ABSTRACT
The presence of isolated interrupted inferior vena cava (IVC) is very rare. Though the occurrence of typical atrial flutter in this setting has recently been described, the use of 3-dimensional activation mapping to aid the management of such patients has not yet been described. We report the successful ablation of this arrhythmia in a 63-year-old woman using the superior route through the internal jugular vein with the help of a mapping system.
Subject(s)
Atrial Flutter/diagnosis , Atrial Flutter/surgery , Body Surface Potential Mapping/methods , Catheter Ablation/methods , Imaging, Three-Dimensional/methods , Vena Cava, Inferior/abnormalities , Atrial Flutter/complications , Female , Humans , Surgery, Computer-Assisted/methods , Syndrome , Treatment Outcome , Vena Cava, Inferior/surgeryABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Mortality benefit from implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy in ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) with non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (NS-VT) and inducible VT is well defined. Although NS-VT may suggest an increased risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM), the role of ICD therapy is unclear. This retrospective study compares follow-up data in these two groups after ICD implantation. METHODS: 153 consecutive patients with ICD implantation for NS-VT were analyzed. ICM patients received an ICD if they had inducible VT at electrophysiology study (EPS). NICM patients did not routinely undergo EPS before ICD implantation. RESULTS: There were 48 patients (33 males) in NICM group and 105 patients (89 males) in the ICM group. Baseline characteristics including mean ejection fraction (EF), distribution in various New York Heart Association (NYHA) classes, and the mean duration of follow up in the two groups were similar. 50% of the patients in the NICM group and 36% in the ICM group received appropriate therapies (p = 0.106). The mean number of appropriate therapies in the two groups were similar (23.3 +/- 56.7 and 22.5 +/- 59.5 respectively, p = NS). The percentage of patients with inappropriate therapies in the two groups were 27% and 23% respectively (p = NS). Patients in the NICM group received appropriate ICD discharges at a greater rate (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing ICD implantation for NICM and NS-VT receive appropriate ICD therapy at a greater rate than those implanted for ICM, NS-VT, and a positive EPS. Although these data do not prove survival benefit in NICM, they suggest a beneficial effect.
