Search

Mohit K Turagam, Poonam Velagapudi, Greg C FlakerDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Missouri School of Medicine, Columbia, MO, USAAbstract: Stroke prevention in elderly atrial fibrillation patients remains a challenge. There is a high risk of stroke and systemic thromboembolism but also a high risk of bleeding if anticoagulants are prescribed. The elderly have increased chronic kidney disease, coronary artery disease, polypharmacy, and overall frailty. For all these reasons, anticoagulant use is underutilized in the elderly. In this manuscript, the benefits of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants compared with warfarin in the elderly patient population with multiple comorbid conditions are reviewed.Keywords: non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants, novel oral anticoagulants, warfarin, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban

Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is an emerging technology for the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF), for which pre-clinical and early-stage clinical data are suggestive of some degree of preferentiality to myocardial tissue ablation without damage to adjacent structures. Here in the MANIFEST-17K study we assessed the safety of PFA by studying the post-approval use of this treatment modality. Of the 116 centers performing post-approval PFA with a pentaspline catheter, data were received from 106 centers (91.4% participation) regarding 17,642 patients undergoing PFA (mean age 64, 34.7% female, 57.8% paroxysmal AF and 35.2% persistent AF). No esophageal complications, pulmonary vein stenosis or persistent phrenic palsy was reported (transient palsy was reported in 0.06% of patients; 11 of 17,642). Major complications, reported for ~1% of patients (173 of 17,642), were pericardial tamponade (0.36%; 63 of 17,642) and vascular events (0.30%; 53 of 17,642). Stroke was rare (0.12%; 22 of 17,642) and death was even rarer (0.03%; 5 of 17,642). Unexpected complications of PFA were coronary arterial spasm in 0.14% of patients (25 of 17,642) and hemolysis-related acute renal failure necessitating hemodialysis in 0.03% of patients (5 of 17,642). Taken together, these data indicate that PFA demonstrates a favorable safety profile by avoiding much of the collateral damage seen with conventional thermal ablation. PFA has the potential to be transformative for the management of patients with AF., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Pulsed field ablation is a novel nonthermal cardiac ablation modality using ultra-rapid electrical pulses to cause cell death by a mechanism of irreversible electroporation. Unlike the traditional ablation energy sources, pulsed field ablation has demonstrated significant preferentiality to myocardial tissue ablation, and thus avoids certain thermally mediated complications. However, its safety and effectiveness remain unknown in usual clinical care., Methods: MANIFEST-PF (Multi-National Survey on the Methods, Efficacy, and Safety on the Post-Approval Clinical Use of Pulsed Field Ablation) is a retrospective, multinational, patient-level registry wherein patients at each center were prospectively included in their respective center registries. The registry included all patients undergoing postapproval treatment with a multielectrode 5-spline pulsed field ablation catheter to treat atrial fibrillation (AF) between March 1, 2021, and May 30, 2022. The primary effectiveness outcome was freedom from clinical documented atrial arrhythmia (AF/atrial flutter/atrial tachycardia) of ≥30 seconds on the basis of electrocardiographic data after a 3-month blanking period (on or off antiarrhythmic drugs). Safety outcomes included the composite of acute (<7 days postprocedure) and latent (>7 days) major adverse events., Results: At 24 European centers (77 operators) pulsed field ablation was performed in 1568 patients with AF: age 64.5±11.5 years, female 35%, paroxysmal/persistent AF 65%/32%, CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc 2.2±1.6, median left ventricular ejection fraction 60%, and left atrial diameter 42 mm. Pulmonary vein isolation was achieved in 99.2% of patients. After a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 367 (289-421) days, the 1-year Kaplan-Meier estimate for freedom from atrial arrhythmia was 78.1% (95% CI, 76.0%-80.0%); clinical effectiveness was more common in patients with paroxysmal AF versus persistent AF (81.6% versus 71.5%; P =0.001). Acute major adverse events occurred in 1.9% of patients., Conclusions: In this large observational registry of the postapproval clinical use of pulsed field technology to treat AF, catheter ablation using pulsed field energy was clinically effective in 78% of patients with AF., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Reddy reports receiving consulting fees (and equity—now divested) from Farapulse Inc. and is a consultant for Boston Scientific Inc; unrelated to this manuscript, Dr Reddy also serves as a consultant for and has equity in Ablacon, Acutus Medical, Affera-Medtronic, Apama Medical-Boston Scientific, Anumana, APN Health, Aquaheart, Atacor, Autonomix, Axon Therapies, Backbeat, BioSig, CardiaCare, CardioNXT/ AFTx, Circa Scientific, CoRISMA, Corvia Medical, Dinova-Hangzhou DiNovA EP Technology, East End Medical, EPD-Philips, EP Frontiers, Epix Therapeutics-Medtronic, EpiEP, Eximo, Field Medical, Focused Therapeutics, HRT, Intershunt, Javelin, Kardium, Keystone Heart, LuxMed, Medlumics, Middlepeak, Neutrace, Nuvera-Biosense Webster, Oracle Health, Restore Medical, Sirona Medical, SoundCath, Valcare; unrelated to this work, has served as a consultant for AtriAN, Biosense-Webster, BioTel Heart, Biotronik, Cairdac, Cardiofocus, Cardionomic, CoreMap, Fire1, Gore & Associates, Impulse Dynamics, Medtronic, Novartis, Philips, Pulse Biosciences; and has equity in Manual Surgical Sciences, Newpace, Nyra Medical, Surecor, and Vizaramed. Dr Schmidt reports receiving speaker’s fees and research grants from Boston Scientific/Farapulse, Medtronic, Biosense Webster, and Abbott. Dr Reichlin reports research grants from the Swiss National Science Foundation, the Swiss Heart Foundation, and the sitem insel Support Fund. Speaker/consulting honoraria or travel support from Abbott/SJM, Bayer, Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, Medtronic, and Pfizer-BMS. Support for his institution’s fellowship programme from Abbott/SJM, Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic. Dr Roten reports receiving speaker honoraria from Abbott/SJM, consulting honoraria from Medtronic, and research funding to the institution from Medtronic. Dr Neven reports speaker’s fees from Farapulse, Inc. Dr Metzner reports research grant and fees from Farapulse. Dr Rollin reports receiving research grant from Farapulse. Dr Lemoine reports receiving research grant from Farapulse. Dr Hansen reports receiving speaker fees and grant support from Biosense Webster, and Medtronic. Dr Blaauw reports receiving research grants from Medtronic and Atricure and consulting fees from Abbott, Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific. Dr Sommer reports member of the advisory board for Abbott, Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic. Dr Anic reports receiving consultant fees from Farapulse Inc., Boston Scientific Inc., Galaxy Medical Inc., Biosense Webster, and performs contracted research for Farapulse Inc., Boston Scientific Inc., Galaxy Medical Inc., and Biosense Webster. Dr Anselme reports receiving consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Microport CRM. Dr Boveda reports receiving consulting fees from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Microport, Zoll, and BMS. Dr Deneke reports receiving speaker honoraria from Galaxy Medical, Abbott, and Biotronik, being a consultant to Farapulse, and serving on a Clinical Events Committee for Boston Scientific. Dr Willems reports receiving grants and personal fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Brystol Myers Squibb, Bayer Vital, Accutus, Daiichi, and Farapulse Inc. Dr Gunawardene reports grants from Farapulse Inc. and Abbott. Dr Tilz reports receiving consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Abbott Medical, Biotronik, Biosense Webster and speaker honorarium from Boston Scientific, Abbott Medical, Biotronik, and Biosense Webster. Dr Heeger received travel grants and research grants by Boston Scientific, Lifetech, Biosense Webster, and Cardiofocus and Speaker´s Honoraria from Boston Scientific, Lifetech. Biosense Webster, Bayer, and Cardiofocus. He is a consultant of Medtronic, Lifetech, Boston Scientific, Biosense Webster, and Cardiofocus. Dr Scheer reports receiving an educational grant from Farapulse Inc. and is a consultant for Boston Scientific Inc. Dr Wakili reports receiving consultant fees and travel expenses from Boston Scientific and Biotronik; investigator-initiated funding for research projects (initiated by him) from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, and Boston Scientific; and speaking honoraria from Boston Scientific, Biotronik, and Medtronic. Dr Steven reports receiving speaking fees from Pfizer, Bayer, Abbott, Johnson & Johnson, and Medtronic; grants from Abbott, Johnson & Johnson, and Boston Scientific; and consulting fees from Boston Scientific and Johnson & Johnson. Dr Sultan reports receiving lecture and consulting honoraria from Medtronic, Abbott, and Bayer. Dr Kautzner reports personal fees from Bayer, Biosense Webster, Boehringer Ingelheim, Medtronic, and Abbott for participation in scientific advisory boards, and has received speaker honoraria from Bayer, Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Boehringer Ingelheim, CathVision, Medtronic, Mylan, Pfizer, ProMed, and Abbott. Dr Jais reports receiving equity from Farapulse and consulting fees and grant from Boston Scientific. Dr Derval reports receiving consulting fees from Boston scientific. Dr Chun reports receiving speaker’s fees and research grants from Boston Scientific/Farapulse, Medtronic, Biosense Webster, and Abbott. Dr Neuzil reports receiving grants from the Ministry of Health, Czech Republic, DRO (NHH, 00023884). Dr Manninger reports receiving speaker fees from Bayer, Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Amomed, AOP Orphan, Boston Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, BMS/Pfizer and research grants from Biosense Webster and Abbott. All remaining authors have declared no conflict of interest.

Background: Preclinical studies have revealed that pulsed field ablation (PFA) lesion dimensions increase with repetitive applications at a similar electric field., Objectives: This study investigated whether pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) durability varies with single vs repetitive pulsed field (PF) applications., Methods: Atrial fibrillation patients underwent PVI using a spherical multielectrode array PFA catheter delivered with a 19-F deflectable sheath under intracardiac echocardiographic guidance. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy and brain magnetic resonance imaging were performed within 1 to 3 days, and invasive remapping at ∼2 to 3 months., Results: The patient cohort (n = 21; age 63 ± 11 years; 67% women) underwent PVI in either of 2 groups: group 1 (n = 11)-single PF application/PV; and group 2 (n = 10)-3 PF applications/PV. In both groups, PVI was acutely successful in all (100%) patients. Despite significantly longer pulse delivery times (75.2 ± 7.4 s/patient vs 24.5 ± 5.5 s/patient) the procedure times (73.2 ± 13.7 minutes vs 93.7 ± 18.5 minutes) were shorter with group 2 vs group 1. There was no stroke/transient ischemic attack, pericardial effusion, phrenic nerve injury, or esophageal complications. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy was normal in both groups of patients (n = 9). Screening brain magnetic resonance imaging revealed asymptomatic cerebral lesions (diffusion weighted imaging+/fluid attenuated inversion recovery-) in 3 of 16 (18.7%) patients. PV remapping revealed durable PVI in 62.5% PVs in group 1 (n = 10), compared with all 100% PVs in group 2 (n = 9); this translates to all PVs being durably isolated in 30% vs 100% (P < 0.05) of patients in groups 1 and 2, respectively., Conclusions: In his first-in-human trial, the "single-shot" spherical array PFA catheter was shown to safely isolate PVs. Repetitive PF application is key for lesion consolidation to maximize PVI durability., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Drs Neuzil and Koruth have received grant support from Kardium Inc. Dr Reinders is an employee of and holds stock in Kardium Inc. Dr Reddy has served as a consultant to Kardium Inc (including Equity); is a consultant to Abbott, Ablacon, Acutus Medical, Affera-Medtronic, Apama Medical-Boston Scientific, APN Health, Aquaheart, Atacor, AtiAN, Autonomix, Axon Therapies, Backbeat, BioSig, Biosense-Webster, BioTel Heart, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Cairdac, CardiaCare, Cardiofocus, Cardionomic, CardioNXT / AFTx, Circa Scientific, CoreMap, CoRISMA, Corvia Medical, Dinova-Hangzhou DiNovA EP Technology, East End Medical, EBR, EPD-Philips, EP Frontiers, Epix Therapeutics, EpiEP, Eximo, Farapulse-Boston Scientific, Fire1, Focused Therapeutics, Gore & Associates, HRT, Impulse Dynamics, Intershunt, Javelin, Keystone Heart, LuxMed, Medlumics, Medtronic, Middlepeak, Neutrace, Nuvera-Biosense Webster, Oracle Health, Philips, Pulse Biosciences, Restore Medical, Sirona Medical, SoundCath, and Valcare; and has equity from Ablacon, Acutus Medical, Affera-Medtronic, Apama Medical-Boston Scientific, APN Health, Aquaheart, Atacor, Autonomix, Axon Therapies, Backbeat, BioSig, CardiaCare, CardioNXT / AFTx, Circa Scientific, CoRISMA, Corvia Medical, Dinova-Hangzhou DiNovA EP Technology, East End Medical, EPD-Philips, EP Frontiers, Epix Therapeutics, EpiEP, Eximo, Farapulse-Boston Scientific, Focused Therapeutics, HRT, Intershunt, Javelin, Keystone Heart, LuxMed, Manual Surgical Sciences, Medlumics, Middlepeak, Neutrace, Newpace, Nuvera-Biosense Webster, Nyra Medical, Oracle Health, Restore Medical, Sirona Medical, SoundCath, Surecor, Valcare, and Vizaramed. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: During atrial fibrillation ablations using thermal energy, the treatment effect is attributed to not just pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), but also to modulation of the autonomic nervous system by ablation of cardiac ganglionated plexi (GP)., Objectives: This study sought to assess the impact of pulsed field ablation (PFA) on the GP in patients undergoing PVI., Methods: In the retrospective phase, heart rate was assessed pre- versus post-PVI using PFA, cryoballoon ablation, or radiofrequency ablation. In the prospective phase, a pentaspline PFA catheter was used in a protocol: 1) pre-PFA, high-frequency stimulation (HFS) identified GP sites by vagal effects; 2) PVI was performed assessing for repetitive vagal effects over each set of PF applications; 3) mapping defined PVI extent to identify those GP in the ablation zone; and 4) repeat HFS at GP sites to assess for persistence of vagal effects., Results: Between baseline and 3 months, heart rates in the retrospective radiofrequency ablation (n = 40), cryoballoon (n = 40), and PFA (n = 40) cohorts increased by 8.9 ± 11.4, 11.1 ± 9.4, and -0.1 ± 9.2 beats/min, respectively (P= 0.01 PFA vs radiofrequency ablation; P= 0.01 PFA vs cryoballoon ablation). In the prospective phase, pre-PFA HFS in 20 additional patients identified 65 GP sites. During PFA, vagal effects were noted in 45% of first PF applications, persisting through all applications in 83%. HFS post-PFA reproduced vagal effects in 29 of 38 sites (76%) in low-voltage tissue., Conclusions: PFA has minimal effect on GP. Unlike with thermal ablation, the mechanism by which PFA treats atrial fibrillation is mediated solely by durable PVI., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Neuzil has received grant support from, and has served as a consultant to Farapulse Inc. Dr Dukkipati has equity in Farapulse Inc. Dr Reddy has served as a consultant to and owns equity in Farapulse Inc, Ableton, Acutus Medical, Affera, Apama Medical–Boston Scientific, APN Health, Aquaheart, Atacor, Autonomix, Axon Therapies, Backbeat, BioSig, CardiaCare, CardioNXT/AFTx, Circa Scientific, CoRISMA, Corvia Medical, Dinova-Hangzhou DiNOVA EP Technology, East End Medical, EPD-Philips, EP Frontiers, EPIX Therapeutics, EpiEP, Eximo, HRT, Intershunt, Javelin, Kardium, Keystone heart, LuxMed, Medlumics, Middlepeak, Neutrace, Nuvera-Biosense Weber, Oracle Health, Restore Medical, Sirona Medical, and Valcare, is a consultant to Abbott, AtiAN, Biosense-Webster, BioTel Heart, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Cardiofocus, Cardionomic, CoreMap, EBR, Fire1, W. L. Gore and Associates, Impulse Dynamics, Medtronic, Philips, and Pulse Biosciences, and holds equity in Manual Surgical Sciences, Newpace, Surecor, and Vizaramed. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest: The authors have provided declaration of interest information for all relationships that might be perceived as real or potential sources of conflicts of interest. The full disclosures can be viewed in the Supplementary material online for this article, available online at [URL].

Aims: Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a novel atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation modality that has demonstrated preferential tissue ablation, including no oesophageal damage, in first-in-human clinical trials. In the MANIFEST-PF survey, we investigated the 'real world' performance of the only approved PFA catheter, including acute effectiveness and safety-in particular, rare oesophageal effects and other unforeseen PFA-related complications., Methods and Results: This retrospective survey included all 24 clinical centres using the pentaspline PFA catheter after regulatory approval. Institution-level data were obtained on patient characteristics, procedure parameters, acute efficacy, and adverse events. With an average of 73 patients treated per centre (range 7-291), full cohort included 1758 patients: mean age 61.6 years (range 19-92), female 34%, first-time ablation 94%, paroxysmal/persistent AF 58/35%. Most procedures employed deep sedation without intubation (82.1%), and 15.1% were discharged same day. Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) was successful in 99.9% (range 98.9-100%). Procedure time was 65 min (38-215). There were no oesophageal complications or phrenic nerve injuries persisting past hospital discharge. Major complications (1.6%) were pericardial tamponade (0.97%) and stroke (0.4%); one stroke resulted in death (0.06%). Minor complications (3.9%) were primarily vascular (3.3%), but also included transient phrenic nerve paresis (0.46%), and TIA (0.11%). Rare complications included coronary artery spasm, haemoptysis, and dry cough persistent for 6 weeks (0.06% each)., Conclusion: In a large cohort of unselected patients, PFA was efficacious for PVI, and expressed a safety profile consistent with preferential tissue ablation. However, the frequency of 'generic' catheter complications (tamponade, stroke) underscores the need for improvement., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: V.Y.R. reports receiving consulting fees and equity (stock) from Farapulse Inc. and is a consultant for Boston Scientific Inc.; he also has additional disclosures unrelated to this manuscript that are listed in the Supplementary material online. B.S. reports receiving speaker’s fees and research grants from Boston Scientific/Farapulse, Medtronic, Biosense Webster, and Abbott. T.R. reports research grants from the Swiss National Science Foundation, the Swiss Heart Foundation, and the sitem insel support fund. Speaker/consulting honoraria or travel support from Abbott/SJM, Bayer, Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, Medtronic, and Pfizer-BMS. Support for his institution’s fellowship programme from Abbott/SJM, Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic. L.R. reports receiving speaker honoraria from Abbott/SJM and consulting honoraria from Medtronic. K.N. reports speaker’s Fees from Farapulse, Inc. A.M. reports research grant and fees from Farapulse. A.R. reports receiving research grant from Farapulse. J.H. reports receiving speaker fees and grant support from Biosense Webster and Medtronic. Y.B.: reports receiving Research grant from Medtronic and Atricure and consulting fees from Abbott, Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific. P.S. reports member of the advisory board for Abbott, Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic. C.S. reports receiving modest honoraria from Medtronic. A.A. reports receiving consultant fees from Farapulse Inc., Boston Scientific Inc., Galaxy Medical Inc., Biosense Webster, and performs contracted research for Farapulse Inc., Boston Scientific Inc., Galaxy Medical Inc., Biosense Webster. F.A. reports receiving consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Medtronic and Microport CRM. S.B. reports receiving consulting fees for Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Microport, Zoll, and BMS. T.D. reports receiving speaker honoraria from Galaxy Medical, Abbott and Biotronik, being a consultant to Farapulse, and serving on a Clinical Events Committee for Boston Scientific. S.W. reports receiving grants and personal fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Brystol Myers Squibb, Bayer Vital, Accutus, Daiichi, Farapulse Inc. M.G. reports grant from Farapulse Inc. and Abbott. R.T. reports receiving consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Abbot Medical, Biotronik, and speakers honorarium from Boston Scientific, Abbot Medical, Biotronik, Biosense Webster. B.K. reports receiving Travel and Congress Sponsoring from Biotronik, Abbott, Impulse Dynamics, DGK AG EP, EHRA, Pfizer; she also received fellowship sponsoring from Johnson & Johnson, Boston Scientific and Lecture Honorary from Biotronik, Impulse Dynamics, C.T.I. GmbH, Doctrina Med. D.S. reports receiving an educational grant from Farapulse Inc., and is a consultant For Boston Scientific Inc. R.W. reports receiving consultant fees and travel expenses from Boston Scientific and Biotronik; investigator-initiated funding for research projects (initiated by him) from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, and Boston Scientific; and speaking honoraria from Boston Scientific, Biotronik, and Medtronic. D.S. reports receiving speaking fees from Pfizer, Bayer, Abbott, Johnson & Johnson, and Medtronic; grant from Abbott, Johnson & Johnson, and Boston Scientific; and consulting fees from Boston Scientific and Johnson & Johnson. A.S. reports receiving lecture and consulting honoraria from Medtronic, Abbott, and Bayer. J.K. reports personal fees from Bayer, Biosense Webster, Boehringer Ingelheim, Medtronic, and Abbott for participation in scientific advisory boards, and has received speaker honoraria from Bayer, Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Boehringer Ingelheim, CathVision, Medtronic, Mylan, Pfizer, ProMed, and Abbott. P.J. reports receiving equity from Farapulse and consulting fees and grant from Boston Scientific. N.D. reports receiving consulting fees from Boston scientific. J.C. reports receiving speaker’s fees and research grants from Boston Scientific/Farapulse, Medtronic, Biosense Webster, and Abbott. P.N. reports receiving grant from the Ministry of Health, Czech Republic, DRO (NHH, 00023884). All the remaining authors have declared no conflict of interest., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Doshi has received a grant from Boston Scientific. Dr Dukkipati has received a grant from Biosense Webster; and holds equity in Farapulse and Manual Surgical Sciences. Dr Neuzil has received grants from Biosense Webster and Boston Scientific. Dr Reddy is a consultant to Abbott, Ablacon, Acutus Medical, Affera, Apama Medical, APN Health, Aquaheart, Atacor, AtiAN, Autonomix, Axon Therapies, Backbeat, BioSig, Biosense Webster, BioTel Heart, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Cardiac Implants, CardiaCare, Cardiofocus, Cardionomic, CardioNXT/AFTx, Circa Scientific, CoreMap, CoRISMA, Corvia Medical, Dinova-Hangzhou Nuomao Medtech, East End Medical, EBR, EPD, Epix Therapeutics, EpiEP, Eximo, Farapulse, Fire1, Gore & Associates, HRT, Impulse Dynamics, Intershunt, Javelin, Kardium, Keystone Heart, LuxCath, Medlumics, Medtronic, Middlepeak, Neutrace, Nuvera, Philips, Pulse Biosciences, Restore Medical, Sirona Medical, and Valcare; and holds equity in Ablacon, Acutus Medical, Affera, Apama Medical, APN Health, Aquaheart, Atacor, Autonomix, Backbeat, BioSig, Cardiac Implants, CardiaCare, Circa Scientific, CoRISMA, Corvia Medical, Dinova-Hangzhou Nuomao Medtech, East End Medical), EPD, Epix Therapeutics, EpiEP, Eximo, Farapulse, Fire1, HRT, Intershunt, Javelin, Kardium, Keystone Heart, LuxCath, Manual Surgical Sciences, Medlumics, Middlepeak, Neutrace, Newpace, Nuvera, Restore Medical, Sirona Medical, Surecor, Valcare, and Vizaramed (Equity). All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.

Background: Recent data suggest that epicardial left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is associated with several short-term neurohormonal effects. However, the long-term effects are currently unknown., Objective: To investigate the effects of percutaneous epicardial left atial appendage (LAA) exclusion using LARIAT on neurohormonal profiles at long-term follow-up., Methods: In a prospective single centre study, 60 patients with long-standing, persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) LARIAT were treated. The major hormones of the adrenergic system, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS), and natriuretic peptides were assessed before the intervention and at regular intervals during the following two years., Results: In patients with epicardial LAAC, atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP) levels were significantly increased from baseline at 24 h and decreased at 7 days, 1 month, and 3 months, while remaining unchanged at 12 and 24 months. Noradrenaline levels were significantly lower at 24 h, 7 days, 1 month, 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months, while epinephrine levels decreased significantly at 1 month, 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months. Plasma renin activity significantly decreased at 7 days, 1 month, 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months, while aldosterone levels significantly decreased at 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months. Endothelin-1 and vasopressin showed a significant increase and decrease, respectively, at 24 h, 7 days, 1 month, 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months. There was also a significant decrease in systolic and diastolic blood pressure at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after the intervention., Conclusions: Epicardial LAAC in AF patients is associated with persistent neurohormonal changes favouring blood pressure reduction.

Objectives: This is a first report of the safety and 1-year outcomes of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) using a novel foam-based conformable device, guided by intracardiac echocardiography (ICE)., Background: Limitations of current transcatheter LAAC devices include the need for precise coaxial delivery into the left atrial appendage (LAA), potential for traumatic implantation, incomplete LAA seal, and device-related thrombus., Methods: The device (Conformal Left Atrial Appendage Seal, Conformal Medical Inc) is a self-expanding occluder consisting of a cylindrical nitinol endoskeleton with low-profile anchor barbs around the midpoint, covered with a porous foam cup. In a prospective single-center series, under conscious sedation, the device was delivered under fluoroscopic and ICE guidance. After positioning, a transesophageal echocardiography probe was placed to confirm ICE findings before device release. After closure, dual antiplatelet therapy was administered for 6 months. Follow-up imaging was planned for 45 days and 6 and 12 months., Results: A total of 15 patients (age 71.3 ± 10.8 years, 33% men, CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc 4.1 ± 1.7, HAS-BLED 3.4 ± 1.4) underwent LAAC, 100% successfully. There were no procedure/device-related complications requiring intervention. Asymptomatic pericardial effusion occurred in 2 patients. The 45-day, 6-month, and 12-month follow-up imaging in 11, 9, and 13 patients, respectively, revealed adequate LAA seal (leak ≤5 mm) in all patients; device-related thrombus was detected in 1 patient at 6 months. Over 1-year follow-up, there were no ischemic strokes and 1 minor bleed. Nonprocedure-/device-related death occurred in 2 patients., Conclusions: This first report indicates that LAAC with the conformable implant guided by ICE imaging is feasible with encouraging 1-year clinical outcomes. (The Conformal Prague Study; NCT04193826)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Conformal Medical, Inc, provided funding for this study. Dr Neuzil has received grants from Conformal Medical Inc and Biosense Webster Inc. Dr Dukkipati has received a grant from Biosense Webster. Dr Reddy has served as an unpaid consultant to Conformal Medical Inc and Biosense Webster Inc; has served as a consultant for and has equity in Ablacon, Acutus Medical, Affera, Apama Medical, Aquaheart, Atacor, Autonomix, Backbeat, BioSig, Circa Scientific, Corvia Medical, Dinova-Hangzhou Nuomao Medtech Co, Ltd, East End Medical, EPD, Epix Therapeutics, EpiEP, Eximo, Fire1, Javelin, Kardium, Keystone Heart, LuxCath, Medlumics, Middlepeak, Nuvera, Sirona Medical, and Valcare unrelated to this work; has served as a consultant for Abbott, Axon, Biotronik, Cardiofocus, Cardionomic, CardioNXT/AFTx, EBR, Impulse Dynamics, Medtronic, Philips, Pulse Biosciences, Stimda, and Thermedical unrelated to this work; and has equity in Manual Surgical Sciences, Newpace, Surecor, and Vizaramed unrelated to this work. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Perioperative anticoagulation management with uninterrupted or minimally interrupted anticoagulation during atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is thought to be critical to minimize thromboembolic complications. Protamine is often administered to neutralize the effects of heparin and expedite vascular hemostasis post-procedure., Objective: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the effectiveness of protamine to expedite vascular hemostasis and ambulation in patients undergoing AF ablation., Methods: Electronic searches on PubMed, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, EBSCO, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases from the inception through August 7, 2021, were performed. The primary outcomes included-time to hemostasis (minutes) and time to ambulation (minutes). The secondary outcomes included - any vascular complications (excluding minor hematoma), minor hematoma, or cerebrovascular accidents (CVA)., Results: A total of 5 eligible studies (3 retrospective cohort studies and two randomized trials) consisting of 1012 patients (515 patients received protamine group and 497 patients did not receive protamine group) were included in the meta-analysis. There was a significant reduction in time to ambulation [weighted mean difference (WMD) -176.6 minutes, 95% Confidence interval (CI) -266.9 to -86.3; p < 0.01] and time to hemostasis (WMD -13.72 minutes, 95% CI -22 to -5.4, p < 0.01) in the protamine group compared to the contrary. At a follow-up up to 3 months, there was no statistical difference between the two groups with regards to vascular complications (2.9% vs. 7.4%; Risk ratio (RR) 0.46 95% CI 0.17 to 1.24; p = 0.12), minor hematoma (2.1% vs. 5.8%; RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.2; p = 0.11) or CVA (0 vs. 0.3%; RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.08 to 4.98; p = 0.65)., Conclusion: Protamine administration was associated with reduced time to ambulation (176 minutes reduction) and time to hemostasis (13 minutes reduction) without an increase in any adverse events., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (© 2022 The Author(s). Published by IMR Press.)

Aims: We studied the extent/area of electrical pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) after either pulsed field ablation (PFA) using a pentaspline catheter or thermal ablation technologies., Methods and Results: In a clinical trial (NCT03714178), paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) patients underwent PVI with a multi-electrode pentaspline PFA catheter using a biphasic waveform, and after 75 days, detailed voltage maps were created during protocol-specified remapping studies. Comparative voltage mapping data were retrospectively collected from consecutive PAF patients who (i) underwent PVI using thermal energy, (ii) underwent reablation for recurrence, and (iii) had durably isolated PVs. The left and right PV antral isolation areas and non-ablated posterior wall were quantified. There were 20 patients with durable PVI in the PFA cohort, and 39 in the thermal ablation cohort [29 radiofrequency ablation (RFA), 6 cryoballoon, and 4 visually guided laser balloon]. Pulsed field ablation patients were younger with shorter follow-up. Left atrial diameter and ventricular systolic function were preserved in both cohorts. There was no significant difference between the PFA and thermal ablation cohorts in either the left- and right-sided PV isolation areas, or the non-ablated posterior wall area. The right superior PV isolation area was smaller with PFA than RFA, but this disappeared after propensity score matching. Notch-like normal voltage areas were seen at the posterior aspect of the carina in the balloon sub-cohort, but not the PFA or RFA cohorts., Conclusion: Catheter-based PVI with the pentaspline PFA catheter creates chronic PV antral isolation areas as encompassing as thermal energy ablation., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Objectives: The goal of this study is to determine the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of atrial fibrillation (AF) or atrial flutter (AFL) in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19)., Background: COVID-19 results in increased inflammatory markers previously associated with atrial arrhythmias. However, little is known about their incidence or specificity in COVID-19 or their association with outcomes., Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of 3,970 patients admitted with polymerase chain reaction-positive COVID-19 between February 4 and April 22, 2020, with manual review performed of 1,110. The comparator arm included 1,420 patients with influenza hospitalized between January 1, 2017, and January 1, 2020., Results: Among 3,970 inpatients with COVID-19, the incidence of AF/AFL was 10% (n = 375) and in patients without a history of atrial arrhythmias it was 4% (n = 146). Patients with new-onset AF/AFL were older with increased inflammatory markers including interleukin 6 (93 vs. 68 pg/ml; p < 0.01), and more myocardial injury (troponin-I: 0.2 vs. 0.06 ng/ml; p < 0.01). AF and AFL were associated with increased mortality (46% vs. 26%; p < 0.01). Manual review captured a somewhat higher incidence of AF/AFL (13%, n = 140). Compared to inpatients with COVID-19, patients with influenza (n = 1,420) had similar rates of AF/AFL (12%, n = 163) but lower mortality. The presence of AF/AFL correlated with similarly increased mortality in both COVID-19 (relative risk: 1.77) and influenza (relative risk: 1.78)., Conclusions: AF/AFL occurs in a subset of patients hospitalized with either COVID-19 or influenza and is associated with inflammation and disease severity in both infections. The incidence and associated increase in mortality in both cohorts suggests that AF/AFL is not specific to COVID-19, but is rather a generalized response to the systemic inflammation of severe viral illnesses., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Koruth has received consulting fees from Abbott Laboratories, CardioFocus, Farapulse, and Vytron US, Inc. Dr Dukkipati has received grant support from Biosense Webster; and has equity with Farapulse and Manual Surgical Sciences, LLC. Dr Halperin has received consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Johnson & Johnson-Janssen Pharmaceuticals, and Medtronic. Dr Reddy is a consultant with Abbott, Ablacon, Acutus Medical, Affera, Apama Medical, Aquaheart, Atacor, Autonomix, Axon, Backbeat, BioSig, Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Cardiofocus, Cardionomic, CardioNXT/AFTx, Circa Scientific, Corvia Medical, Dinova-Hangzhou Nuomao Medtech Co., Ltd., East End Medical, EBR, EPD, Epix Therapeutics, EpiEP, Eximo, Fire1, Impulse Dynamics, Javelin, Kardium, Keystone Heart, LuxCath, Manual Surgical Sciences, Medlumics, Medtronic, Middlepeak, Newpace, Nuvera, Philips, Pulse Biosciences, Sirona Medical, Stimda, Surecor, Thermedical, and Valcare; and has equity in Ablacon, Acutus Medical, Affera, Apama, Aquaheart, Atacor, Autonomix, Backbeat, BioSig, Circa Scientific, Corvia Medical, Dinova-Hangzhou Nuomao Medtech Co., Ltd., East End Medical, EPD, Epix Therapeutics, EpiEP, Eximo, Fire 1, Javelin, Kardium, Keystone Heart, LuxCath, Manual Surgical Sciences, Medlumics, Middlepeak, Newpace, Nuvera, Sirona Medical, Surecor, Valcare, and Vizaramed. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Warfarin is traditionally the drug of choice for stroke prophylaxis or treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on hemodialysis as data on apixaban use is scarce. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of Apixaban in patients with ESRD on hemodialysis when compared with warfarin., Methods: A comprehensive literature search in PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases from inception until Nov 25, 2019, was performed. Studies reporting clinical outcomes comparing Apixaban (2.5 mg BID or 5 mg BID) versus Warfarin in ESRD patients on hemodialysis were included. Mantel-Haenszel risk ratio (RR) random-effects model was used to summarize data., Results: Four studies (three retrospective and one randomized) with a total of 9862 patients (apixaban = 2,547, warfarin = 7315) met inclusion criteria. The overall mean age was 66.6 ± 3.9 years and mean CHA2DS2-VASc score 4.56 ± 0.58. Apixaban was associated with lower rates of major bleeding (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.45-0.64, p < 0.0001], gastrointestinal (GI) bleed (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.55-0.76, p < 0.0001), intracranial bleed (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.36-0.89, p = 0.01), and stroke/systemic embolism [RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.52-0.83, p = 0.0004] compared with warfarin in patients with ESRD on hemodialysis. There was no significant increased risk of all-cause mortality with the apixaban vs. warfarin (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.41-1.96, p = 0.78)., Conclusion: Apixaban had an overall favorable risk-benefit profile, with significant reductions in ischemic stroke, major bleeding, and intracranial bleeding compared to Warfarin in ESRD patients on hemodialysis with non-valvular AF and/or venous thromboembolism., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2021 Indian Heart Rhythm Society. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Orthotropic heart transplantation remains the most effective therapy for patients with end-stage heart failure, with a median survival of ≈13 years. Yet, a number of complications are observed after orthotropic heart transplantation, including atrial and ventricular arrhythmias. Several factors contribute to arrhythmias, such as autonomic denervation, effect of the surgical technique, acute and chronic rejection, and transplant vasculopathy among others. To minimize risk of future arrhythmias, the bicaval technique and minimizing ischemic time are current surgical standards. Sinus node dysfunction is the most common indication for early (within 30 days) pacemaker implantation, whereas atrioventricular block incidence increases as time from transplant increases. Atrial fibrillation can occur in the first few weeks following transplantation but is uncommon in the long term unless secondary to a precipitant such as acute rejection. The most common atrial arrhythmias are atrial flutters, which are mainly typical, but atypical circuits can be observed such as those that involve the remnant donor atrium in regions immediately adjacent to the atrioatrial anastomosis suture line. Choosing the appropriate pharmacological therapy requires careful consideration due to the potential interaction with immunosuppressive agents. Despite historical concerns, adenosine is effective and safe at reduced doses if administered under cardiac monitoring. Catheter ablation has emerged as an effective treatment strategy for symptomatic supraventricular tachycardias, including ablation of atypical flutter circuits. Cardiac allograft vasculopathy is an important risk factor for sudden cardiac death, yet the role of prophylactic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implant for sudden death prevention is unclear. Current indications for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation are as in the nontransplant population. A number of questions for future research are posed.

Objectives: This study sought to determine the impact of adjunctive renal sympathetic denervation to catheter ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and history of hypertension., Background: There are limited data regarding the impact of upstream adjunctive renal sympathetic denervation (RSDN) to pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) in patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) and hypertension., Methods: The data for this study were obtained from 2 prospective randomized pilot studies, the HFIB (Adjunctive Renal Denervation to Modify Hypertension and Sympathetic tone as Upstream Therapy in the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation)-1 (n = 30) and HFIB (Adjunctive Renal Denervation to Modify Hypertension and Sympathetic tone as Upstream Therapy in the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation)-2 (n = 50) studies, and we performed a meta-analysis including all published studies comparing RSDN+PVI versus PVI alone up to January 25, 2020, in patients with AF and hypertension., Results: At 24 months, AF recurrence occurred in 53% and 38% in the PVI and PVI+RSDN groups (p = 0.43) in the HFIB-1 study, respectively, and 27% and 25% in the PVI and PVI+RSDN groups (p = 0.80) in the HFIB-2 study, respectively. When combined in a meta-analysis including 6 studies (n = 725), adjunctive RSDN significantly decreased the risk of AF recurrence (risk ratio [RR]: 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55 to 0.83; p = 0.0002; I 2  = 0%) when compared with PVI. Six renal artery complications occurred in the HFIB-1 study and none occurred in the HFIB-2 study with RSDN. However, in the meta-analysis, there were no significant differences in overall complications between both groups (RR: 1.43; 95% CI: 0.63 to 3.22; p = 0.40; I 2  = 7%). When compared with baseline, RDSN significantly reduced the systolic blood pressure (-12.1 mm Hg; 95% CI: -20.9 to -3.3 mm Hg; p < 0.007; I 2  = 99%) and diastolic blood pressure (-5.60 mm Hg; 95% CI: -10.05 to -1.10 mm Hg; p = 0.01; I 2  = 98%) on follow-up., Conclusions: The pilot HFIB-1 and HFIB-2 studies did not demonstrate a benefit with RSDN as an adjunctive upstream therapy during PVI. However, in the meta-analysis, adjunctive RSDN to PVI appears to be safe, and improves clinical outcomes in AF patients with a history of hypertension., Competing Interests: Author Disclosures The HFIB-1 study was sponsored by Biosense Webster. The HFIB-2 study was sponsored by Boston Scientific. Dr. Cuoco has served as a consultant for St. Jude Medical and Boston Scientific. Dr. Mansour has received research grant support from Abbott, Biosense Webster, Johnson and Johnson, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Sentre Heart; has served as a consultant for Abbott, Biosense Webster, Jonhson and Johnson, Boston Scientific, Janssen, Medtronic, Philips, Novartis, and Sentre Heart; and owns equity interest in Affera, EPS Solutions, and NewPace Ltd. Dr. Lakkireddy has served as a steering committee member for the Amulet and Amaze IDE studies; and received consulting fees from Abbott. Dr. Michaud has served as a consultant for Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific, and Abbott; and has received honoraria from Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Medtronic, and Abbott. Dr. Dukkipati owns equity interest in Manual Surgical Sciences and Farapulse; and has received research grant support from Biosense Webster. Dr. Reddy has served as an unpaid consultant to and received grant support from Biosense Webster and Boston Scientific. Additional disclosures unrelated to this manuscript are listed in the Supplemental Appendix. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who develop cardiac injury are reported to experience higher rates of malignant cardiac arrhythmias. However, little is known about these arrhythmias-their frequency, the underlying mechanisms, and their impact on mortality., Methods: We extracted data from a registry (NCT04358029) regarding consecutive inpatients with confirmed COVID-19 who were receiving continuous telemetric ECG monitoring and had a definitive disposition of hospital discharge or death. Between patients who died versus discharged, we compared a primary composite end point of cardiac arrest from ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation or bradyarrhythmias such as atrioventricular block., Results: Among 800 patients with COVID-19 at Mount Sinai Hospital with definitive dispositions, 140 patients had telemetric monitoring, and either died (52) or were discharged (88). The median (interquartile range) age was 61 years (48-74); 73% men; and ethnicity was White in 34%. Comorbidities included hypertension in 61%, coronary artery disease in 25%, ventricular arrhythmia history in 1.4%, and no significant comorbidities in 16%. Compared with discharged patients, those who died had elevated peak troponin I levels (0.27 versus 0.02 ng/mL) and more primary end point events (17% versus 4%, P =0.01)-a difference driven by tachyarrhythmias. Fatal tachyarrhythmias invariably occurred in the presence of severe metabolic imbalance, while atrioventricular block was largely an independent primary event., Conclusions: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who die experience malignant cardiac arrhythmias more often than those surviving to discharge. However, these events represent a minority of cardiovascular deaths, and ventricular tachyarrhythmias are mainly associated with severe metabolic derangement. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04358029.

Objectives: The goal of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to provide a comprehensive evaluation of contemporary randomized trials addressing the efficacy and safety of multivessel versus culprit vessel-only percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) among patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease., Background: Multivessel coronary artery disease is present in about one-half of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Randomized controlled trials comparing multivessel and culprit vessel-only PCI produced conflicting results regarding the benefits of a multivessel PCI strategy., Methods: A comprehensive search for published randomized controlled trials comparing multivessel PCI with culprit vessel-only PCI was conducted on ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO Services, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Google Scholar, and scientific conference sessions from inception to September 15, 2019. A meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model to calculate the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Primary efficacy outcomes were all-cause mortality and reinfarction., Results: Ten randomized controlled trials were included, representing 7,030 patients: 3,426 underwent multivessel PCI and 3,604 received culprit vessel-only PCI. Compared with culprit vessel-only PCI, multivessel PCI was associated with no significant difference in all-cause mortality (RR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.68 to 1.05) and lower risk for reinfarction (RR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.50 to 0.95), cardiovascular mortality (RR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.50 to 1.00), and repeat revascularization (RR: 0.34; 95% CI: 0.25 to 0.44). Major bleeding (RR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.50 to 1.67), stroke (RR: 1.15; 95% CI: 0.65 to 2.01), and contrast-induced nephropathy (RR: 1.25; 95% CI: 0.80 to 1.95) were not significantly different between the 2 groups., Conclusions: Multivessel PCI was associated with a lower risk for reinfarction, without any difference in all-cause mortality, compared with culprit vessel-only PCI in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Electrophysiological procedures such as epicardial ventricular tachycardia ablation and Lariat left atrial appendage ligation that involve the epicardial space are typically associated with significant postoperative pain due to mechanical irritation and associated inflammation. There is an unmet need for an effective pain management strategy in this group of patients. We studied how this impacts patient comfort and duration of hospitalization and other associated comorbidities related to pericardial access., Methods: This is a multicenter retrospective study including 104 patients who underwent epicardial ventricular tachycardia ablation and Lariat left atrial appendage exclusion. We compared 53 patients who received postprocedural intrapericardial liposomal bupivacaine (LB)+oral colchicine (LB group) and 51 patients who received colchicine alone (non-LB group) between January 2015 and March 2018., Results: LB was associated with significant lowering of median pain scale at 6 hours (1.0 [0-2.0] versus 8.0 [6.0-8.0], P <0.001), 12 hours (1.0 [1.0-2.0] versus 6.0 [5.0-6.0], P <0.001), and up to 48 hours postprocedure. Incidence of acute severe pericarditis delayed pericardial effusion and gastrointestinal adverse effects were similar in both groups. Median length of stay was significantly lower in LB group (2.0 versus 3.0; adjusted linear coefficient -1 [CI -1.3 to -0.6], P <0.001). Subgroup analysis demonstrated similar favorable outcomes in both Lariat and epicardial ventricular tachycardia ablation groups., Conclusions: Addition of intrapericardial postprocedural LB to oral colchicine in patients undergoing epicardial access during ventricular tachycardia ablation or Lariat procedure is associated with significantly decreased numeric pain score up to 48 hours compared with colchicine alone. It is also associated with significantly shorter length of hospital stay without an increase in the risk of adverse events.

Objectives: This study sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of venous access techniques for cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation., Background: Minimally invasive transvenous access is a fundamental step during implantation of CIEDs. However, the preferred venous access is still subject to ongoing debate, and the decision depends on patient characteristics and operator experience., Methods: A comprehensive search for studies comparing subclavian vein puncture (SVP) and axillary vein puncture (AVP) versus cephalic vein cutdown (CVC) for CIED implantation was performed in PubMed, Google Scholar, EMBASE, SCOPUS, ClinicalTrials.gov, and various scientific conferences from inception to July 1, 2019. A meta-analysis was performed by using a random effects model to calculate risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences with 95% confidence interval (CIs)., Results: Twenty-three studies were eligible that included 35,722 patients (SVP, n = 18,009; AVP, n = 409; and CVC, n = 17,304). Compared with CVC, SVP was associated with a higher risk of pneumothorax (RR: 4.88; 95% CI: 2.95 to 8.06) and device/lead failure (RR: 2.09; 95% CI: 1.07 to 4.09), whereas there was no significant difference in these outcomes compared with AVP. Acute procedural success was significantly higher with SVP compared with CVC (RR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.00 to 1.53). There was no significant difference in other complications such as pocket hematoma/bleeding, device infection, or pericardial effusion between SVP or AVP compared with CVC., Conclusions: CVC was associated with a lower risk of pneumothorax and lead failure compared with SVP. AVP and CVC are both effective approaches for CIED lead implantation and offer the potential to avoid the complications usually observed with traditional SVP., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the feasibility and safety of left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) procedures in patients with persistent left atrial appendage (LAA) thrombus., Background: The left atrial appendage (LAA) is the most common site of thrombus formation in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF). Oral anticoagulation (OAC) is used to prevent and treat AF-related thrombus. However, a significant proportion of patients may not be eligible for long-term OAC therapy. In many cases, OAC may fail to resolve the thrombus. Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) may be a potential option in such cases. Major LAAO studies have excluded patients with LAA thrombus, and it is not known whether LAAO procedures in the presence of LAA thrombus is feasible and safe., Methods: This was a systematic review of patient-level data of all published cases of LAAO in the presence of LAA thrombus., Results: There was a total of 58 patients included in the study. Most of the patients had a distally located thrombus in the LAA. All cases underwent successful implantation of LAAO devices with some procedural modifications. Amulet was the most commonly used device (50%). A cerebral protection device was used in 17 (29%) patients, and procedural transesophageal echocardiography was used in most of the cases. One stroke (1.7%) and 2 (3.4%) device-related thromboses were noted during the mean follow-up of 3.4 ± 7 months., Conclusions: Percutaneous LAAO procedures appear to be feasible in patients with a distally located persistent LAA thrombus when performed by experienced operators with some technical modifications. Further studies are required to determine the long-term safety and efficacy of this approach., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study sought to evaluate the safety and feasibility of percutaneous retrieval of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) devices with an endoscopic grasping tool., Background: Transcatheter LAAC is a mechanical stroke prevention strategy in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) who are poor candidates for long-term oral anticoagulation. However, these LAAC devices can be inadvertently released into an unfavorable location, the device might migrate to a different (unfavorable) position within the left atrial appendage (LAA) or may embolize from the heart into the aorta. In such instances, it can be challenging to remove the LAAC device without open cardiac or vascular surgery., Methods: This study reports on a series of 4 cases in which an endoscopic grasping tool (Raptor) designed for gastrointestinal applications was used to percutaneously (non-surgically) remove LAAC devices that were either malpositioned or embolized., Results: LAAC devices were safely and non-surgically removed using the grasping device in all 4 cases (Amulet: 1, Watchman: 3). Devices were successfully retrieved from the left inferior pulmonary vein, descending aorta, aortic arch, and the edge of the LAA ostium. Time of device retrieval post-LAAC implantation ranged from 24 h to 1 year. Special precautionary measures, such as preemptive pericardial access, embolic protection devices, and intraprocedural imaging, were used in 2 cases., Conclusions: This case series demonstrated that the endoscopic grasping tool appeared to be safe and useful to percutaneously retrieve LAAC devices., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) using point-by-point radiofrequency energy or single-application one-shot balloons is either technically challenging or have limited ability to accommodate variable patient anatomy to achieve acute and durable pulmonary vein (PV) isolation. A novel ablation system employs low intensity collimated ultrasound (LICU)-guided anatomic mapping and robotic ablation to isolate PVs. In this first-in-human, single-center, multioperator trial, VALUE trial (VytronUS Ablation System for Treatment of Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation; NCT03639597) in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, this LICU system was evaluated to determine its safety, effectiveness in PV isolation, and freedom from recurrent atrial arrhythmias., Methods: In the enrolled 52 patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, ultrasound M-mode-based left atrial anatomies were successfully created, and ablation was performed under robotic control along an operator-defined lesion path. The LICU system software advanced over the course of the study: the last 13 patients were ablated with enhanced software., Results: Acute PV isolation was achieved in 98% of PVs-using LICU-only in 77.3% (153/198) of PVs and requiring touch-up with a standard radiofrequency ablation catheter in 22.7% (45/198) PVs. The touch-up rate decreased to 5.8% (3/52) in patients undergoing LICU-ablation with enhanced software. Freedom from atrial arrhythmia recurrence was 79.6% (39/49 patients) at 12 months or 92.3% (12/13 patients) with the enhanced software. Major adverse events occurred in 3 patients (5.8%): one had transient diaphragmatic paralysis, one vascular access complication, and one had transient ST-segment elevation from air-embolism, without sequelae., Conclusions: In this first-in-human study, low- intensity collimated ultrasound-guided anatomic mapping and robotic ablation allows PV isolation with good chronic safety; PV isolation success is improving with device enhancements. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03639597.

Background: Premature ventricular contractions are a common clinical presentation that drives further diagnostic workup. We hypothesize the presence of underlying inflammation is often unrecognized in these patients with a potential for continued disease progression if not diagnosed and treated early in the disease course., Methods: This is a single-center, prospective study including 107 patients with frequent symptomatic premature ventricular contractions (>5000/24 h) and no known ischemic heart disease. Patients underwent a combination of laboratory testing, 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography scan, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, and biopsy. Patients were diagnosed with myocarditis based on a multidisciplinary approach and treated with immunosuppressive therapy., Results: The mean age of the cohort was 57±15 years, 41% were males, and left ventricular ejection fraction was 47±11.8%. Positive positron emission tomography scan was seen in 51% (55/107), of which 51% (28/55) had preserved left ventricle function. Based on clinical profile, 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography imaging, cardiac magnetic resonance, and histological data 58% patients (32/55) received immunosuppressive therapy alone and 25.4% (14/55) received immunosuppressive therapy and catheter ablation. Optimal response was seen in 67% (31/46) over a mean follow-up of 6±3 months. In patients with left ventricle systolic dysfunction, 37% (10/27) showed an improvement in mean left ventricular ejection fraction of 13±6%., Conclusions: Approximately 51% of patients presenting with frequent premature ventricular contractions have underlying myocardial inflammation in this cohort. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography scan can be a useful modality for early diagnosis and treatment with immunosuppressive therapy in selected patients can improve clinical outcomes.

Background: Direct current cardioversion (DCCV) is a common rhythm control strategy in patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation or flutter. There is no long-term data regarding the safety of DCCV in patients with endocardial left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) devices., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility and safety of DCCV in patients with an LAAO device., Methods: This multicenter retrospective study included 148 patients with an LAAO device who underwent DCCV for symptomatic atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter., Results: The average age of the included patients was 72 ± 7 years and 59% were men. All patients (100%) had a transesophageal echocardiogram prior to DCCV. Device-related thrombus was seen in 2.7%. They were all successfully treated with oral anticoagulation (OAC) and were able to undergo DCCV after 6 to 8 weeks. DCCV restored sinus rhythm in all patients. None of the patients had DCCV-related thromboembolic complications. A total of 22% of patients were newly started on OAC after DCCV. There was no difference in DCCV-related complications between patients treated with or without OAC post-DCCV. Patients receiving OAC post-DCCV were found to undergo cardioversion at an earlier time after implantation (3.6 months [interquartile range (IQR): 0.7 to 8.6 months] vs. 8.6 months [IQR: 2.5 to 13.3 months]; p = 0.003). Three transient ischemic attacks, unrelated to DCCV, were found during follow-up. During a median follow-up of 12.8 months (IQR: 11.8 to 14.2 months), no device or left atrial thrombosis, device dislodgement, or a new device leak were observed. One patient died during follow-up due to noncardiac cause., Conclusions: DCCV is feasible in high-risk AF patients with an LAAO device without the need for oral anticoagulation if pre-procedural transesophageal echocardiography shows good device position, absence of device-related thrombus, and peridevice leak of ≤5 mm. The preliminary results are encouraging, but further large studies are warranted to establish safety., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the differences in transient thermal response (TTR) among various types of commercial esophageal temperature probes (ETPs) in the United States in an experimental model., Background: There is little information regarding the variation in TTR among various commercial ETPs that are approved for atrial fibrillation ablation., Methods: We compared various thermodynamic characteristics including, mean thermal time constant (τ), time to rise 1°C (T 1°C ), time to peak temperature (T peak ), and decay time among 22 different ETPs. Each probe was submerged in a constant-temperature water bath maintained at 37 ± 0.5°C and then quickly (<0.5 s) submerged into another water bath at 45 ± 0.5°C. The experiments were repeated 3 times with each probe. TTR properties were compared on the basis of probe size, design, and number of sensors., Results: The τ was significantly higher with the larger 24- and 18-F ETPs compared with the smaller 9-F ETPs. Compared with the 18-F probe, T 1°C (11.9 s vs. 5 s), T peak (40.3 s vs. 14.4 s), and T decay (92.4 s vs. 32.4 s) was shorter with the 9-F ETPs. Solid-shaft ETPs had shorter τ (8.6 s vs. 20.5 s), T 1°C (4.4 s vs. 10.1 s) and T peak (13.5 s vs. 32.5 s) compared with acoustascopes. Multisensor ETPs had shorter τs (3.9 s vs. 9.1 s), T 1°C (2.3 s vs. 5 s), and T peak (6.2 s vs. 14.4 s) compared with single-sensor ETPs., Conclusions: There is a significant variation in TTR among the various commercially available ETPs. The use of certain ETPs might result in underestimation of luminal esophageal temperature, which can potentially lead to adverse events., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Catheter ablation is an effective strategy for treatment of drug-refractory atrial fibrillation (AF). Continuation of oral anticoagulation (OAC) beyond 3 months after an apparently successful ablation of AF remains controversial., Methods: A systematic electronic search of the scientific literature was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS and Google Scholar. Studies comparing continuation vs discontinuation of OACs after an apparent successful ablation of AF among patients with CHA2DS2VASC or CHADS2 score ≥2were included. Clinical outcomes included cerebrovascular events, systemic thromboembolism and major bleeding. Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals for above outcomes were calculated., Results: Nine observational studies were eligible and included 3,436patients of whom 1,815 continued OACs and1,621 discontinued OAC post -AF ablation. There was no significant difference in risk of cerebrovascular events (RR: 0.85, 95%CI: 0.42 to 1.70, p= 0.64)and systemic thromboembolism (RR: 1.21, 95%CI: 0.66 to 2.23, p= 0.54)between the two groups. Continuation of OACs was associated with an increased risk of major bleeding (RR: 6.50, 95% CI: 2.53 to 16.74, p= 0.0001)., Conclusion: In conclusion, discontinuation of oral anticoagulation 3 months after a successful AF ablation appears to be safe in highly selected closely monitored patients. Further randomized trials are warranted to assess the safety of discontinuing OACs after AF ablation.

Aim: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of surgical left atrial appendage occlusion (s-LAAO) during concomitant cardiac surgery., Methods: We performed a comprehensive literature search through May 31st 2018 for all eligible studies comparing s-LAAO vs no occlusion in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Clinical outcomes during follow-up included: embolic events, stroke, all-cause mortality, atrial fibrillation (AF), reoperation for bleeding and postoperative complications. We further stratified the analysis based on propensity matched studies and AF predominance., Results: Twelve studies (n = 40107) met the inclusion criteria. s-LAAO was associated with lower risk of embolic events (OR: 0.63, 95%CI: 0.53-0.76; P < 0.001) and stroke (OR: 0.68, 95%CI: 0.57-0.82; P < 0.0001). Stratified analysis demonstrated this association was more prominent in the AF predominant strata. There was no significant difference in the incidence risk of all-cause mortality, AF, and reoperation for bleeding and postoperative complications., Conclusion: Concomitant s-LAAO during cardiac surgery was associated with lower risk of follow-up thromboembolic events and stroke, especially in those with AF without significant increase in adverse events. Further randomized trials to evaluate long-term benefits of s-LAAO are warranted., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Background: Percutaneous left atrial appendage exclusion (LAAE) has evolved as an alternative strategy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF). Recent observational data have suggested that epicardial LAAE can have substantial impact on arrhythmia burden and hemodynamic profile., Objectives: The authors aimed to study the impact of epicardial versus endocardial LAAE on systemic blood pressure in hypertensive AF patients., Methods: This was a prospective, nonrandomized study comparing 247 patients who underwent epicardial LAAE with 124 patients with endocardial exclusion. Clinical outcomes were measured at 3 months and 1 year. Primary outcome was improvement in systolic blood pressure (SBP) between both groups compared with baseline. Secondary outcome included changes in diastolic pressures (DBP), serum electrolytes, and creatinine., Results: There was no significant difference in baseline SBP between epicardial and endocardial groups. SBP was significantly lower in the epicardial group both at 3 months (122 ± 11.8 mm Hg vs. 129.7 ± 8.2 mm Hg; p < 0.001) and 1 year (123 ± 11.6 mm Hg vs. 132.2 ± 8.8 mm Hg; p < 0.001) compared with the endocardial group. An adjusted multivariate linear mixed effects model demonstrated that epicardial LAAE significantly decreased SBP by 7.4 mm Hg at 3 months and by 8.9 mm Hg at 1 year (p < 0.0001). There was a trend toward lower DBP with epicardial LAAE at 3 months by 1.3 mm Hg (p = 0.2) and at 1 year by 1.8 mm Hg (p = 0.09). There was no significant difference in serum electrolytes and creatinine between both groups., Conclusions: In hypertensive AF patients, epicardial LAAE significantly decreases SBP both at 3 and 12 months compared with endocardial exclusion., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: There is limited data regarding effect of prolonged radiation exposure during electrophysiological (EP) procedures on direct DNA damage. Comet test has shown to assess DNA damage following radiation exposure., Methods: We performed a single-center prospective observational study assessing direct DNA damage using the quantitative comet assay in patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization (CRT) and atrial fibrillation (AF) catheter ablation procedures. Venous comet assay was performed pre, immediately post procedure and at 3-month duration in twenty-two (N=22) patients who underwent catheter ablation for symptomatic AF and fourteen (N=14) patients who underwent CRT implantation., Results: The median [interquartile range (IQR)] fluoroscopy time, radiation dose and dose area product (DAP) were 34.3 (27.97 - 45.48) minutes, 853.07 (611.36 - 1334.76) mGy and 16,994.10 (9,023.65 - 58,845.00) UGym2 in the ablation group and 30.05 (18.75 - 37.33) minutes, 345.00 (165.09 - 924.79) mGy and 11,837.20 [7182.67 - 35567.75] UGym2 in the CRT group. When compared with pre-procedure, there was a statistically significant increase in median (IQR) DNA migration on comet assay in the ablation group immediately post procedure [+6.55 µm (0.78, 10.25, p=0.02)] that subsequently decreased at 3 months [-1.00 µm (-2.20, 0.78), p=0.03] but not in the CRT group., Conclusion: There was a significant increase in DNA damage as detected by comet assay immediately post procedure that normalized at 3 months in patients undergoing AF ablation. Further large prospective studies are warranted to evaluate the impact of this prolonged radiation exposure and DNA damage on long-term follow up.

Left atrial appendage (LAA) closure has evolved as an effective strategy for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation who are considered suitable for oral anticoagulation. There is strong evidence based on randomized clinical trials with 1 percutaneous device, as well as a large registry experience with several devices, regarding the safety and efficacy of this strategy. In addition, there is encouraging data regarding the effect of epicardial LAA closure on decreasing arrhythmia burden and improvements in systemic homeostasis by neurohormonal modulation. However, there are several unresolved issues regarding optimal patient selection, device selection, management of periprocedural complications including device-related thrombus, residual leaks, and pericarditis. In this review, we summarize the rationale, evidence, optimal patient selection, and common challenges encountered with mechanical LAA exclusion., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) has emerged as an effective site-directed therapy in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) for stroke prevention, who are ineligible for long-term oral anticoagulation. The objective of this study was to assess the safety, efficacy, and availability of LAAO devices by reviewing the literature and to review the development and effectiveness of LAAO by the transcatheter approach with plugging devices such as WATCHMAN™ (Boston Scientific, Natick, MA, USA); AMPLATZER™ Cardiac Plug and AMPLATZER™ Amulet™ (Abbott Laboratories, Chicago, IL, USA); and the LARIAT ® Suture Delivery Device (SentreHEART, Redwood City, CA, USA), which features an entirely unique hybrid (endocardial and epicardial) approach in closing the left atrial appendage (LAA). The conducted literature review ultimately revealed a substantial body of literature supporting the safety and efficacy of various LAAO strategies, including endocardial, epicardial, and hybrid approaches, in AF patients who are not eligible for long-term oral anticoagulant use. Specifically, the most attractive population suitable for LAA closure appears to be patients at high risk for ischemic stroke with a longer life expectancy but a moderate-to-high bleeding risk with long-term oral anticoagulation. The benefit of LAA closure in reducing the incidence of stroke in patients with nonvalvular AF has been evolving gradually, and we are confident that this new field of percutaneous LAA closure will continue to emerge as a game-changer in the treatment of AF., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest for the published content. There was no financial involvement of a pharmaceutical or other company in this study., (Copyright: © 2018 Innovations in Cardiac Rhythm Management.)

Background: We sought to investigate and compare the safety and efficacy of two commonly used antiarrhythmic drugs, Dofetilide (DF) and Sotalol (SL), during inpatient drug initiation in patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF)., Methods: We performed a single center retrospective study of consecutive patients, admitted for initiation of either DF or SL, for AF between 2012 and 2015. Rates of successful cardioversion, QT interval prolongation, adverse events and drug discontinuations were calculated and compared. A two-tailed p value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant., Results: Of 378 patients, 298 (78.8%) received DF and 80 (21.2%) SL, mean age was 64 ± 11 years, 90% were Caucasians and 66% were males. Among the patients who remained in AF upon admission (DF: 215/298 (72%) vs. SL: 48/80 (60%)), no significant differences were noted in pharmacological cardioversion rates (DF: 125/215(58%) vs. SL: 30/48 (62.5%); p = 0.58). Baseline QTc was similar between the groups, with higher dose dependent QTc prolongation with DF (472.25± 31.3 vs. 458± 27.03; p = 0.008). There were no significant differences in the rates of adverse events such as bradycardia (7.4% vs. 11.3%; p = 0.26), Torsades de pointes (1.3% vs. 1.2%; p = 1.00), and drug discontinuation (9.0% vs. 5.0%; p = 0.47) between the two groups.

Objectives: This study sought to evaluate the clinical outcomes of patients receiving hemodynamic support (HS) during ventricular tacchycardia (VT) ablation., Background: There are limited real-world data evaluating its effect of HS in ablation outcomes., Methods: An analysis of 1,655 patients from the International VT Ablation Center Collaborative group was performed. A total of 105 patients received HS with percutaneous ventricular assist device., Results: Patients in the HS group had lower left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), higher New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class, and more implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) shocks, VT storm, and antiarrhythmic drug use (all p < 0.05). The HS group also required significantly longer fluoroscopy, procedure, and total lesion time. Acute procedural success (71.8% vs. 73.7%; p = 0.04) was significantly lower and complications (12.5% vs. 6.5%; p = 0.03) and 1-year mortality (34.7% vs. 9.3%; p < 0.001) were significantly higher in the HS group. Multivariate Cox regression analysis demonstrated HS as an independent predictor of mortality (hazard ratio: 5.01; 95% confidence interval: 3.44 to 7.20; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in VT recurrence between groups. In a subgroup analysis including LVEF ≤20% and NYHA functional class III to IV patients, acute procedural success (74.0% vs. 70.5%; p = 0.8), complications (15.6% vs. 7.8%; p = 0.2), VT recurrence (30.2% vs. 38.1%; p = 0.44), and 1-year mortality (40.0% vs. 28.8%; p = 0.2) were no different between the HS and no-HS groups., Conclusions: Patients requiring HS were sicker with multiple comorbidities and, as expected, had a significantly higher 1-year mortality than did those patients in the no-HS group. In patients with LVEF ≤20% and NYHA functional class III to IV, there was also no significant difference in clinical outcomes when compared with no HS. Further studies are needed to systematically evaluate patients undergoing VT ablation receiving HS., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The present study describes the use of octreotide (OCT) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) receiving oral anticoagulation (OAC) who have gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding related to arteriovenous malformations (AVMs), as well as its effect on OAC tolerance and subsequent rebleeding., Background: AVMs cause significant GI bleeding, especially in patients with AF who are receiving OAC for stroke prevention. OCT has been shown to minimize recurrent GI bleeds related to AVMs., Methods: In a multicenter, observational study, 38 AF patients with contraindications to OAC because of AVM-related GI bleeding were started on 100 μg of subcutaneous OCT twice daily. OAC was resumed in all patients within 48 h. Incidence of recurrent GI bleeds was calculated, and hemoglobin levels were recorded at enrollment and at 3 and 6 months' follow-up., Results: After a median follow-up of 8 months, 36 patients (mean age 69 ± 8.0 years; mean CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score 3 ± 1 and mean HAS-BLED score 3 ± 1) were available for analysis. All were able to successfully resume OAC, and 28 of 36 (78%) remained on OAC at the conclusion of the study, whereas 8 underwent left atrial appendage closure with subsequent OAC discontinuation. No systemic thromboembolic events occurred in follow-up. Of the 28 patients who continued receiving OAC, 19 (68%) were free of recurrent GI bleed, 4 had minor GI bleeds, 4 required transfusion, and 1 required colectomy for GI bleeding. Mean hemoglobin levels in all patients receiving OAC were significantly higher at 3- and 6-month follow-up than at baseline (p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Subcutaneous OCT therapy is an attractive option in AF patients receiving OAC who have AVM-related GI bleeds. It allows successful reinitiation of OAC as a bridge to left atrial appendage exclusion or short-term relief from bleeding., (Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: We aimed to perform a meta-analysis from eligible studies to analyze the true impact of QL when compared with BL with regard to post-procedural outcomes including lead deactivation, revision or replacement. Background: Many observational and retrospective studies showed that quadripolar left ventricular leads (QL) are associated with better outcomes and fewer complications when compared with bipolar leads (BL). Methods: We performed a comprehensive literature search through June 30, 2015 using: quadripolar, bipolar, left ventricular lead and CRT in Pubmed, Ebsco and google scholar databases. Results: The analysis included 8 studies comparing QL and BL implantation. Post-procedural outcomes such as lead deactivation, revision or replacement were used as primary outcome and assessed with Mantel-Haenszel risk ratio (RR). Secondary outcomes included total fluoroscopy/procedure time, occurrence of phrenic nerve stimulation (PNS) and all-cause mortality on follow up. Follow-up duration for the studies ranged from 3 to 60 months. Compared with BL, the use of QL is associated with 52 % reduction (relative risk 0.48; 95% CI: 0.36-0.64, p=0.00001) in the risk of deactivation, revision or replacement of the LV lead. QL had significantly lower fluoroscopy/procedure time, PNS and all-cause mortality when compared with BL. Conclusion: Our meta-analysis shows that QL implantation was associated with decreased risk of LV lead deactivation, revision or replacement when compared with BL.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia in athletes, especially in middle-aged athletes. Studies have demonstrated that athletes who engage in endurance sports such as runners, cyclists and skiers are more prone to AF than other athletes. The effects of exercise on the onset and progression of AF is complex. Triggers of AF in athletes may include atrial ectopy and sports supplements. Substrates for AF in athletes include atrial remodeling, fibrosis, and inflammation. Modulators of AF in athletes include autonomic activation, electrolyte abnormalities, and possibly, gastroesophageal reflux. Management of AF in athletes with rate-controlling agents and antiarrhythmic drugs remains a challenge and can be associated with impaired athletic performance. The value of catheter ablation is emerging and should be considered in suitable athletes with AF.