Search

ObjectivesThis study sought to examine whether suppressing premature ventricular contractions (PVC) using radiofrequency ablation improves effectiveness of the cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in nonresponders.BackgroundCRT is an effective strategy for drug refractory congestive heart failure. However, one-third of patients with CRT do not respond clinically, and the causes for nonresponse are poorly understood. Whether frequent PVC contribute to CRT nonresponse remains unknown.MethodsIn this multicenter study, CRT nonresponders with >10,000 PVC in 24 h who underwent PVC ablation were enrolled from a prospective database.ResultsSixty-five subjects (age 66.6 ± 12.4 years, 78% men, QRS duration of 155 ± 18 ms) had radiofrequency ablation of PVC from 76 foci. Acute and long-term success rates of ablation were 91% and 88% in 12 ± 4 months of follow-up. There was significant improvement in left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (26.2 ± 5.5% to 32.7 ± 6.7 %, p < 0.001), LV end-systolic diameter (5.93 ± 0.55 cm to 5.62 ± 0.32 cm, p < 0.001), LV end-diastolic diameter (6.83 ± 0.83 cm to 6.51 ± 0.91 cm, p < 0.001), LV end-systolic volume (178 ± 72 to 145 ± 23 ml, p < 0.001), LV end-diastolic volume (242 ± 85 ml to 212 ± 63 ml, p < 0.001), and median New York Heart Association functional class (3.0 to 2.0, p < 0.001). Modeling of pre-ablation PVC burden revealed an improvement in ejection fraction when the pre-ablation PVC burden was >22% in 24 h.ConclusionsFrequent PVC is an uncommon yet significant cause of CRT nonresponse. Radiofrequency ablation of PVC foci improves LV function and New York Heart Association class and promotes reverse remodeling in CRT nonresponders. PVC ablation may be used to enhance CRT efficacy in nonresponders with significant PVC burden.

Objectives The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of uninterrupted rivaroxaban therapy during atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. Background Optimal periprocedural anticoagulation strategy is essential for minimizing bleeding and thromboembolic complications during and after AF ablation. The safety and efficacy of uninterrupted rivaroxaban therapy as a periprocedural anticoagulant for AF ablation are unknown. Methods We performed a multicenter, observational, prospective study of a registry of patients undergoing AF ablation in 8 centers in North America. Patients taking uninterrupted periprocedural rivaroxaban were matched by age, sex, and type of AF with an equal number of patients taking uninterrupted warfarin therapy who were undergoing AF ablation during the same period. Results A total of 642 patients were included in the study, with 321 in each group. Mean age was 63 ± 10 years, with 442 (69%) males and 328 (51%) patients with paroxysmal AF equally distributed between the 2 groups. Patients in the warfarin group had a slightly higher mean HAS- BLED (hypertension, abnormal renal/liver function, stroke, bleeding history or predisposition, labile international normalized ratio, elderly, drugs/alcohol concomitantly) score (1.70 ± 1.0 vs. 1.47 ± 0.9, respectively; p = 0.032). Bleeding and embolic complications occurred in 47 (7.3%) and 2 (0.3%) patients (both had transient ischemic attacks) respectively. There were no differences in the number of major bleeding complications (5 [1.6%] vs. 7 [1.9%], respectively; p = 0.772), minor bleeding complications (16 [5.0%] vs. 19 [5.9%], respectively; p = 0.602), or embolic complications (1 [0.3%] vs. 1 [0.3%], respectively; p = 1.0) between the rivaroxaban and warfarin groups in the first 30 days. Conclusions Uninterrupted rivaroxaban therapy appears to be as safe and efficacious in preventing bleeding and thromboembolic events in patients undergoing AF ablation as uninterrupted warfarin therapy.

Recent increase in the torch flame use for cannabis inhalation is concerning because of its higher butane content and risk of myocarditis. A 36-year-old healthy male presented with myalgias, and suffered an in-hospital asystolic arrest. Coronary angiogram and 2D-Echocardiogram were normal. He

Percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) exclusion can be performed using endocardial occlusion devices or an endoepicardially placed suture delivery device (1-3). Thrombus formation on endocardial occlusion devices (Watchman, Boston Scientific, Marlborough, Massachusetts; or Amplatzer Cardiac Plug [ACP], St. Jude Medical, St. Paul, Minnesota) (1,2) has been attributed to platelet aggregation in the setting of a foreign body in the left atrium (LA). With the percutaneous endoepicardial ligation technique (Lariat, SentreHEART, Redwood City, California), there is no foreign body left behind, and the risk of thrombus formation should be insignificant. This study describes the clinical course of LA thrombi after the Lariat procedure in 19 patients. We conducted a nationwide survey of physicians performing procedures with the Lariat device in the United States to identify patients who developed LA thrombus after the procedure. Our study cohort comprised patients found to have LA thrombus post-procedure. Post-procedure surveillance imaging was not uniform across centers. Most patients underwent transesophageal echocardiogram (TEE)/computed tomography at 1 to 3 months post-procedure. Anticoagulation/antiplatelet therapy was initiated immediately after detection of LA thrombus. We collected demographic, clinical, and pre-procedural imaging characteristics of patients. Procedural variables and clinical course of patients after thrombus detection were recorded. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 19.0 for Windows (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, Illinois). A total of 47 operators participated in the survey. Routine post-procedure imaging was performed by 44 (93.6%) operators. Three (6.4%) operators performed imaging only if clinically indicated. Routine post-procedure follow-up imaging was performed at 1 to 3 months and 3 to 6 months by 80% and 40% of the operators, respectively. Of the 964 patients who underwent the procedure, 19 (2%) had an LA thrombus. Table 1 lists some patient characteristics and includes follow-up data of the 19 patients. TABLE 1 Patient Characteristics and Follow-Up (n = 19) LA thrombus was detected within 90 days in 15 (79%) patients. TEEs performed in the first 6 months were negative for thrombi in 2 patients with clots discovered >200 days after the procedure. Eighteen patients received oral anticoagulants after detection of LA thrombus, whereas 1 patient received antiplatelet therapy. Thrombus remained unchanged at 90 days in the latter patient, requiring a switch to rivaroxaban. Serial TEEs were performed until thrombus resolution. Oral anticoagulation was discontinued in 16 patients after clot resolution, whereas 3 patients with unresolved thrombi remained on anticoagulation (30, 58, and 80 days, respectively). None of the patients had clinical evidence of stroke or peripheral embolism during follow-up. Our study highlights that the risk of LA thrombus formation with the device is low (2%). Most (79%) cases were detected within the first 90 days. Prompt initiation of anticoagulation can lead to thrombus resolution. This is the first investigation to describe the clinical course of LA thrombus post-procedure in a large cohort of patients receiving the Lariat device. In a clinical study involving 89 patients, no case of LA thrombus was detected on the 30-day post-procedure TEE. However, 1 patient had an LA thrombus away from the site of occlusion at 1-year follow-up (3). Our study is consistent in that, although uncommon, an LA thrombus can develop after the procedure. The pathophysiology of LA thrombus formation after the Lariat procedure remains unclear. Focal endocardial damage and inflammation around the LAA orifice secondary to tissue compression from the Lariat suture, causing edema and ischemic necrosis around the ligation site, can increase the propensity for LA thrombus formation. In our study, 17 of 19 (89%) patients developed a thrombus at the ligation site. Currently, there are no clear guidelines on LA thrombus surveillance after LAA ligation. We strongly support a follow-up TEE 30 to 90 days post-procedure. Given that the risk of thrombus formation is greatest during the first 3 months post-procedure, it may be appropriate for patients to receive antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy during this period. The risk of LA thrombus in the absence of anticoagulation use post-procedure is low and is more frequently seen during the first 3 months after LAA ligation. Periodic imaging studies are essential for early detection of an LA thrombus. With prompt initiation of anticoagulation and close supervision, an LA thrombus can be managed safely.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of uninterrupted rivaroxaban therapy during atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation.Optimal periprocedural anticoagulation strategy is essential for minimizing bleeding and thromboembolic complications during and after AF ablation. The safety and efficacy of uninterrupted rivaroxaban therapy as a periprocedural anticoagulant for AF ablation are unknown.We performed a multicenter, observational, prospective study of a registry of patients undergoing AF ablation in 8 centers in North America. Patients taking uninterrupted periprocedural rivaroxaban were matched by age, sex, and type of AF with an equal number of patients taking uninterrupted warfarin therapy who were undergoing AF ablation during the same period.A total of 642 patients were included in the study, with 321 in each group. Mean age was 63 ± 10 years, with 442 (69%) males and 328 (51%) patients with paroxysmal AF equally distributed between the 2 groups. Patients in the warfarin group had a slightly higher mean HAS- BLED (hypertension, abnormal renal/liver function, stroke, bleeding history or predisposition, labile international normalized ratio, elderly, drugs/alcohol concomitantly) score (1.70 ± 1.0 vs. 1.47 ± 0.9, respectively; p = 0.032). Bleeding and embolic complications occurred in 47 (7.3%) and 2 (0.3%) patients (both had transient ischemic attacks) respectively. There were no differences in the number of major bleeding complications (5 [1.6%] vs. 7 [1.9%], respectively; p = 0.772), minor bleeding complications (16 [5.0%] vs. 19 [5.9%], respectively; p = 0.602), or embolic complications (1 [0.3%] vs. 1 [0.3%], respectively; p = 1.0) between the rivaroxaban and warfarin groups in the first 30 days.Uninterrupted rivaroxaban therapy appears to be as safe and efficacious in preventing bleeding and thromboembolic events in patients undergoing AF ablation as uninterrupted warfarin therapy.

We read with great interest the TARGET (Targeted Left Ventricular Lead Placement to Guide Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy) study by Khan et al. ([1][1]), a randomized controlled trial with targeted left ventricular (LV) lead placement to guide cardiac resynchronization therapy. The results of the

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of periprocedural dabigatran during atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation.AF ablation requires optimal periprocedural anticoagulation for minimizing bleeding and thromboembolic complications. The safety and efficacy of dabigatran as a periprocedural anticoagulant for AF ablation are unknown.We performed a multicenter, observational study from a prospective registry including all consecutive patients undergoing AF ablation in 8 high-volume centers in the United States. All patients receiving dabigatran therapy who underwent AF ablation on periprocedural dabigatran, with the dose held on the morning of the procedure, were matched by age, sex, and type of AF with an equal number of patients undergoing AF ablation with uninterrupted warfarin therapy over the same period.A total of 290 patients, including 145 taking periprocedural dabigatran and an equal number of matched patients taking uninterrupted periprocedural warfarin, were included in the study. The mean age was 60 years with 79% being male and 57% having paroxysmal AF. Both groups had a similar CHADS(2) score, left atrial size, and left ventricular ejection fraction. Three thromboembolic complications (2.1%) occurred in the dabigatran group compared with none in the warfarin group (p = 0.25). The dabigatran group had a significantly higher major bleeding rate (6% vs. 1%; p = 0.019), total bleeding rate (14% vs. 6%; p = 0.031), and composite of bleeding and thromboembolic complications (16% vs. 6%; p = 0.009) compared with the warfarin group. Dabigatran use was confirmed as an independent predictor of bleeding or thromboembolic complications (odds ratio: 2.76, 95% confidence interval: 1.22 to 6.25; p = 0.01) on multivariate regression analysis.In patients undergoing AF ablation, periprocedural dabigatran use significantly increases the risk of bleeding or thromboembolic complications compared with uninterrupted warfarin therapy.

We were greatly interested by the study by Wong et al. ([1][1]) on pericardial fat and atrial fibrillation (AF) outcomes. This study further highlights the association of pericardial fat with cardiac disease. The authors remark that pericardial fat may predict the severity and symptomatic burden of