Search

We review the current data on epidemiology, the clinical significance, the pathophysiologic mechanisms, and the treatment of VAs in the setting of COVID-19. VAs prevail in 0.15% to 8% of hospitalized patients, but only sustained and rapid tachyarrhythmias are purportedly associated with a significant increase in mortality. Multiple factors can elicit VAs, which are ultimately deemed to be a marker of severe systemic disease rather than a distinct cardiac condition. Even though the electrophysiologist plays a determinant role in the secondary prevention of VAs, a multidisciplinary approach is indispensable for primary prophylaxis and acute management., Competing Interests: Disclosure Dr A. Natale has received speaker honoraria from Boston Scientific, Biosense Webster, St. Jude Medical, Biotronik, and Medtronic; and is a consultant for Biosense Webster, St. Jude Medical, and Janssen. Dr L. Di Biase is a consultant for Biosense Webster, RMG, Stereotaxis, Boston Scientific, and Abbott. Dr L. Di Biase received speaker honoraria/travel from Medtronic, Atricure, and Biotronik. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this article to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The percutaneous epicardial approach has become an adjunctive tool for electrophysiologists to treat disparate cardiac arrhythmias, including accessory pathways, atrial tachycardia, and particularly ventricular tachycardia. This novel technique prompted a strong impulse to perform epicardial access as an alternative strategy for pacing and defibrillation, left atrial appendage exclusion, heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, and genetically engineered tissue delivery. However, because of the incremental risk of major complications compared with stand-alone endocardial ablation, it is still practiced in a limited number of highly experienced centers across the world., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest Dr J.D. Burkhardt is a consultant for Biosense Webster and Stereotaxis. Dr A. Natale has received speaker honoraria from Boston Scientific, Biosense Webster, St. Jude Medical, Biotronik, and Medtronic; and is a consultant for Biosense Webster, St. Jude Medical, and Janssen. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this article to disclose., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Fluoroscopy continues to be considered an indispensable part of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation worldwide. Deleterious effects of radiation exposure to patients, physicians, and catheter laboratory personnel are gaining increased consideration. Safety and efficacy of a fluoroless approach for AF ablation is comparable with outcomes achieved with fluoroscopy use. This article focuses on AF ablation with zero fluoroscopy use as well as current evidence on efficacy and safety of this technique. In contrast, minimal fluoroscopy is an alternative. Relying on intracardiac echocardiography for transseptal access and electroanatomic mapping for catheter manipulation can help implement this approach on a wider scale., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors have no disclosures related to this article., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The optimal ablation strategy for non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation remains controversial. Non-PV triggers have been shown to have a major arrhythmogenic role in these patients. Common sources of non-PV triggers are: posterior wall, left atrial appendage, superior vena cava, coronary sinus, vein of Marshall, interatrial septum, crista terminalis/Eustachian ridge, and mitral and tricuspid valve annuli. These sites are targeted empirically in selected cases or if significant ectopy is noted (with or without a drug challenge), to improve outcomes in patients with non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. This article focuses on summarizing the current evidence and the approach to mapping and ablation of these frequent non-PV trigger sites., Competing Interests: Disclosure Dr L. Di Biase is a consultant for Stereotaxis, Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific, and Abbott Medical; and received speaker honoraria/travel support from Medtronic, Pfizer, Bristol Meyers Squibb, and Biotronik. The other authors have no disclosures., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Left atrial appendage (LAA) is the dominant source of systemic thromboembolic (TE) events in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF). In patients with significant bleeding risk, various LAA exclusion strategies have been developed as an alternative to pharmacologic TE prophylaxis. Nevertheless, in a relatively small percentage of patients, incomplete LAA closure can be documented, either at the time of procedure or during follow-up. This persistent patency can potentially jeopardize an effective stroke prophylaxis. Hereby, we report an update on the current clinical implications of LAA leaks and how to manage them., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Atrial fibrillation catheter ablation has emerged as the most effective strategy to restore and maintain sinus rhythm. The cornerstone of atrial fibrillation ablation is elimination of triggers from the pulmonary veins by pulmonary vein isolation. Nevertheless, some patients may experience atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrences even with permanent pulmonary vein antral isolation. Whether and in which patients pulmonary vein antral isolation should be considered as the only ablation strategy remains a matter of debate. This review aims to summarize the rationale and effectiveness of different ablation approaches and identify key points for a uniform atrial fibrillation ablation strategy., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)