ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Ultrasound-guided axillary venous puncture (UGAVP) for cardiac devices implantation has been developed because of its rapidity, safety and potential long-term lead protection. Early work excluded defibrillators (ICD), cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) and upgrade procedures. Compared to the cephalic approach, in previous studies, there was a greater use of pressure dressings with this technique, suggesting a higher risk of bleeding. AIMS: To assess UGAVP in patients under antithrombotic therapy (ATT) undergoing cardiac devices implantation including CRT/ICD. METHODS: Prospectively, consecutive patients eligible for a pacemaker or ICD implantation were included. All procedures were performed by a single operator, experienced with UGAVP for femoral access, and fluoroscopy-guided axillary vein access. Guidewires insertion time (from lidocaïne administration), and complications were systematically studied. RESULTS: From 457 cardiac device implantations, 200 patients (77.8 ± 10 y, male 58%) 360 leads were implanted by UGAVP including 36 ICD, 54 CRT and 14 upgrade procedures. A majority (90%) was under ATT: Vitamin K Antagonist or Heparin (n = 58, 29%), direct oral anticoagulant (n = 46, 23%), dual antithrombotic therapy (n = 18, 9%) and single antiplatelet drug (n = 82, 41%). UGAVP was successful in 95.78%. Mean insertion time for 1.8 guidewires per patient was 4.68 ± 3.6 min. No complication (no hematoma) was observed during the follow-up (mean of 45 ± 10 months). Guidewires insertion time reached its plateau after 15 patients. CONCLUSION: UGAVP is fast, feasible and safe for patients under ATT undergoing device implantation including CRT/ICD and upgrade procedures, with a short learning curve.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The electrocardiographic and intracardiac activation features of left atrial roof-dependent macroreentrant flutter have been incompletely characterized. METHODS: Patients post-pulmonary vein (PV) isolation with roof-dependent atrial flutter based on activation and entrainment mapping were included. ECG and coronary sinus activation were compared with mitral annular (MA) flutter. RESULTS: The roof-dependent left atrial flutter circled the right PVs in 32 of 33 cases. Two forms of roof flutters were identified, posteroanterior, ascendant on posterior wall and descendant on anterior wall (n=24); and anteroposterior, ascendant on the anterior wall and descendent on the posterior wall (n=9). Both forms had positive large amplitude P waves in V1 through V2 with decreasing amplitude in V3 through V6. Posteroanterior roof flutters had positive P wave in the inferior and negative P wave in leads I and aVL similar to counterclockwise MA flutter, but coronary sinus activation was simultaneous for roof and proximal to distal for counterclockwise. Anteroposterior roof flutters were similar to clockwise MA flutter with negative P in inferior leads and transition to flat or negative P in V3 through V6. Coronary sinus activation time ≤39 ms identified roof versus MA flutter (sensitivity: 100% and specificity: 97%). CONCLUSIONS: Roof-dependent flutter around right PVs is more common than around left PVs. The ECG pattern for roof-dependent flutter around right PVs is similar to MA flutter with frontal plane axis dictated by septal activation. Roof-dependent flutter can be distinguished from MA flutter by more simultaneous rather than sequential coronary sinus activation.
