Protocol update for a randomised controlled feasibility trial of exercise rehabilitation for people with postural tachycardia syndrome: the PULSE study.

BACKGROUND: The PULSE (PostUraL tachycardia Syndrome Exercise) study is a randomised controlled trial assessing the feasibility of conducting a multicentre RCT testing supervised exercise rehabilitation with behavioural and motivational support, compared to best-practice usual care, for people with Postural Tachycardia Syndrome (PoTS). The original trial protocol was published in BMC Pilot & Feasibility Studies (accessible at https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-020-00702-1 ). The PULSE intervention consists of (1) individual assessment; (2) 12-week, twice-weekly, supervised exercise training; (3) behavioural and motivational support; and (4) guided lifestyle physical activity. The control intervention is best-practice usual care with a single 30-min, one-to-one practitioner appointment, and general advice on safe and effective physical activity. Sixty-two people (aged 18-60 years) with a confirmed diagnosis of PoTS will be invited to enrol on a feasibility RCT with an embedded qualitative study. The primary outcome will be feasibility; process-related measures will include eligibility, recruitment, randomisation and withdrawal rates, along with indicators of exercise programme adherence and acceptability. Secondary physiological, clinical and health-related outcomes will be assessed. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, here we describe amendments to the trial protocol. METHODS: Restrictions imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic meant it was necessary to change the delivery of the PULSE and control interventions. These changes reflected the need to limit the risk of COVID-19 transmission in a clinical population, some of whom were at increased risk of contracting the virus and suffering serious illness. The major change was that the originally intended centre-based PULSE and control interventions would now be delivered remotely on-line. Subsequently, there were minor changes to the participant eligibility criteria. These decisions followed an on-line co-creation session with people affected by PoTS, and relevant public and professional stakeholders. CONCLUSIONS: We present an update of the original trial protocol in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. No participants were recruited to the original protocol; thus, results will reflect the on-line delivery of the intervention. PULSE will be the first randomised trial to assess the feasibility of conducting a definitive multi-centre RCT testing supervised on-line exercise rehabilitation with behavioural and motivational support, compared to best-practice usual care, for people with PoTS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN45323485 registered on 7 April 2020.

Safety and feasibility of trans-venous cardiac device extraction using conscious sedation alone-Implications for the post-COVID-19 era.

BACKGROUND: Transvenous lead extraction (TLE) for implantable cardiac-devices is traditionally performed under general anesthesia (GA). This can lead to greater risk of exposure to COVID-19, longer recovery-times and increased procedural-costs. We report the feasibility/safety of TLE using conscious-sedation alone with immediate GA/cardiac-surgery back-up if needed. METHODS: Retrospective case-series of consecutive TLEs performed using conscious-sedation alone between March 2016 and December 2019. All were performed in the electrophysiology-laboratory using intravenous Fentanyl, Midazolam/Diazepam with a stepwise approach using locking-stylets/cutting-sheaths, including mechanical-sheaths. Baseline patient-characteristics, procedural-details and TLE outcomes (including procedure-related complications/death) were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 130 leads were targeted in 54 patients, mean age ± SD 74.6 ± 11.8years, 47(87%) males; dual-chamber pacemakers (n = 26; 48%), cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillators (n = 17; 31%) and defibrillators (n = 8; 15%) were commonest extracted devices. Mean ± SD/median (range) lead-dwell times were 11.0 ± 8.8/8.3 (0.3-37) years, respectively. Extraction indications included systemic infection (n = 23; 43%) and lead/pulse-generator erosion (n = 27; 50%); mean 2.1 ± 2.0 leads were removed per procedure/mean procedure-time was 100 ± 54 min. Local anesthetic (LA) was used for all (mean-dose: 33 ± 8 ml 1% lidocaine), IV drug-doses used (mean ± SD) were: midazolam: 3.95 ± 2.44 mg, diazepam: 4.69 ± 0.89 mg and fentanyl: 57 ± 40 µg. Complete lead-extraction was achieved in 110 (85%) leads, partial lead-extraction (<4 cm-fragment remaining) in 5 (4%) leads. Sedation-related hypotension requiring IV fluids occurred in 2 (managed without adverse-consequences) and hypoxia requiring additional airway-management in none. No procedural deaths occurred, one patient required emergency cardiac surgery for localized ventricular perforation, nine had minor complications (transient hypotension/bradycardia/pericardial effusion not requiring intervention). CONCLUSION: TLE undertaken using LA/conscious-sedation was safe/feasible in our series and associated with good clinical outcome/low procedural complications. Reduced risk of aerosolization of COVID-19 and quicker patient recovery/reduced anesthetic risk are potential benefits that warrant further study.

Safety and cost-effectiveness of same-day complex left atrial ablation.

BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation for complex left-atrial arrhythmia is increasing worldwide with many centres admitting patients overnight. Same-day procedures using conscious sedation carry significant benefits to patients/healthcare providers but data are limited. We evaluated the safety and cost-effectiveness of same-day complex left-atrial arrhythmia ablation. METHOD: Multi-centre retrospective cohort study of all consecutive complex elective left-atrial ablation procedures performed between January 2011 and December 2019. Data were collected on planned same-day discharge versus overnight stay, baseline parameters, procedure details/success, ablation technology, post-operative complications, unplanned overnight admissions/outcomes at 4-months and mortality up to April 2020. A cost analysis of potential savings was also performed. RESULTS: A total of 967 consecutive patients underwent complex left-ablation using radiofrequency (point-by-point ablation aided by 3D-mapping or PVAC catheter ablation with fluoroscopic screening) or cryoballoon-ablation (mean age: 60.9 ± 11.6 years, range 23-83 yrs., 572 [59%] females). The majority of patients had isolation of pulmonary veins alone (n = 846, 87%) and most using conscious-sedation alone (n = 921, 95%). Of the total cohort, 414 (43%) had planned same-day procedure with 35 (8%) admitted overnight due to major (n = 5) or minor (n = 30) complications. Overall acute procedural success-rate was 96% (n = 932). Complications in planned overnight-stay/same-day cohorts were low. At 4-month follow-up there were 62 (6.4%) readmissions (femoral haematomas, palpitation, other reasons); there were 3 deaths at mean follow-up of 42.0 ± 27.6 months, none related to the procedure. Overnight stay costs £350; the same-day ablation policy over this period would have saved £310,450. CONCLUSIONS: Same-day complex left-atrial catheter ablation using conscious sedation is safe and cost-effective with significant benefits for patients and healthcare providers. This is especially important in the current financial climate and Covid-19 pandemic.