Search

Background: Catheter ablation (CA) and left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) require transseptal access; combining both in a single procedure may have advantages. However, the safety of this approach has not been extensively studied. The objective of this study was to compare in hospital outcomes among patients receiving CA, LAAC, and combination of both treatments on the same day. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of the National Inpatient Sample database. The primary outcome was the presence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) during index hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included stroke, pericardial effusion, pericardiocentesis, and bleeding. Results: A total of 69,285 hospitalizations with AF were included in the analysis, of which 71.7% received LAAC, 27.8% received CA, and 0.5% received combination of both treatments on the same day. MACEE (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 0.39–6.70), stroke (OR, 2.98; 95% CI, 0.55–16.01), pericardial effusion (OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.07–1.41), pericardiocentesis (OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.25–3.86), and bleeding (OR, 3.25; 95% CI, 0.87–12.07) did not differ significantly between CA and combination treatment. Similarly, MACCE (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.28–4.41), stroke (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.24–4.35), pericardial effusion (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.11–1.90), pericardiocentesis (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.14–2.83), and bleeding (OR, 2.04; 95% CI, 0.65–6.39) did not differ significantly between LAAC and combination treatment. Conclusions: The combined approach is infrequently used in clinical practice (< 1%). However, major life-threatening adverse events did not differ between CA and LAAC when performed in isolation or combined in a single procedural stage on the same day. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims To evaluate the efficacy of oesophageal cooling in the prevention of oesophageal injury in patients undergoing atrial fibrillation (AF) catheter ablation. Methods and results Comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases through April 2022 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the role of oesophageal cooling compared with control in the prevention of oesophageal injury during AF catheter ablation. The study primary outcome was the incidence of any oesophageal injury. The meta-analysis included 4 RCTs with a total of 294 patients. There was no difference in the incidence of any oesophageal injury between oesophageal cooling and control [15% vs. 19%; relative risk (RR) 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31–2.41]. Compared with control, oesophageal cooling showed lower risk of severe oesophageal injury (1.5% vs. 9%; RR 0.21; 95% CI 0.05–0.80). There were no significant differences among the two groups in mild to moderate oesophageal injury (13.6% vs. 12.1%; RR 1.09; 95% CI 0.28–4.23), procedure duration [standardized mean difference (SMD) −0.03; 95% CI −0.36–0.30], posterior wall radiofrequency (RF) time (SMD 0.27; 95% CI −0.04–0.58), total RF time (SMD −0.50; 95% CI −1.15–0.16), acute reconnection incidence (RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.02–36.34), and ablation index (SMD 0.16; 95% CI −0.33–0.66). Conclusion Among patients undergoing AF catheter ablation, oesophageal cooling did not reduce the overall risk of any oesophageal injury compared with control. Oesophageal cooling might shift the severity of oesophageal injuries to less severe injuries. Further studies should evaluate the long-term effects after oesophageal cooling during AF catheter ablation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The cardiovascular and renal systems share an intimate physiological relationship, wherein a perturbance in one system may have an adverse effect on the other. Since the burden of renal disease increases with age, there is a considerable interest in the pathophysiology of kidney disease in the geriatric patient population. This review will explore the physiological dynamics behind the increased susceptibility to kidney disease in this population. A better understanding of these pathophysiological changes may lead to improved prevention and management strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Our objective was to determine significant predictors of spinal cord ischemia (SCI) following Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) and to further develop a simple and clinically orientated risk score model. Methods: A retrospective review of data from the Society of Vascular Surgery/Vascular Quality Initiative national data set was performed for all patients undergoing TEVAR from January, 2014 to June 2018. Preoperative demographics, procedure-related variables, and clinical details related to SCI were examined. A SCI risk score was developed utilizing a multivariable logistic regression model. Results: For the 7889 patients in the final analysis who underwent TEVAR during the study period, the mean age was 67.6 ± 13.9, range 18 to 90 years, and the majority was male (65%). Postoperative outcomes included stroke (3.0%), myocardial infarction (2.9%), inhospital mortality (5.4%), transient SCI (1.5%), and permanent SCI (2.1%). Nearly half of the overall cases were performed in high volume centers. Predictors of increased risk for SCI included age by decade (odds ratio [OR]: 1.2), celiac coverage (OR: 1.5), current smoker (OR: 1.6), dialysis (OR: 1.9), 3 or more aortic implanted devices (OR: 1.7), emergent or urgent surgery (OR: 1.5), adjunct aorta-related procedure (OR: 2.5), adjunct not related (OR: 2.6), total estimated length of aortic device (19-31 cm, OR: 1.9 and ≥32 cm, OR: 3.0), ASA class 4 or 5 (OR: 1.6), and procedure time ≥154 minutes (OR: 1.8). Two predictors decreased the risk of SCI, cases from high-volume centers (OR: 0.6) and eGFR ≥ 60 (OR: 0.6). To evaluate the risk score model, probabilities of SCI from the original regression, raw score, and raw score categories resulted in area under the curve statistics of 0.792, 0.786, and 0.738, respectively. Conclusions: Spinal cord ischemia remains one of the most feared complications of TEVAR. Incidence of SCI in this large series of patients with TEVAR was 3.6% with nearly 60% being permanent. The proposed model provides an assessment tool to guide clinical decisions, patient consent process, risk-assessment, and procedural strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) refers to partial or complete occlusion of one or more non-coronary arteries that leads to compromised blood flow and ischemia. Numerous processes are involved in arterial stenosis, however, atherosclerosis remains the most common etiology. PAD constitutes a major health economic problem, and it is estimated that over 200 million people around the world suffer from PAD, with at least 20% having some degree of claudication. The purpose of this review is to compare and contrast the guidelines on PAD published in 2005, 2011 and 2016 in terms of new recommendations and level of evidence for practicing clinicians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Renal artery stenosis may play a significant role in the pathogenesis of secondary hypertension, renal dysfunction, and flash pulmonary edema. Currently correction of renal arterial inflow stenosis is reserved for resistant hypertension patients who have failed maximal medical therapy, have worsening renal function and/or unexplained proximal congestive failure. With the recent advances in minimally invasive percutaneous stent placement techniques, open surgical revascularization has been largely replaced by renal artery stenting. The potential benefit of revascularization seemed intuitive; however, the initial enthusiasm and rise in the number of percutaneous interventions have been tempered by many subsequent negative randomized clinical trials that failed to prove the proposed benefits of the percutaneous intervention. The negative randomized trial results have fallen under scrutiny due to trial design concerns and inconsistent outcomes of these studies compared to pivotal trials undertaken under US Food and Drug Administration scrutiny. Treatment of atherosclerotic renal artery occlusive disease has become one of the most debatable topics in the field of vascular disease. The results from recent randomized clinical trials of renal artery stenting have basically limited the utilization of the procedure in many centers, but not every clinical scenario was covered in those trials. There are potential areas for improvement focusing mainly on procedural details and patient selection with respect to catheter based treatment of atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis. We believe, limiting patient selection, enrollment criteria and outcomes measured functioned to reduce the benefit of renal artery stenosis stenting by not enrolling patients likely to benefit. Future studies incorporating potential procedural improvements and that include patients more likely to benefit from renal stenting than were included in ASTRAL and CORAL are needed to more carefully examine specific patient subgroups so that "the baby is not thrown out with the bath water." We also discuss several other concerns related to renal artery stenting which include diagnostic, procedure, indication, and reimbursement issues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI) is an important consideration in patients undergoing cardiac catheterization. There has been a continuous strive to decrease morbidity and improve procedural safety. This review will address the pathophysiology, predictors, and clinical management of CI-AKI with a concise overview of the pathophysiology and a suggested association with left atrial appendage closure. Minimizing contrast administration and intravenous fluid hydration are the cornerstones of an effective preventive strategy. A few adjunctive pharmacotherapies hold promise, but there are no consensus recommendations on prophylactic therapies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Periprocedural imaging assessment for percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage (LAA) transcatheter occlusion can be obtained by utilizing different imaging modalities including fluoroscopy, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), and ultrasound imaging. Given the complex and variable morphology of the left atrial appendage, it is crucial to obtain the most accurate LAA dimensions to prevent intra-procedural device changes, recapture maneuvers, and prolonged procedure time. We therefore sought to examine the accuracy of the most commonly utilized imaging modalities in LAA occlusion. Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was waived as we only reviewed published data. By utilizing PUBMED which is an integrated online website to list the published literature based on its relevance, we retrieved thirty-two articles on the accuracy of most commonly used imaging modalities for pre-procedural assessment of the left atrial appendage morphology, namely, two-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography, three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography, computed tomography, and three-dimensional printing. There is strong evidence that real-time three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography is more accurate than two-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography. Three-dimensional computed tomography has recently emerged as an imaging modality and it showed exceptional accuracy when merged with three-dimensional printing technology. However, real time three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography may be considered the preferred imaging modality as it can provide accurate measurements without requiring radiation exposure or contrast administration. We will present the most common imaging modality used for LAA assessment and will provide an algorithmic approach including preprocedural, periprocedural, intraprocedural, and postprocedural. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]