Search

BackgroundHigh-dose isoproterenol infusion is a useful provocative maneuver to elicit triggers of atrial fibrillation (AF) during ablation. We evaluated whether the use of isoproterenol infusion to elicit triggers of AF after ablation is associated with differential outcomes.MethodsWe performed a retrospective study of all patients who underwent de novo radiofrequency catheter ablation of AF enrolled in the University of California, San Diego AF Ablation Registry. The primary outcome was freedom from atrial arrhythmias on or off antiarrhythmic drugs (AAD).ResultsOf 314 patients undergoing AF ablation, 235 (74.8%) received isoproterenol while 79 (25.2%) did not. Among those who received isoproterenol, 11 (4.7%) had additional triggers identified. There were no statistically significant differences in procedure time (p = 0.432), antiarrhythmic drug use (p = 0.289), procedural complications (p = 0.279), recurrences of atrial arrhythmias on or off AAD [adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) 0.92 (95% CI 0.58-1.46); p = 0.714], all-cause hospitalizations [AHR 1.00 (95% CI 0.60-1.67); p = 0.986], or all-cause mortality [AHR 0.14 (95% CI 0.01-3.52); p = 0.229] between groups.ConclusionsIn this registry analysis, use of isoproterenol is safe but was not associated with a reduction in recurrence of atrial arrhythmias.

BackgroundThe mechanisms for atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence after pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) catheter ablation are unclear. Non-PV organized atrial arrhythmias (PAC, AT, macro-reentrant AFL) are possible contributors; however the prevalence and effect of their ablation on recurrent AF are unknown. We hypothesize that the identification and ablation of non-PV organized atrial arrhythmias were associated with less AF recurrence.MethodsPatients who underwent repeat ablation for recurrent AF after prior PVI were retrospectively enrolled. The prevalence and characteristics of PV reconnections and non-PV organized atrial arrhythmias were identified. The outcomes of time to clinical AF recurrence, heart failure (HF) hospitalization, and mortality were analyzed in patients using multivariable adjusted Cox regression.ResultsIn 74 patients with recurrent AF (age 66 ± 9 years, left atrial volume index 38 ± 10 ml/m2, 59% persistent AF), PV reconnections were found in 46 patients (61%), macro-reentrant atrial flutter in 27 patients (36%), and focal tachycardia in 12 patients (16%). Mapping and ablation of non-PV organized atrial arrhythmias were associated with a reduced recurrence of late clinical AF (adjusted HR 0.26, CI 0.08-0.85, p = 0.03) and the composite outcome of recurrence of late AF, HF hospitalization, and mortality (adjusted HR 0.38, CI 0.17-0.85, p = 0.02), with median follow-up of 1.6 (IQR 0.7-6.3) years. The presence of PV reconnections or empiric linear ablation was not associated with reduction in clinical AF or composite endpoints.ConclusionThe ablation of non-PV organized atrial arrhythmias resulted in a reduction of late clinical AF recurrence and composite outcome. In this challenging population, alternate mechanisms beyond PV reconnections need to be considered. Prospective studies are needed.

PurposeEarly recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmia (ER) is predictive of late recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmia (LR) after first-time atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation, but the association in patients undergoing repeat AF ablation is unknown. We aim to determine the incidence and prognostic significance of ER after repeat ablation.MethodsA total of 259 consecutive patients (mean age 64 years, 75.3% male) undergoing repeat AF ablation with complete follow-up data were included at a single institution from 2010 to 2015. ER and LR were defined as atrial tachyarrhythmia (AF, atrial flutter or atrial tachycardia) > 30 s within the 3-month blanking period (BP) and after the 3-month BP, respectively.ResultsER occurred in 79/259 (30.5%), and LR occurred in 138/259 (53%) at a median follow-up of 1221 (IQR: 523-1712) days. Four-year freedom from LR was 22% and 56% in patients with and without ER, respectively (p < 0.001). After multivariate adjustment, ER was strongly associated with LR, cardioversion post BP, and repeat ablation, but not associated with hospitalization. Compared to those with no ER, there was a higher risk of LR when ER occurred within the first month of the BP [month 1: hazard ratio (HR) 2.32, confidence interval (CI) 1.57-3.74, p < 0.001; month 2: HR 2.01, CI 1.13-3.83, p = 0.02; month 3: HR 1.46, CI 0.5-3.36, p = 0.37], however the prediction of LR based on timing within the BP was poor (area under curve 0.64).ConclusionFollowing repeat AF ablation, ER is strongly associated with LR, cardioversion post BP, and repeat ablation.

PurposeMitral annular flutter (MAF) is a common arrhythmia after atrial fibrillation ablation. We sought to compare the efficacy and safety of catheter ablation utilizing either a left atrial anterior wall (LAAW) line or a lateral mitral isthmus (LMI) line.MethodsWe performed a systematic review for all studies that compared LAAW versus LMI lines. Risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) 95% confidence intervals were measured for dichotomous and continuous variables, respectively.ResultsFour studies with a total of 594 patients were included, one of which was a randomized control trial. In the LMI ablation group, 40% of patients required CS ablation. There were no significant differences in bidirectional block (RR 1.26; 95% CI, 0.94-1.69) or ablation time (MD -1.5; 95% CI, -6.11-3.11), but LAAW ablation was associated with longer ablation line length (MD 11.42; 95% CI, 10.69-12.14) and longer LAA activation delay (MD 67.68; 95% CI, 33.47-101.89.14) when compared to LMI. There was no significant difference in pericardial effusions (RR 0.36; 95% CI, 0.39-20.75) between groups and more patients were maintained sinus rhythm (RR 1.19; 95% CI, 1.03-1.37, p = 0.02) who underwent LAAW compared to LMI.ConclusionAblation of mitral annular flutter with a LAAW line compared to a LMI line showed no difference in rates of acute bidirectional block, ablation time, or pericardial effusion. However, LAAW ablation required a longer ablation line length, resulted in greater LAA activation delayed and was associated with more sinus rhythm maintenance, with the added advantage of avoiding ablation in the CS.

BackgroundLeft atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) has emerged as an alternative strategy to oral anticoagulation for mitigating ischemic stroke risk in selected patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), but safety data in patients with significant kidney disease are limited.ObjectiveTo determine the association of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) with procedural complications and in-hospital outcomes after LAAO in AF patients.MethodsData were extracted from National Inpatient Sample for calendar years 2015-2018. Watchman implantations were identified on the basis of International Classification of Diseases, 9th and 10th Revision, Clinical Modification codes of 37.90 and 02L73DK. The outcomes assessed in our study included complications, inpatient mortality, and resource utilization with LAAO.ResultsA total of 36,065 Watchman recipients were included in the final analysis. CKD (9.8%, n = 3545) and ESRD (3%, n = 1155) were associated with a higher prevalence of major complications and mortality in crude analysis compared to no CKD. After multivariate adjustment for potential confounders, CKD was associated with length of stay (LOS) >1 day (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.355; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.234-1.488), median cost >$24,663 (aOR 1.267; 95% CI 1.176-1.365), and acute kidney injury (aOR 4.134; 95% CI 3.536-4.833), while ESRD was associated with in-patient mortality (aOR 7.156; 95% CI 3.294-15.544).ConclusionThe prevalence of CKD and ESRD was approximately 13% in AF patients undergoing Watchman LAAO implantations. CKD was independently associated with prolonged LOS, higher hospitalization costs, and acute kidney injury, while ESRD was independently associated with in-patient mortality.

BackgroundStereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SAbR) is an emerging therapy for refractory ventricular tachycardia (VT). However, the current workflow is complicated, and the precision and safety in patients with significant cardiorespiratory motion and VT targets near the stomach may be suboptimal.ObjectiveWe hypothesized that automated 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) mapping and respiratory-gated therapy may improve the ease and precision of SAbR planning and facilitate safe radiation delivery in patients with refractory VT.MethodsConsecutive patients with refractory VT were studied at 2 hospitals. VT exit sites were localized using a 3-D computational ECG algorithm noninvasively and compared to available prior invasive mapping. Radiotherapy (25 Gy) was delivered at end-expiration when cardiac respiratory motion was ≥0.6 cm or targets were ≤2 cm from the stomach.ResultsIn 6 patients (ejection fraction 29% ± 13%), 4.2 ± 2.3 VT morphologies per patient were mapped. Overall, 7 out of 7 computational ECG mappings (100%) colocalized to the identical cardiac segment when prior invasive electrophysiology study was available. Respiratory gating was associated with smaller planning target volumes compared to nongated volumes (71 ± 7 vs 153 ± 35 cc, P < .01). In 2 patients with inferior wall VT targets close to the stomach (6 mm proximity) or significant respiratory motion (22 mm excursion), no GI complications were observed at 9- and 12-month follow-up. Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks decreased from 23 ± 12 shocks/patient to 0.67 ± 1.0 (P < .001) post-SAbR at 6.0 ± 4.9 months follow-up.ConclusionsA workflow including computational ECG mapping and protocol-guided respiratory gating is feasible, is safe, and may improve the ease of SAbR planning. Studies to validate this workflow in larger populations are required.

BackgroundLeft atrial appendage occlusion has shown promise in mitigating the risk of stroke in selected patients with atrial fibrillation.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to determine the real-world prevalence and in-hospital outcomes in left atrial appendage occlusion (Watchman) recipients complicated by pericardial effusion requiring percutaneous drainage or open cardiac surgery-based intervention.MethodsData were derived from the National Inpatient Sample database from January 2015 to December 2017. The primary outcomes assessed were the prevalence of pericardial effusion requiring intervention and in-hospital outcomes including mortality, other major complications, hospital stay > 1 day, and hospitalization costs. Predictors of pericardial effusion requiring intervention were also analyzed.ResultsPericardial effusion requiring intervention occurred in 220 total patients (1.24%). After multivariable adjustment, pericardial effusion requiring intervention was associated with in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 511.6; 95% confidence interval [CI] 122-2145.3), other Watchman-related major complications (aOR 1.35; 95% CI 0.83-2.19), length of stay > 1 day (aOR 17.64; 95% CI 12.56-24.77), and hospitalization cost above the median of $24,327 (aOR 3.58; 95% CI 2.61-4.91). Independent patient predictors of pericardial effusion requiring intervention from the procedure included advanced age (aOR 1.029 per 1-year increase; 95% CI 1.009-1.05 per 1-year increase), higher CHA2DS2-VASc score (aOR 1.221 per 1-point increase; 95% CI 1.083-1.377 per 1-point increase), and obesity (aOR 2.033; 95% CI 1.464-2.823).ConclusionIn a large, contemporary real-world cohort of Watchman recipients in US practice, the prevalence of pericardial effusion requiring intervention was 1.24%. Pericardial effusion requiring intervention was associated with several adverse events including increased in-hospital mortality, other major complications, prolonged hospital stay, and hospitalization costs.

[Figure: see text].

[Figure: see text].

ObjectiveTo determine trends in real-world utilization and in-hospital adverse events from Watchman implantation since its approval by the Food and Drug Administration in 2015.BackgroundThe risk of embolic stroke caused by atrial fibrillation is reduced by oral anticoagulants, but not all patients can tolerate long-term anticoagulation. Left atrial appendage occlusion with the Watchman device has emerged as an alternative therapy.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study utilizing data from National Inpatient Sample for calendar years 2015-2017. The outcomes assessed in this study were associated complications, in-hospital mortality, and resource utilization trends after Watchman implantation. Trends analysis were performed using analysis of variance. Multivariable adjusted logistic regression analysis was performed to determine predictors of mortality.ResultsA total of 17 700 patients underwent Watchman implantation during the study period. There was a significantly increased trend in the number of Watchman procedures performed over the study years (from 1195 in 2015 to 11 165 devices in 2017, p

PurposeTo evaluate if specific AADs prescribed in the blanking period (BP) after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) may be associated with reduced risk of early recurrence (ER) and/or late recurrence (LR) of atrial arrhythmias.MethodsA total of 478 patients undergoing first-time ablation at a single institution were included. Outcomes were: ER, LR, discontinuation of AAD less than 90 days post-ablation, and second ablation. ER was defined as AF, atrial flutter (AFL), or atrial tachycardia (AT) > 30 seconds within BP. LR was defined as AF/AFL/AT > 30 seconds after BP.ResultsOf 478 patients, 14.9% were prescribed no AAD, 26.4% propafenone/flecainide, 34.5% sotalol/dofetilide, 10.7% dronedarone, and 13.6% amiodarone. Patients prescribed amiodarone were more likely to have persistent AF, hypertension, diabetes, and other comorbidities. In unadjusted analyses, there were no differences between groups in relation to ER (log rank P = 0.171), discontinuation of AAD before ninety days post-ablation (log rank P = 0.235), or freedom from second ablation (log rank P = 0.147). After multivariable adjustment, patients prescribed amiodarone or dronedarone were more likely to experience LR than those prescribed no AAD [Adjusted Hazard Ratio (AHR) 1.83, 95% CI 1.10-3.04, p = 0.02; AHR 1.79, 95% CI 1.05-3.05, p = 0.03, respectively].ConclusionFollowing first-time catheter ablation, there were no differences between specific AAD prescription and risk of ER, while those prescribed amiodarone or dronedarone in the BP were more likely to experience LR than those prescribed no AAD, which may represent an association due to confounding by indication.

Catheter ablation improves clinical outcomes in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, the role of catheter ablation in HF with a preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is less clear. We performed a literature search and systematic review of studies that compared AF recurrence at one year after catheter ablation of AF in patients with HFpEF versus those with HFrEF. Risk ratio (RR; where a RR

Catheter ablation improves outcomes in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of catheter ablation of AF in HF patients with a preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). We performed a retrospective study of all patients who underwent de novo radiofrequency catheter ablation enrolled in the UC San Diego AF Ablation Registry. The primary outcome was recurrence of all atrial arrhythmias on or off antiarrhythmic drugs (AAD). Of 547 total patients, 51 (9.3%) had HFpEF, 40 (7.3%) had HFrEF, and 456 (83.4%) were without HF. There was no difference in recurrence of atrial arrhythmias on or off AAD (Adjusted Hazard Ratio [AHR] 1.92 [95% CI 0.97 to 3.83] for HFpEF vs HFrEF and AHR 0.90 [95% CI 0.59 to 1.39] for HFpEF vs no HF) or off AAD (AHR 1.96 [95% CI 0.99 to 3.90] for HFpEF vs HFrEF and AHR 1.14 [95% CI 0.74 to 1.77] for HFpEF vs no HF). There was also no difference in rates of all-cause hospitalizations (AHR 1.80 [95% CI 0.97 to 3.33] for HFpEF vs HFrEF and AHR 2.05 [95% CI 1.30 to 3.23] for HFpEF vs no HF) or rates of all-cause mortality (AHR 0.53 [95% CI 0.05 to 6.11] for HFpEF vs HFrEF and AHR 2.46 [95% CI 0.34 to 17.92] for HFpEF vs no HF). There were no significant differences in AAD use (p = 0.176) or procedural complications between groups (p = 0.980). In conclusion, there were no significant differences in arrhythmia-free survival between patients with HFpEF and HFrEF that underwent catheter ablation of AF.

A 67-year-old man presented with dizziness secondary to ventricular tachycardia (VT) originating from the moderator band. The VT was refractory to multiple antiarrhythmic medications requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and eventual curative ablation. We highlight a malignant form of idiopathic VT, unique electrocardiogram characteristics, and ablation considerations. (Level of Difficulty: Intermediate.).

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is frequently present in patients with heart failure (HF) and an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). This study aims to identify clinical factors associated with a baseline history of AF in ICD recipients, and compares subsequent clinical outcomes in those with and without a baseline history of AF.We studied 566 consecutive first-time ICD recipients at an academic center between 2011 and 2018. Logistic regression multivariable analyses were used to identify clinical factors associated with a baseline history of AF at the time of ICD implant. Cox-proportional hazard regression models were constructed for multivariate analysis to examine associations between a baseline history of AF with subsequent clinical outcomes, including ICD therapies, HF readmission, and all-cause mortality.Of all patients, 201 (36%) had a baseline history of AF at the time of ICD implant. In multivariate analyses, clinical factors associated with a baseline history of AF included hypertension, valvular heart disease, body weight, PR interval, and serum creatinine level. After multivariate adjustment for potential confounders, a baseline history of AF was associated with an increased risk of anti-tachycardia pacing (HR = 1.84, 95% CI = 1.19-2.85, P = .006), appropriate ICD shocks (HR = 1.80, 95% CI = 1.05-3.09, P = .032), and inappropriate ICD shocks (HR = 3.72, 95% CI = 1.7-7.77, P = .0001), but not other adverse outcomes.Among first-time ICD recipients, specific clinical characteristics were associated with a baseline history of AF at the time of ICD implant. After adjustment for potential confounders, a baseline history of AF was associated with a higher risk of all ICD therapies in follow-up.

Obesity and atrial fibrillation (AF) are growing epidemics with significant overlap in co-morbidities. Multiple smaller studies have evaluated the effects of weight loss and risk factor modification on recurrence of AF, reduction in AF burden and improvement in AF symptom severity. The objective of this study was to determine if a modest weight loss of ≥10% of initial body weight is enough to improve outcomes in overweight or obese patients with established AF. We performed an extensive literature search and systematic review of studies that compared weight loss of ≥10% versus weight loss of less than 10% or weight gain and assessed outcomes including recurrence of AF as determined through a Holter monitor, AF burden and improvement in AF symptom severity. Risk ratio 95% confidence intervals (CI) were measured for dichotomous variables and mean difference (MD) 95% CI were measured for continuous variables, where MD >0 favors the group with ≥10% weight loss. Five studies with a total of 548 patients were included. Patients who lost ≥10% of their initial body weight experienced less recurrence of AF (risk ratio 0.29; 95% CI 0.19 to 0.44) and a larger reduction in reported event frequency (MD 1.74; 95% CI 0.70 to 2.79), episode duration (MD 2.14; 95% CI 0.04 to 4.23), global episode severity (MD 1.89; 95% CI 1.34 to 2.45), and symptom severity (MD 5.36; 95% CI 3.75 to 6.97). In conclusion, weight loss is associated with less risk of recurrent AF, reduction in AF burden, and improvement in AF symptom severity.

BackgroundThe arrhythmic role of the left atrial appendage (LAA) has been implicated in the maintenance of persistent atrial fibrillation. LAA isolation with catheter ablation has been successful but is limited by the risk of tamponade and electromechanical dissociation with the potential for LAA thrombus formation.ObjectiveTo assess whether LAA ligation results in LAA electrical isolation.MethodsA total of 68 patients with contraindication or intolerance to oral anticoagulation therapy underwent LAA ligation with the LARIAT suture delivery device. Patients had unipolar [n = 30(44%)] or bipolar [n = 38(56%)] voltage measurements pre- and post-LAA ligation.ResultsAll 68 patients underwent successful LAA ligation. There was a statistically significant reduction in the mean LAA voltage from pre-ligation (unipolar pre-ligation voltage 1.1 ± 0.53 mV; bipolar pre-ligation voltage 4.7 ± 2.83 mV) to post-ligation (unipolar post-ligation voltage 0.3 ± 0.38 mV; bipolar post-ligation voltage 0.6 ± 0.27 mV). Ninety-four percent of the patients had a reduction in the LAA voltage after the closure of the snare, with 10 of 30 (33%) of the patients having complete elimination of LAA voltage with the initial tightening of the suture. Pacing from the LAA after the closure of the snare resulted in lack of capture of the left atrium in 28 of 31 patients.ConclusionsThe snare closure of the LAA using the LARIAT device produces an acute reduction in the LAA voltage and inhibits the capture of the left atrium during LAA pacing. Future studies are needed to determine whether LAA ligation affects atrial fibrillation burden.

Background: Catheter ablation improves outcomes in symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. However, its safety and efficacy in the very elderly (≥80 years old) is not well described. Hypothesis: Ablation of AF in the very elderly is safe and effective. Methods: We performed a retrospective study of all patients who underwent catheter ablation enrolled in the University of California, San Diego AF Ablation Registry. The primary outcome was freedom from atrial arrhythmias on or off antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs). Results: Of 847 patients, 42 (5.0%) were 80 years of age or greater with a median age of 81.5 (80–82.3) and 805 (95.0%) were less than 80 years of age with a median age of 64.4 (57.6–70.2). Among those who were ≥80 years old, 29 were undergoing de novo ablation (69.0%), whereas in the younger cohort, 518 (64.5%) were undergoing de novo ablation (p =.548). There were no statistically significant differences in fluoroscopy (p =.406) or total procedure times (p =.076), AAD use (p =.611), or procedural complications (p =.500) between groups. After multivariable adjustment, there were no statistically significant differences in recurrence of any atrial arrhythmias on or off AAD (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR]: 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.45–1.23; p =.252), all‐cause hospitalizations (AHR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.46–1.60; p =.626), or all‐cause mortality (AHR: 4.48; 95% CI: 0.59–34.07; p =.147) between the very elderly and the younger cohort. Conclusion: In this registry analysis, catheter ablation of AF appears similarly effective and safe in patients 80 years or older when compared to a younger cohort. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]