Transvenous Lead Extraction in Patients With Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of transvenous lead extraction (TLE) in patients with arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC). BACKGROUND: ARVC is an increasingly diagnosed cardiomyopathy that often requires device implantation to prevent sudden death. Little is known about TLE in this setting, which has potential challenges and risks, primarily due to right ventricular (RV) wall thinning and fragility. METHODS: All consecutive patients with ARVC who underwent TLE at our institution between 1996 and 2016 were included. When extraction tools were used, sheaths were advanced to the RV with countertraction at the lead tip. Success and complications were defined in concordance with Heart Rhythm Society guidelines. RESULTS: Twenty-two TLE procedures in patients with ARVC involved extraction of 27 leads (22 defibrillators and 5 pacemakers). TLEs were performed due to evidence of lead malfunction (n = 17; 77%) or device infection (n = 5; 23%). Twenty-four leads (89%) were RV, and 3 leads (11%) were right atrial. The median age of the oldest extracted lead was 1,691 days (interquartile range [IQR]: 1,168 to 2,726 days). Specialized extraction tools were required in 20 procedures (91%). None required the use of a snare or a femoral workstation. The median procedural and fluoroscopic times were 152 min (IQR: 129 to 185 min) and 11 min (IQR: 6 to 18 min), respectively. Complete procedural success with removal of all leads was achieved in all cases. There were no major complications. CONCLUSIONS: In a high-volume center, TLE in patients with ARVC was associated with a high success rate and a low rate of complications when guideline-established techniques and tools were used.

Life-Threatening Complications of Atrial Fibrillation Ablation: 16-Year Experience in a Large Prospective Tertiary Care Cohort.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess the incidence and outcomes of life-threatening complications from atrial fibrillation ablations in a high volume center. BACKGROUND: With increasing rates of atrial fibrillation ablation procedures, an increase in life-threatening procedure-related complications has been reported despite improvements in technology and ablation strategies. METHODS: Between 2000 and 2015, 10,378 patients underwent atrial fibrillation ablation at our institution and were enrolled in a prospectively maintained data registry. We identified all patients who had life-threatening cardiac, neurological, respiratory, or vascular complications to the ablation resulting in death or requiring emergent intervention. RESULTS: Major life-threatening complications occurred in 100 patients (0.9%). The most common was pericardial effusion requiring pericardiocentesis (0.5%), with 7 (0.07%) requiring emergent surgical repair for cardiac perforation. Stroke occurred in 27 patients (0.3%) with a vast majority having an ischemic stroke (93%) followed by hemorrhagic (3.5%) and ischemic stroke with hemorrhagic conversion (3.5%). The yearly incidence of stroke decreased from an average of 1.1% per year in the first tertile (2000 to 2004) to 0.2% per year in the last 2 tertiles (2005 to 2015). Permanent neurological deficits occurred in 23 patients. Vascular complications causing hemorrhagic shock occurred in 7 patients (0.06%), 5 of whom required urgent surgical intervention. Acute coronary syndrome requiring urgent percutaneous coronary revascularization occurred in 2 patients whereas 1 developed a right coronary artery air embolus. No procedural death or atrio-esophageal fistulae occurred. CONCLUSIONS: In a large quaternary care center, the incidence of life-threatening complications is low. Experienced operators, high volume, continuous quality improvement initiatives, and efficient back-up support have allowed exemplary safety profiles and 0 procedure-related deaths over 16 years.

Recurrent Atrial Fibrillation After Initial Long-Term Ablation Success: Electrophysiological Findings and Outcomes of Repeat Ablation Procedures.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation recurrence after initial long-term success of catheter ablation has been described, yet not well studied. We assessed the electrophysiological findings and outcomes of repeat ablation procedures in this setting. METHODS AND RESULTS: Between 2000 and 2015, 10 378 patients underwent atrial fibrillation ablation and were enrolled in a prospectively maintained data registry. From this registry, we included all 137 consecutive patients who had initial long-term success, defined as freedom from recurrent arrhythmia for >36 months off antiarrhythmics, then underwent repeat ablation for recurrent atrial fibrillation. The median arrhythmia-free period that defined long-term success was 52 months (41-68 months). In redo ablations, reconnection along at least one of the pulmonary veins (PVs) was found in 111 (81%) patients. Reconnection along a left superior, left inferior, right superior, and right inferior PV was found in 64%, 62%, 50%, and 54% of patients, respectively, and were reisolated. Additional non-PV ablations were performed in 127 (92.7%) patients: posterior wall (46%), septal to right PVs (49%), superior vena cava (35%), roof lines (52%), and cavotricuspid isthmus (33%). After a median follow-up of 17 months (5-36.9 months), 103 patients (75%) were arrhythmia free (79 off antiarrhythmics, 24 on antiarrhythmics). CONCLUSIONS: PV reconnection is the most common electrophysiological finding in patients with atrial fibrillation recurrence after long-term success, but with lower rates than what had been reported for early recurrences. In our experience, repeat ablations in this setting involve complex ablation approaches to reisolate the PVs and modify the atrial substrate and are associated with good success rates.

Transvenous Lead Extraction in Chronic Kidney Disease and Dialysis Patients With Infected Cardiac Devices.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac implantable electronic device infections have been on the rise. A high-risk population is that with renal disease, especially dialysis. We aimed to assess procedural profiles and clinical outcomes of transvenous lead extraction for cardiac implantable electronic device infection based on renal disease status. METHODS AND RESULTS: In 1420 consecutive patients undergoing transvenous lead extraction of infected cardiac implantable electronic devices (1996-2012), we assessed procedural profiles and clinical outcomes in 3 groups: normal renal function (group 1, n=1159), renal dysfunction not requiring dialysis (group 2, n=163), and dialysis (group 3, n=98). A total of 3182 infected leads were extracted. Dialysis patients had shorter lead dwell times and were less likely to require transvenous lead extraction tools but as likely to require femoral workstations. There were higher overall rates of procedure-related complications in dialysis patients (12% versus ≈6% in nondialysis) with no difference in the major complication rates (P=not significant). Complete procedural success rates were 94%, 96%, and 94% in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively (P=not significant). There were 4 intraprocedural deaths in group 1 versus none in groups 2 and 3. Mortality rates were significantly higher in dialysis patients both at 1 and 6 months (P<0.0001 for both). In multivariable analyses, dialysis status was independently associated with increased mortality risk at 1 and 6 months. Other factors associated with mortality were lead material retention, functional (New York Heart Association) class, and occurrence of procedural complications. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with cardiac implantable electronic device infection, dialysis status did not seem to add complexity to transvenous lead extraction but was independently associated with increased mortality at 1 and 6 months.

Long-term mortality in patients with severe secondary mitral regurgitation and normal left ventricular ejection fraction: interventional perspective.

AIMS: Patients with severe secondary mitral regurgitation (MR) and normal ejection fraction are being excluded from clinical trials evaluating transcatheter mitral devices. We sought to evaluate the long-term mortality with medical management alone in this patient population. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively evaluated patients diagnosed with ≥3+ MR at our institution over 15 years. Only patients with an ejection fraction ≥60% were included in the study. Those with degenerative mitral valve disease, papillary muscle dysfunction, or hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, and those who underwent mitral valve intervention were excluded. The study included 400 patients (age 71.1±14.8, 25.1% male, ejection fraction 62.5±3.6%). Mechanism of secondary MR was restricted valve motion, annular dilation and apical tethering in 91.5, 4.5 and 4%, respectively. One-year and three-year mortality were 19.1 and 26.3%, respectively. On multivariable Cox proportional regression analysis, older age, New York Heart Association functional Class III or IV, >3+ MR and larger left atrium were independent predictors of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Severe secondary MR with normal left ventricular systolic function has significant mortality with medical management alone. This initial observation needs to be confirmed in larger prospective studies. These patients should be included in future transcatheter clinical trials.

Repeat ablation or medical management alone for recurrent arrhythmias after ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation.

INTRODUCTION: Management of persistent atrial fibrillation (PersAF) remains challenging, and many patients are left on medical therapy after a failed first ablation. In patients with recurrent symptomatic arrhythmias after PersAF ablation, we aimed to compare outcomes of repeat ablation and medical therapy versus medical therapy alone. METHODS AND RESULTS: All 682 consecutive patients with recurrent symptomatic arrhythmia after a first ablation for PersAF at our institution (2005-2012) were included. Repeat ablation with continuation of medical therapy was performed in 364 patients (Group 1) and 318 were only medically managed (Group 2). The outcome of interest was freedom from arrhythmia recurrence beyond a 3-month blanking period. Separate analyses were performed to assess this endpoint totally off antiarrhythmics (primary endpoint) or alternatively with/without use of antiarrhythmics (secondary endpoint). Over a median follow-up of 26 months, 41.5% of Group 1 patients met the primary endpoint and remained free from arrhythmia recurrence off antiarrhythmics (vs. 14.5% in Group 2, P < 0.0001). At last follow-up, antiarrhythmics continued to be required for rhythm control in 40.1% and 46.2% of patients in Groups 1 and 2, respectively (P < 0.0001). The secondary endpoint was met in 60.2% versus 32.1% of patients in Groups 1 and 2, respectively (P < 0.0001). In multivariable Cox analyses, repeat ablation was associated with significant reduction in arrhythmia recurrences compared to medical therapy alone (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.35-0.65, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: In patients with recurrent symptomatic arrhythmia after ablation of PersAF, repeat ablation was associated with significant reduction in arrhythmia recurrences compared to routine medical therapy alone.

Computed tomography measurement of the left atrial appendage for optimal sizing of the Watchman device.

INTRODUCTION: Percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion is an emerging treatment option for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation who cannot tolerate oral anticoagulation. The Watchman device (Boston Scientific Corporation, Natick, MA, USA) is deployed at the ostium of the LAA, and an appropriately sized device is critical for successful occlusion. However, standardized imaging protocols for device sizing have not been established. OBJECTIVES: We investigated the clinical utility of a standardized imaging protocol, with pre-procedural multi-detector cardiac computed tomography (MDCT), and intra-procedural transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), for Watchman device sizing. METHODS: Patients who underwent Watchman device implantation between 2010 and 2016 at our center, and who had pre-procedural MDCT and intra-procedural TEE were included. MDCT measurements (CTmax, CTmin, CTmean), and TEE measurement (TEEmax) of the LAA ostium were determined for each case, and correlated with the final size of the Watchman device implanted. Demographic data and clinical outcomes were collected. RESULTS: The study included 80 patients (mean age: 75 ± 9.6 years; male: 68%; mean CHA2DS2-VASc score: 4.5 ± 1.4). CTmax of the LAA ostium correlated strongly with the final deployed Watchman device size (Spearman's rho: 0.81, p < 0.001), while TEEmax of the LAA ostium showed only moderate correlation with the final deployed Watchman device size (Spearman's rho: 0.61, p < 0.001). Implantation success rate was 100%. At a mean duration of follow-up of 197 days, there were no device-related complications (device embolization, cardiac perforation and pericardial tamponade). At follow-up, the vast majority of patients (76 patients; 95%) had either no or trivial (≤3 mm) residual peri-device leak on TEE. CONCLUSIONS: A standardized imaging protocol for assessment of Watchman device implantation incorporating pre-procedural MDCT and intra-procedural TEE, was associated with excellent procedural outcomes at a mean duration of follow-up of 197 days.