Search

Introduction Reprocessing of electrophysiology (EP) catheters in daily routine varies through countries and may depend on national laws, catheter (cath.) models or supplier. Data on reprocessing of EP materials is sparse and remains a matter of controversy. The aim of this study is to collect data on reprocessing usage through EHRA countries. Methods and results A structured online questionnaire comprising 27 questions was distributed among electrophysiologists in EHRA countries. Two-hundred-and-two participants from 34 countries completed the survey (161 males, 36.8 ± 5.8 years old). Overall, 111 (55%) of respondents currently use reprocessed materials and 30 (15%) have used them in the past. Cables, diagnostic cath. with deflectable curve and diagnostic cath. with fixed curve were the most frequently reprocessed materials (87%, 80% and 78% respondents, respectively). Maximum number of times (median) a cath. was usually reprocessed was 6 for diagnostic cath. and 5 for ablation cath. Among potential benefits of reprocessing, cost reduction for the providing hospital (65%), cost reduction for the health provider (42%) and making EP procedure available for more patients (42%) were most frequently reported. Respondents reported a need to change the reprocessed material due to its insufficient functionality in around 15% of cases. They were also concerned about the quality of the reprocessed material (58%), contamination issues (52%) and loss of precision (47%). Nineteen (17%) users of reprocessed EP material reported at least one complication potentially related to the reprocessing during their whole reprocessing experience. Sixty-six (73%) respondents who did not use reprocessed EP material would consider using it in the future. Conclusions Reprocessing of EP material is heterogeneously managed among the EHRA countries, as wide differences are present in terms of national and local regulations, clinical practice and technical aspects. Nonetheless, the current data show that European electrophysiologists consider the use of reprocessed EP material as generally safe and cost-effective.

AIMS: Therapy with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is established for the prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in high risk patients. We aimed to determine the effectiveness of primary prevention ICD therapy by analysing registry data from 14 centres in 11 European countries compiled between 2002 and 2014, with emphasis on outcomes in women who have been underrepresented in all trials. METHODS AND RESULTS: Retrospective data of 14 local registries of primary prevention ICD implantations between 2002 and 2014 were compiled in a central database. Predefined primary outcome measures were overall mortality and first appropriate and first inappropriate shocks. A multivariable model enforcing a common hazard ratio for sex category across the centres, but allowing for centre-specific baseline hazards and centre specific effects of other covariates, was adjusted for age, the presence of ischaemic cardiomyopathy or a CRT-D, and left ventricular ejection fraction ≤25%. Of the 5033 patients, 957 (19%) were women. During a median follow-up of 33 months (IQR 16-55 months) 129 women (13%) and 807 men (20%) died (HR 0.65; 95% CI: [0.53, 0.79], P-value