Search

Background Pharmacological treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) in the setting of Brugada syndrome (BrS) is challenging. In addition, patients with BrS with an implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator (ICD) might experience inappropriate shocks for fast AF. Long‐term outcome of pulmonary vein isolation in BrS has not been well established yet, and it is still unclear whether pulmonary vein triggers are the only pathophysiological mechanism of AF in BrS. The aim of the study is to assess the long‐term outcomes in patients with BrS undergoing pulmonary vein isolation for paroxysmal AF compared with a matched cohort of patients without BrS. Methods and Results Sixty patients with BrS undergoing pulmonary vein isolation with cryoballoon catheter ablation for paroxysmal AF were matched with 60 patients without BrS, who underwent the same procedure. After a mean follow‐up of 58.2±31.7 months, freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmias was achieved in 61.7% in the BrS group and in 78.3% in the non‐BrS group (log‐rank P =0.047). In particular, freedom from AF was 76.7% in the first group and in 83.3% in the second ( P =0.27), while freedom from atrial tachycardia/atrial flutter was 85% and 95% ( P =0.057). In the BrS group, 29 patients (48.3%) had an ICD and 8 (27.6%) had a previous ICD‐inappropriate shock for fast AF. In the BrS cohort, ICD‐inappropriate interventions for AF were significantly reduced after ablation (3.4% versus 27.6%; P =0.01). Conclusions Pulmonary vein isolation in patients with BrS was associated with higher rate of arrhythmic recurrence. Despite this, catheter ablation significantly reduced inappropriate ICD interventions in BrS patients and can be considered a therapeutic strategy to prevent inappropriate device therapies.

Background Although life-saving in selected patients, ECMO treatment still has high mortality which for a large part is due to treatment-related complications. A feared complication is ischemic stroke for which heparin is routinely administered for which the dosage is usually guided by activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT). However, there is no relation between aPTT and the rare occurrence of ischemic stroke (1.2%), but there is a relation with the much more frequent occurrence of bleeding complications (55%) and blood transfusion. Both are strongly related to outcome. Methods We will conduct a three-arm non-inferiority randomized controlled trial, in adult patients treated with ECMO. Participants will be randomized between heparin administration with a target of 2–2.5 times baseline aPTT, 1.5–2 times baseline aPTT, or low molecular weight heparin guided by weight and renal function. Apart from anticoagulation targets, treatment will be according to standard care. The primary outcome parameter is a combined endpoint consisting of major bleeding including hemorrhagic stroke, severe thromboembolic complications including ischemic stroke, and mortality at 6 months. Discussion We hypothesize that with lower anticoagulation targets or anticoagulation with LMWH during ECMO therapy, patients will have fewer hemorrhagic complications without an increase in thromboembolic complication or a negative effect on their outcome. If our hypothesis is confirmed, this study could lead to a change in anticoagulation protocols and a better outcome for patients treated with ECMO. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04536272. Registered on 2 September 2020. Netherlands Trial Register NL7969

Introduction COVID-19 infection has resulted in thousands of critically ill patients admitted to ICUs and treated with mechanical ventilation. Percutaneous tracheostomy is a well-known technique utilised as a strategy to wean critically ill patients from mechanical ventilation. Worldwide differences exist in terms of methods, operators, and settings, and questions remain regarding timing and indications. If tracheostomy is to be performed in COVID-19 patients, a safe environment is needed for optimal care. Material and methods We present a guidewire dilating forceps tracheostomy procedure in COVID-19 patients that was optimised including apnoea-moments, protective clothing, checklists, and clear protocols. We performed a retrospective analysis of the outcome after tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients between March 2020 and May 2020. Results The follow-up of the first 16 patients, median age 62 years, revealed a median intubation time until tracheostomy of 18 days and median cannulation time of 20 days. The overall perioperative complication rate and complication rate while cannulated was 19%, mainly superficial bleeding. None of the healthcare providers involved in performing the procedure developed any symptoms of the disease. Conclusions This COVID-19-centred strategy based on flexibility, preparation, and cooperation between healthcare providers with different backgrounds facilitated percutaneous tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients without an increase in the overall complication rate or evidence of risk to healthcare providers. Our findings provide initial evidence that tracheostomy can be performed safely as a standard of care for COVID-19 patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation as was standard practice in ICU patients prior to the COVID-19 pandemic to promote ventilator weaning and patient recovery.

This report describes two patients for whom the preoperative, anaesthetic consultation led to postponing planned surgery because of important, undiagnosed health problems. In one of the two cases, this consultation was even life-saving. However, actual literature cannot prove any advantage on the outcome of the individual patient. The only proven advantages in favour of pre-operative consultation are a reduced length of stay in the hospital and a reduction in the cost of preoperative testing.