Search

Cardiac implantable electronic devices, including implantable cardioverter-defibrillators and therapy, are part of guideline-indicated treatment for a subset of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Current technological advancements in cardiac implantable electronic devices have allowed the detection of specific physiological parameters that are used to forecast clinical decompensation through algorithmic, multiparameter remote monitoring. Other recent emerging technologies, including cardiac contractility modulation and baroreflex activation therapy, may provide symptomatic or physiological benefits in patients without indications for cardiac resynchronization. Our goal in this state-of-the-art review is to describe the new commercially available technologies, their purported mechanisms of action, and the evidence surrounding their clinical roles, limitations and future directions. Finally, we underline the need for standardized workflow and close interdisciplinary management of this population to ensure the delivery of high-quality care.

Introduction Prospective studies on rivaroxaban and apixaban have shown the safety and efficacy of direct anticoagulation agents (DOAC)s used peri-procedurally during radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of atrial fibrillation (AF). Studies comparing the two agents have not been performed. Methods Consecutive patients from a prospective registry who underwent RFA of AF between April 2012 and March 2015 and were on apixaban or rivaroxaban were studied. Clinical variables and outcomes were noted. Results There were a total of 358 patients (n = 56 on apixaban and n = 302 on rivaroxaban). There were no differences in baseline characteristics between both groups. The last dose of rivaroxaban was administered the night before the procedure in 96% of patients. In patients on apixaban, 48% of patients whose procedure was in the afternoon took the medication on the morning of the procedure. TIA/CVA occurred in 2 patients (0.6%) in rivaroxaban group with none in apixaban group (p = 0.4). There was no difference in the rate of pericardial effusion between apixaban and rivaroxaban groups [1.7% vs 0.6% (p = 0.4)]. Five percent of patients in both groups had groin complications (p = 0.9). In apixaban group, all groin complications were small hematomas except one patient who had a pseudoaneurysm (1.6%). One pseudo-aneurysm, 1 fistula and 3 large hematomas were noted in patients on rivaroxaban (1.7%) with the rest being small hematomas. DOACs were restarted post procedure typically 4 h post hemostasis. Conclusions Peri-procedural uninterrupted use of apixaban and rivaroxaban during AF RFA is safe and there are no major differences between both groups.

Dofetilide is a class III antiarrhythmic drug that has been reported to be safe and efficacious in the treatment of atrial dysrhythmias with a known initial risk of QT prolongation and torsades de pointes (TdP). As a result, the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) mandated in-hospital dofetilide initiation and adherence to a common dosing protocol. However, there is a lack of clarity on how to manage dofetilide re-initiation.An observational survey was performed including 347 cardiologists in the United States and worldwide to evaluate the deviations from approved manufacturer's protocol during dofetilide initiation and re-initiation among practicing cardiologists.Most practicing cardiologists were cautious about outpatient dofetilide use and adhered to the manufacturer's in-patient dofetilide protocol during de-novo initiation and reported low incidence of TdP in clinical practice. There were substantial differences among practicing cardiologists with deviation from the manufacturer's protocol during re-initiation of dofetilide. About 21% cardiologists always admitted patients to the hospital while 37% admitted patients10% of the time for dofetilide re-initiation. Only 4% reported major adverse events with outpatient dofetilide re-initiation. There was also wide variation regarding monitoring of electrolytes and QT interval as an outpatient with dofetilide.There is significant practice pattern variation in the use of dofetilide for the management of AF. This degree of variation noted is concerning and is a reflection of the current lack of substantial clinical evidence in the re-initiation dofetilide protocol to help direct the provider.

Introduction Limited data is available regarding the novel Reveal LinQ™ (LinQ) which is a new generation implantable loop recorders (ILRs). Methods We performed a prospective, observational study of all consecutive patients undergoing conventional (Reveal XT™; XT) and LinQ devices at our institution between January 2012 and December 2014. Results A total of 217 patients underwent ILR implantation. XT was implanted in 105 and LinQ in 112 patients. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups. LinQ implantation using the manufacturer's technique termed, "manufacturer's method" group had significantly higher incidence of pocket infection compared to XT (6/50, 12% vs 3/105, 3%, p=0.032). With modifications to the LinQ implantation technique (using a conventional scalpel and placing a suture when needed to the incision) termed "modified method" group, the rate of infection has decreased significantly compared to "manufacturer's method group" (0/62, 0% vs 6/50, 12%, p=0.004) (Table 3). In multivariate regression analysis, the only independent predictors of infection were younger age (OR 0.95; p=0.04), insertion of LinQ device (OR 30.02; p=0.006) and procedure time (OR 1.07; p=0.03). Conclusion In our single-center, prospective, observational study we found that with the current implantable techniques, the novel insertable LinQ device is associated with increased risk of complications.

Background The fibrous capsule around cardiac implantable device generators is known to promote bacterial colonization and latent infection. Removal of the capsule during device replacement procedures may reduce infection rates but may increase hemorrhagic complications. Objective The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of pocket capsule decortication procedure on infection and bleeding rates in patients undergoing device replacement procedures. Methods In a prospective randomized single-blind control study, patients undergoing device replacement, upgrade, or lead extraction were randomized to Group A "with pocket revision" (n = 131) and group B "without pocket revision" (n = 127). Deep and superficial infection rates, bleeding, and prolonged serous drainage were assessed during 12 months of follow-up. Data were analyzed according to intention-to-treat principle. Results A total of 258 patients were enrolled in the study. Rates of generator change, upgrade, and lead extraction/replacement were similar between both groups. There was no incidence of deep infection in either group at 12-month follow-up. There was no significant difference in the incidence of superficial infection between groups (1.5% vs 4.7%, P = .13) during 12-month follow-up. There was a significant increase in acute hematoma formation in group A compared to group B (6.1% vs 0.8%, P = .03). Two patients in group A had to undergo hematoma evacuation. Conclusion There was increased incidence of hematoma formation in group A with no effect on infection rates. Our study suggests that there is no benefit to performing empiric pocket revision.

Background Despite ACC/AHA guidelines indicating implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) as class I therapy for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in patients with EF≤35%, ICD utilization rates in real world practice have been low. Objective To determine the rate of ICD implantation at a tertiary care academic center and to assess the reasons for under-utilization of the same. Methods Review of a prospectively collected database which included all patients diagnosed with an EF≤35% was performed to assess the rate of ICD implantation and mortality. Reasons for non-implantation of ICD were then assessed from detailed chart review. Results A total of 707 patients (age 69.4 ± 14.1 years) with mean EF of 26±7% were analyzed. Only 28% (200/707) of patients had ICDs implanted. Mortality was lower in the group with ICD (25% vs 37%, p=0.004). When patients who either died or were lost to follow-up prior to 2005 were excluded, ICD utilization rate was still low at 37.6%. The most common reason for non-implantation of ICD was physicians not discussing this option with their patients. Patient refusal was the second most common reason. Conclusions ICD Implantation rates for primary prevention of SCD in patients with EF≤35% is low. Physician and patient education should be addressed to improve the utilization rates.

Cryoballoon pulmonary vein (PV) isolation/ablation is an efficacious treatment of paroxysmal and early persistent atrial fibrillation (AF), including in patients with left common (LC) PV anatomy. The efficacy of cryoballoon ablation is unknown in patients with right middle or accessory (RMA) PVs.

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.

Patients with prosthetic valves have a high prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF). We report a multicenter experience of performing pulmonary vein antral isolation (PVAI) in this challenging, high-risk cohort of patients.The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of radiofrequency (RF) ablation for sinus rhythm restoration in AF patients with mitral or aortic mechanical prosthetic valves.A total of 50 patients with prosthetic valves (group I) who underwent RF ablation for AF between January 1, 2007, and April 30, 2009, were identified prospectively at four tertiary care centers. A matched group of 50 patients (group II) acted as controls.Total procedural time (199.4 ± 49 minutes vs 166.6 ± 27.5 minutes, P.001) and fluoroscopy time (60 ± 17 minutes vs 53.8 ± 6.8 minutes, P.01) were prolonged, with a higher incidence of atrial flutter at 3 months in group I (18% vs 6%, P = .1) compared to group II. At 12 months, 80% of patients in the valve group were in sinus rhythm after an average of 1.3 procedures, and 82% of controls were in sinus rhythm after an average 1.2 procedures (P = .9). There was a trend toward a higher nonfatal complication rate in the valve group than in the control group (8% vs 4%, P = .1).In patients with prosthetic valves, RF ablation for AF is feasible, safe, and efficacious, with a trend toward a higher nonfatal complication rate and an increased rate of postablation atrial flutter.

Patients presenting with frequent ventricular arrhythmias can have underlying myocardial inflammation as an inciting factor. We seek to determine whether the site of origin (SOO) of ventricular arrhythmias on 12 lead EKG correlate with areas of inflammation on FDG PET cardiac imaging in patients

Patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) frequently have arrhythmias warranting catheter ablation (CA). The risk of lead dislodgement with CA in patients with CIED implant within 1 year is uncertain. We retrospectively evaluated patients undergoing CA of arrhythmias at an

Background: Very recently St Jude Medical (SJM) released an advisory regarding premature battery depletion in a family of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) including biventricular cardiac defibrillators (CRTDs). There have been reported cases of loss of pacing and inability to

To evaluate the real-world practice patterns of utilization of dofetilide for treating Atrial Fibrillation (AF). We performed an online survey of cardiologists and cardiac electrophysiologists in US and Europe. Participation was voluntary. 31 specific questions were included in the study, primarily

To evaluate the impact of pre-procedural oral prednisone on inflammatory cytokines (TNF-α, Interleukin (IL)-1, IL-6, and IL-8) levels and outcomes of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation in patients with paroxysmal AF. A total of 60 patients with paroxysmal AF undergoing AF ablation were randomized (

We intended to evaluate the incidence of electrical and mechanical failure of QuickSite (QS) and QuickFlex (QF) left ventricular (LV) leads which are a part of a lead advisory. We invited all 154 alive patients who had the QS and QF leads implanted at our center to participate in this prospective

ratings measuring the effectiveness of training conducted: Working with Proctor Physician during procedure (hands-on) 8.6, Observing Proctor Physician during procedure (observational) 8.45, Lecture/Expert 7.32, Animal Lab 6.85, Simulated Patient (Gen I) 6.2, Heart Model 5.65, Video Tape 5.64. Survey results also indicated that 71% of physicians who attended one or more training programs increased their rate in performing CRT implants. Conclusion: While physician satisfaction is greatest with live hands-on training; simulated hands-on training has the potential to reduce implant complications of live learning and is emerging as a potential surrogate to in-vivo training.