This study sought to assess the utility of CMR versus TEE for LAAC planning. METHODS: This single center retrospective study consisted of all patients who underwent preoperative CMR for LAAC with Watchman FLX or Amplatzer Amulet. Key measures were accuracy of LAA thrombus exclusion, ostial diameter, depth, lobe count, morphology, accuracy of predicted device size, and devices deployed per case. Bland-Altman Analysis was used to compare CMR versus TEE measurements of LAA ostial diameter and depth. RESULTS: 25 patients underwent preoperative CMR for LAAC planning. A total of 24 (96%) cases were successfully completed with 1.2 ± 0.5 devices deployed per case. Among the 18 patients who underwent intraoperative TEE, there was no significant difference between CMR versus TEE in LAA thrombus exclusion (CMR 83% vs. TEE 100% cases, p = .229), lobe count (CMR 1.7 ± 0.8 vs. TEE 1.4 ± 0.6, p = .177), morphology (p = .422), and accuracy of predicted device size (CMR 67% vs. TEE 72% cases, p = 1.000). When comparing the difference between CMR and TEE measurements, Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated no significant difference in LAA ostial diameter (CMR-TEE bias 0.7 mm, 95% CI [-1.1, 2.4], p = .420), but LAA depth was significantly larger with CMR versus TEE (CMR-TEE bias 7.4 mm, 95% CI [1.6, 13.2], p = .015). CONCLUSIONS: CMR is a promising alternative for LAAC planning in cases where TEE or CCTA are contraindicated or unavailable.

A unique mapping strategy for localization and ablation of the atrial input of an antegrade only conducting accessory pathway.

The standard technique for accessory pathway ablation involves mapping along the mitral and tricuspid annulus to localize the regions of earliest ventricular activation during antegrade pathway conduction, earliest atrial activation during retrograde conduction or detection of an accessory pathway potential. In some cases despite what appears to be appropriate mapping, catheter positioning and adequate power delivery the ablation is not successful. In many of these cases, the pathway is felt to be inaccessible because of a location remote from the mitral or tricuspid annulus that cannot be affected by endocardial power delivery along the annulus. In the case of difficult left sided pathways, some may be reached and ablated via the coronary sinus or its branches. Right sided pathways cannot be approached in this fashion since there is no venous structure analogous to the coronary sinus around the tricuspid annulus. Alternative mapping and ablation techniques for these difficult pathways have included epicardial mapping via direct pericardial access or attempts to localize pathway insertion areas remote from the valve annulus which may be amenable to endocardial ablation. We describe the use of post-pacing interval mapping to localize the atrial input of a right sided antegrade only accessory pathway that was resistant to conventional mapping and ablation strategies.

A 10 J shock impedance in sinus rhythm correlates with a 65 J defibrillation impedance during subcutaneous defibrillator implantation using an intermuscular technique.

INTRODUCTION: Defibrillation testing (DT) is recommended during the subcutaneous defibrillator (S-ICD) placement. We sought to compare 10 J shock impedance in sinus rhythm (SR) with 65 J defibrillation impedance and evaluate device position on a postimplant chest X-ray (CXR) using an intermuscular (IM) technique. METHODS: Consecutive S-ICD implantations between 12/2019 and 12/2020 at The Ohio State University were reviewed. All implantations were performed using a two-incision IM technique. Standard DT with 65 J shock and 10 J shock in SR were performed unless contraindicated. The PRAETORIAN score was calculated based on CXR. RESULTS: A total of 37 patients (age: 47.2 ± 15.8 years old, male: n = 26 [70.3%], body mass index: 30.1 ± 6.7 kg/m2 ) underwent IM S-ICD implantation, and of those, 27 (73%) underwent both 65 J shock and 10 J shock in SR. The coefficient of determination (R2 ) between 10 J shock impedance and 65 J shock impedance was 0.84. The mean of an impedance difference was 1.6 ± 4.8 Ω (minimum - 11 and maximum 8). Postimplant CXR was available for 33 out of 37 patients (89.2%). The PRAETORIAN score was less than 90 in all patients and the mean score was 32.7 ± 8.8. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that 10 J shock impedance in SR correlated well with 65 J defibrillation impedance during IM S-ICD implantation. An IM implantation technique provides excellent generator location on postimplant CXR. The IM technique combined with 10 J shock in SR may be sufficient to predict and ensure the defibrillation efficacy of the S-ICD.

Incidence of pacing-induced cardiomyopathy in pacemaker-dependent patients is lower with leadless pacemakers compared to transvenous pacemakers.

INTRODUCTION: Frequent right AQ4ventricular pacing (≥40%) with a transvenous pacemaker (TVP) is associated with the risk of pacing-induced cardiomyopathy (PICM). Leadless pacemakers (LPs) have distinct physical and mechanical differences from TVP. The risk of PICM with LP is not known. To identify incidence, predictors, and long-term outcomes of PICM in LP and TVP patients. METHODS: The study comprised all pacemaker-dependent patients with LP or TVP who had left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of ≥50 from 2014 to 2019. The incidence of PICM (≥10% LVEF drop) was assessed with an echocardiogram. Predictors for PICM were identified using multivariate analysis. Long-term outcomes after cardiac resynchronization (CRT) were assessed in both groups. RESULTS: A total of 131 patients with TVP and 67 with LP comprised the study. All patients in the TVP group and the majority in the LP group underwent atrioventricular node ablation. The mean follow-up duration in TVP and LP groups was 592 ± 549 and 817 ± 600 days, respectively. A total of 18 (13.7%) patients in TVP and 2 (3%) in LP developed PICM after a median duration of 254 (interquartile range: 470) days. The incidence of PICM was significantly higher with TVP compared with LP (p = .02). TVP as pacing modality was a positive (odds ratio [OR]: 1.07) while age was negative (OR: 0.94) predictor for PICM on multivariable analysis. Both patients in LP and all except two in the TVP group responded to CRT. CONCLUSION: Incidence of PICM is significantly lower with LP compared with TVP in pacemaker-dependent patients. Age and TVP as pacing modality were predictors for PICM.

RIsk Stratification prior to lead Extraction and impact on major intraprocedural complications (RISE protocol).

BACKGROUND: An internal risk stratification algorithm was developed to decrease the risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) during lead extractions (LEs). OBJECTIVE: To report upon the impact of a risk stratification algorithm (RISE [RIsk Stratification prior to lead Extraction] protocol) on outcomes of LEs in a high-volume center. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained LEs database was performed to identify features associated with MACEs. On the basis of the retrospective data, the RISE protocol differentiated LEs procedures into "High" and "Low" risk for occurrence of MACEs. High-risk LEs included dual-coil defibrillator lead (≥3 years), pacemaker and single-coil lead (≥5 years), and any StarFix coronary sinus lead. During the prospective evaluation of the RISE protocol, "High-risk" LEs were performed in an operating room (OR) or hybrid laboratory with the cardiac anesthesiologist, OR nursing team, perfusionist in the room, and a cardiac surgeon on the premises. "Low-risk" LEs were performed in the electrophysiology (EP) laboratory with anesthesia provided by EP nursing team. The preintervention (pre-RISE) and postintervention (post-RISE) group spanned 19 and 40 months and consisted of 449 (632 leads) and 751 patients (1055 leads), respectively. The primary outcome of MACEs in the two groups was compared. RESULTS: Protocol compliance was 100%. The primary outcome of MACEs occurred in 15 patients (3.34%) before and 12 (1.6%) after implementation of the RISE protocol (P = .04). CONCLUSION: RISE identified a low-risk group where minimal resources are needed and allowed for rapid intervention in the high-risk group that reduced the consequences of MACEs.

Comprehensive strategy to reduce the incidence of lead dislodgement for cardiac implantable electronic devices.

BACKGROUND: Lead dislodgement (LD) is a well-recognized complication during implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). An intraprocedural protocol, referred to as reduction of LD protocol, was developed to reduce the risk of LD. METHODS: The protocol involved (1) inserting a straight stylet down the right atrial lead and applying forward pressure while monitoring for fluoroscopic stability, (2) visualizing all leads during deep inspiration to determine if there is adequate lead redundancy, and (3) having the patient take a deep breath and cough while pacing just at capture threshold to assess for loss of capture in each lead. Any intraprocedural change in the parameters fulfilling the predefined criteria for inadequate lead implantation prompted lead repositioning. Data regarding demographic factors, clinical characteristics, and incidence of LD in the first 30 days after implant was obtained from intramural CIED database. The preintervention (control) group spanned 27 months and consisted of a total of 4,294 leads while the postintervention (intervention) group spanned 17 months and consisted of 2,361 leads implanted. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the demographic factors and clinical characteristics in the two groups. Protocol compliance was > 90%. There were 44 occurrences of LD (1.02%) before and 10 (0.4%) after implementation of the protocol. The protocol significantly reduced the incidence of LD during the 30 days after implant (P = 0.014). No clinical characteristic predicted the risk of LD. CONCLUSION: Intraprocedural maneuvers performed to assess the adequacy of lead implantation results in reduced risk of LD.

Implantation of subcutaneous defibrillator is feasible and safe with monitored anesthesia care.

BACKGROUND: The perioperative anesthesia care during subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) implantation is still evolving. OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility and safety of S-ICD implantation with monitored anesthesia care (MAC) versus general anesthesia (GA) in a tertiary care center. METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective study of patients undergoing S-ICD implantation between October 2012 and May 2019. Patients were categorized into MAC and GA group based on the mode of anesthesia. Procedural success without escalation to GA was the primary endpoint of the study, whereas intraprocedural hemodynamics, need of pharmacological support for hypotension and bradycardia, length of the procedure, stay in the post-anesthesia care unit, and postoperative pain were assessed as secondary endpoints. RESULTS: The study comprises 287 patients with MAC in 111 and GA in 176 patients. Compared to MAC, patients in GA group were younger and had a higher body mass index. All patients had successful S-ICD implantation. Only one patient (0.9%) in the MAC group was converted to GA. Despite a similar baseline heart rate (HR) and mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) in both groups, patients with GA had significantly lower HR and MAP during the procedure and more frequently required pharmacological hemodynamic support. Length of the procedure, stay in the postanesthesia care unit, and postoperative pain was similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: This retrospective experience suggests that implantation of S-ICD is feasible and safe with MAC. Use of GA is associated with more frequent administration of hemodynamic drugs during S-ICD implantation.

Hypertension and Arrhythmias.

Hypertension is the most common cardiovascular risk factor and underlies heart failure, coronary artery disease, stroke, and chronic kidney disease. Hypertensive heart disease can manifest as cardiac arrhythmias. Supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmias may occur in the hypertensive patients. Atrial fibrillation and hypertension contribute to an increased risk of stroke. Some antihypertensive drugs predispose to electrolyte abnormalities, which may result in atrial and ventricular arrhythmias. A multipronged strategy involving appropriate screening, aggressive lifestyle modifications, and optimal pharmacotherapy can result in improved blood pressure control and prevent the onset or delay progression of heart failure, coronary artery disease, and cardiac arrhythmias.

Feasibility of concomitant vacuum-assisted removal of lead-related vegetations and cardiac implantable electronic device extraction.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections associated with large, mobile vegetation adds to the complexity of lead extraction and is associated with significant patient morbidity and mortality. OBJECTIVE: To show the feasibility of concomitant cardiovascular implantable electronic device extraction and vacuum-assisted removal of lead-related vegetations. METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective case series of consecutive patients with persistent bacteremia, sepsis, or endocarditis despite medical therapy who have vegetations >2 cm and subsequently underwent immediate CIED lead extraction after debulking with vacuum-assisted suction. RESULTS: Eight patients underwent successful removal of 17 leads immediately after debulking of vegetations with vacuum-assisted device suction. Debulking procedure was not successful in 1 patient due to inability to direct the vacuum suction device into proper position. There were no intraprocedure complications related to the vacuum-assisted debulking. One patient required open sternotomy for tear of the coronary sinus ostium related to extraction of a left ventricular pacing electrode. There was no mortality within 30 days of the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Based upon these clinical results, it is feasible for patients with infected CIED systems that have large right-sided vegetations to undergo vacuum-assisted debulking then immediately followed by percutaneous CIED removal in whom surgical removal is considered high risk.

Clinical experience with wearable cardioverter defibrillators at a tertiary electrophysiology program.

BACKGROUND: A wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) is an alternative for patients who are not immediate candidates for an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 242 patients prescribed a WCD from January 2014 through March 2015 with 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: A WCD was prescribed to 242 patients during the 15-month period. Forty-one patients were excluded due to lack of complete follow-up. The remaining 201 patients received a WCD for primary or secondary prevention of SCD. Seventy-nine percent of WCDs were prescribed by nonelectrophysiologists. Underlying etiologies for the WCD prescription included: 38% nonischemic cardiomyopathy, 25% recent myocardial infarction, 16% newly diagnosed ischemic cardiomyopathy, 12% documented ventricular arrhythmia, 6% ICD lead extraction, and 3% had high risk conditions for sudden cardiac death. During 1-year follow-up, 96 patients (48%) received an ICD and five patients (2.5%) received appropriate shocks and one patient (0.5 %) received an inappropriate shock. Other 105 (52%) patients subsequently did not require an ICD due to either improvement in ejection fraction, refusal of ICD therapy, or death. CONCLUSIONS: About half of patients prescribed a WCD subsequently receive an ICD and the rate of appropriate shock therapy from the WCD is 2.5%.

Initiation and outcomes with Class Ic antiarrhythmic drug therapy.

BACKGROUND: Expert opinion recommends performing exercise testing with initiation of Class Ic antiarrhythmic medication. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the rate and reason for discontinuation of Ic agent within the first year of follow up, with particular attention to rate of proarrhythmia and the value of routine treadmill testing. METHODS: This is a single center retrospective cohort study including consecutive patients with atrial arrhythmias who were initiated on a Class Ic agent from 2011 to 2016. Data was collated from chart review and pharmacy database. RESULTS: The study population included 300 patients (55% male, mean age 61; mean ejection fraction, 56%) started on flecainide (n = 153; 51%) and propafenone (n = 147; 49%). Drug initiation was completed while hospitalized on telemetry and the staff electrophysiologists directed dosing. There was one proarrhythmic event during initiation (0.3%). The primary reason for not being discharged on Ic agent was due to detection of proarrhythmia (n = 15) or ischemia (n = 1) with treadmill testing (5.3%). Exercise testing was the single significant variable to affect the decision to discontinue Ic drug, p < 0.0001 (95% CI: 1.89-6.08%). During follow up, the primary reason for discontinuation of Ic agent was lack of efficacy, 32%. CONCLUSIONS: With proper screening, initiation of Class Ic agent is associated with very low rate of proarrhythmia. Treadmill testing is of incremental value and should be completed in all patients after loading Class Ic antiarrhythmic.

Defibrillation thresholds with right pectoral implantable cardioverter defibrillators and impact of waveform tuning (the Tilt and Tune trial).

AIMS: Assess defibrillation thresholds (DFTs) with right active pectoral implantable cardioverter defibrillator (RICDs). Defibrillation thresholds in patients receiving RICDs are regarded as 'high' and potentially improved by waveform optimization (tuning). However, this has not been systematically tested. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients receiving RICDs [Single chamber (VVI) = 16, DDD = 32, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) = 43] were randomized to either 50/50% fixed tilt (FT) or tuned waveform (3.5 ms time constant based). Defibrillation threshold was tested with a binary search protocol in single coil anodal configuration. Then RICDs were compared with left-sided placements. Baseline patient characteristics in FT (n = 54) and tuned (n = 37) were similar (65 ± 14 years, 71% male, Left ventricular ejection fraction 31 ± 13%; and proportions VVI/DDD/Cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator). Tuning reduced Phase 1 by 15% and Phase 2 by 45%. For FT vs. tuned: high voltage impedance was 61.9 ± 13.2 vs. 64.5 ± 12.7 Ω (P = 0.33) and mean DFT 14.2 ± 8.8 vs. 14.9 ± 9.2 J (P = 0.8). When high voltage impedance was >62 Ω (mean 73.6 ± 8.6 Ω), DFT was identical [FT 13.0 ± 7.9 J vs. tuned 12.0 ± 5.9 J (P= 0.7)]. Defibrillation thresholds exceeded 20 J (600 V) in >20% of patients [FT 11/54 (20.4%) vs. tuned 12/37 (32%) patients]. Defibrillation threshold with RICD was greater and exhibited wider dispersion compared with left ICDs (n = 54) under similar conditions. CONCLUSION: This first randomized trial investigating DFTs with right ICDs confirms relatively higher DFTs with RICDs than reported for left pectoral ICDs. However, DFTs were generally unaffected by 3.5 ms time constant-based waveform tuning compared with a 50% tilt waveform. Implant testing may be preferred with RICDs. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT00873691.

The Impact of Inappropriate Implantable Cardiac Defibrillator Shocks on Cardiovascular Morbidity and Mortality.

BACKGROUND: The impact of inappropriate implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) shocks on cardiac outcomes is controversial. Shocks due to lead noise are unique in that they are not an outcome of worsening rhythm status. In this study, we compared the outcome of patients with and without inappropriate shocks who underwent Sprint Fidelis lead (Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA) extraction. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 147 patients who underwent Sprint Fidelis lead extraction in our institution between May 2007 and August 2012. The patients were separated into those with (Group 1) and without (Group 2) inappropriate shocks due to lead noise. Pertinent data were obtained from chart review. RESULTS: There were 57 and 90 patients in Groups 1 and 2, respectively. The mean ± standard deviation number of inappropriate shocks in Group 1 was 16 ± 22. There was no difference in the baseline demographics, risk factors, and cardiac history between the groups. There were no extraction-related deaths and there was no difference in the rate of periprocedural complications between the groups. The mean total hospital length of stay (LOS) was longer for Group 1 versus 2; however, the mean postprocedure LOS was the same between the groups. During follow-up, there was no difference in the cardiac readmission rate over a 1-year period (four vs seven patients in Group 1 vs 2, respectively; P = 0.8). Long-term follow-up revealed similar mortality rates in both groups. (18 patients in Group 1, and 21 patients in Group 2; P = 0.8). CONCLUSIONS: Inappropriate shocks due to lead noise do not seem to predispose to a worse clinical outcome after ICD lead extraction.

Incidence and temporal evolution of delayed peridevice leak after left atrial appendage closure.

BACKGROUND: Peridevice leak (PDL) after left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) portends adverse outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the incidence, predictors, clinical implications, and temporal evolution of PDL after LAAC. METHODS: This single-center retrospective study included all patients who underwent LAAC with Watchman FLX and had no PDL detected at the time of implantation. The primary end point was the incidence of new PDL at initial imaging. The composite secondary end point included continued oral anticoagulation after initial imaging, device-related thrombus, stroke or transient ischemic attack, major bleeding, and need for PDL closure at longest follow-up. Temporal evolution of PDL was assessed in patients with available surveillance imaging. RESULTS: Of the 355 patients who completed imaging at 47 days (interquartile range [IQR] 44-50 days), 139 (39%) had new PDL with a mean leak size of 3.2 ± 1.4 mm (median 3.0 mm; IQR 2.0-4.0 mm; range 1.0-9.0 mm). Multiple deployment attempts and larger device size were positive predictors of PDL, while increased contrast volume administration was a negative predictor of PDL. The composite secondary end point occurred in 42 (30%) patients with PDL and 33 (15%) patients without PDL (P < .001). Of the 139 patients with PDL, 43 (31%) had surveillance imaging where the leak size regressed from 3.7 ± 1.8 mm at 46 days (IQR 44-51 days) to 1.7 ± 2.0 mm at 189 days (IQR 158-285 days) (P < .001). The leak size regressed in 33 (77%), remained stable in 4 (9%), and progressed in 6 (14%) cases. CONCLUSION: Despite design improvements, LAAC with Watchman FLX demonstrates a significant incidence of PDL with meaningful clinical implications. Regardless of initial size, most leaks regressed over time.

A rare case of permanent junctional reciprocating tachycardia ablated on the roof of the left atrium.

Left-sided anteroseptal accessory pathways that course through the aortomitral fibrous continuity are some of the rarest types of accessory pathways. At this region the atrium and ventricle are separated by their greatest distance because of the intervening aortic valve. These pathways often have a long circuitous course that may involve the root and cusps of the aortic valve. Prior reports have demonstrated the feasibility of ablating these pathways along the anteroseptal mitral annulus, the left ventricular outflow tract, or in the left or noncoronary cusps of the aortic valve. We describe a case of a concealed decremental anteroseptal accessory pathway that was ablated on the roof of the left atrium remote from the mitral or aortic valve annuli. This report indicates that when an appropriate site for ablation of a left-sided anteroseptal accessory pathway is not found close to a valve annulus, these pathways may be amenable to ablation by targeting their atrial insertion site.