Pericarditis After Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation: Predictors and Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation is a mainstay of atrial fibrillation (AF) treatment. Acute pericarditis after ablation is 1 of the frequently observed complications. There is a significant lack of data on the incidence and predictors of postablation pericarditis. OBJECTIVES: This study examines the incidence, characteristics, and predictors of pericarditis after AF ablation. METHODS: Patients undergoing AF ablation from January 1, 2016, to March 31, 2022, at Johns Hopkins were prospectively enrolled in an AF ablation registry. A clinical diagnosis of acute pericarditis was established in accordance with 2015 European Society of Cardiology guidelines by the presence of at least 2 of the following characteristics: pleuritic chest pain, friction rub, typical electrocardiographic changes, or pericardial effusion within 3 months after the ablation procedure. RESULTS: Of 1,540 patients who underwent AF ablation, 57 patients (3.7%) developed acute pericarditis. Baseline clinical characteristics including age, sex, and body mass index were comparable between the pericarditis and nonpericarditis groups. The median time to symptom onset was 1 day. Electrocardiographic changes were observed in 34 (59.6%) patients, pericardial effusion developed in 7 (12%) patients, and the mean duration of medical treatment was 7 days (25th-75th percentile: 3-14 days). Most pericarditis cases were treated medically with disease-specific nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (100%) and colchicine (81%). Effusion with tamponade necessitating pericardiocentesis was observed in 4 (7%) patients. Radiofrequency (RF) ablation was performed in 869 (58.6%) patients in the nonpericarditis group and 39 (68.4%) patients with pericarditis; cryoballoon ablation was performed in 486 (32.8%) patients in the nonpericarditis group and 11 (19.3%) patients with pericarditis. Multivariable logistic regression analysis identified RF ablation (OR: 2.09; 95% CI: 1.07-4.08; P = 0.03) as an independent predictor of acute pericarditis after AF ablation, whereas age per unit increase was associated with a decreased risk (OR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.95-0.995; P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of acute pericarditis after catheter ablation in our study population was 3.7%. RF ablation and younger age were independent risk factors for postablation acute pericarditis.

Sex-based differences in safety and efficacy of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Studies have identified significant sex-based differences and disparities in the clinical presentation and treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). Studies have shown women are less likely to be referred for catheter ablation, are older at the time of ablation, and are more likely to have recurrence after ablation. However, in most studies investigating AF ablation outcomes, the female cohorts were relatively small. The impact of sex on the outcome and safety of ablation procedures is still unclear. OBJECTIVE: To investigate sex-based differences in outcomes and complications after AF catheter ablation, with a significant female cohort METHOD: In this retrospective study, patients undergoing AF ablation from January 1, 2014, to March 31, 2021, were included. We investigated clinical characteristics, duration and progression of AF, number of EP appointments from diagnosis to ablation, procedural data, and procedure complications. RESULTS: Total of 1346 patients underwent first catheter ablation for AF during this period, including 896 (66.5%) male and 450 (33.4%) female patients. Female patients were older at the time of ablation (66.2 vs. 62.4 years; p < .001). Women had higher CHA2 DS2 -VASc (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age, diabetes, stroke, vascular disease, sex category) scores (3 vs. 2; p < .001) than men, expectedly, as the female sex warrants an additional point. 25.3% female patients had PersAF at the time of diagnosis versus 35.3% male patients (p < .001). At the time of ablation, 31.8% female patients had PersAF as compared to 43.1% male patients (p < .001), indicating progression of PAF to PersAF in both sexes. Women tried more AADs than men before ablation (1.13 vs. 0.98; p = .002). Male and female patients had no statistically significant difference in (a) arrhythmia recurrence at 1-year post ablation (27.7% vs. 30%; p = .38) or (b) procedural complication rate (1.8% vs. 3.1%; p = .56). CONCLUSION: Female patients were older and had higher CHA2 DS2 -VASc scores compared to males at the time of AF ablation. Women tried more AADs than men before ablation. One-year arrhythmia recurrence rates and procedural complications were similar in both sexes. No sex-based differences were observed in safety and efficacy of ablation.

The COVID-19 Era Is Associated With Delays in Esophageal Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment.

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has substantially affected the delivery of healthcare globally. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association of this era with the timeline of care in esophageal cancer patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart-review of patients presenting to a single high-volume tertiary care center with the diagnosis of esophageal cancer. COVID era was defined as March 2020-December 2020 and compared with the year before (3/2019-12/2019). RESULTS: In total, 117 patients presented in the COVID-era versus 190 in pre-COVID. Stage 3 + 4 disease was found in 77.8% of the patients in the COVID-era compared to 68.9% in the pre-COVID era (P = 0.34). Diagnoses through emergency department admission were 35.5% in the COVID versus 26.7% in the pre-COVID group (P = 0.15). In the COVID era it took a median of 78 d to visit primary care provider (versus 52 d, P = 0.12 in pre-COVID), 45 d to endoscopy (versus 18 d, P = 0.004) and 38 d to treatment initiation (versus 36 d, P = 0.48). Thirty-five percent of the patients underwent esophagectomy compared to 26% in the pre-COVID-era. Median days of intensive-care-unit (ICU) (2 versus 3, P = 0.16) and hospital stay (14 versus 15, P = 0.28) were similar in both groups as well as postoperative 30-day morbidities (63 versus 63%, P = 0.48). One-year follow-up showed 83.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 73.8%-90.1%) survival in the COVID-group compared to 76.4% (95% CI: 66.9%-83.5%) in the pre-COVID-group (P = 0.58). Only three patients had a positive COVID result. CONCLUSIONS: Our institution treated fewer esophageal cancer patients during COVID-19 accompanied by a delay in endoscopic diagnosis. Postoperative outcomes and 1-year survival remained similar.

Trends, Factors, and Outcomes Associated with Immediate Sequential Bilateral Cataract Surgery among Medicare Beneficiaries.

PURPOSE: To report the incidence of immediate sequential bilateral cataract surgery (ISBCS) and delayed sequential bilateral cataract surgery (DSBCS) and to identify factors associated with undergoing ISBCS. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥ 65 who underwent ISBCS and DSBCS from 2011 through 2019. METHODS: Population-based analysis of the 100% Medicare fee-for-service carrier claims data. Logistic regression models were performed to evaluate factors associated with ISBCS. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incidence of ISBCS and DSBCS; demographic, ocular, and medical characteristics associated with receipt of ISBCS; and rates of endophthalmitis and cystoid macular edema (CME) after ISBCS or DSBCS. RESULTS: A total of 4014 (0.2%) ISBCS and 1 940 965 (99.8%) DSBCS patients were identified. Black (odds ratio [OR], 2.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.06-2.59), Asian (OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.51-2.19), and Native American (OR, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.81-3.23) patients were more likely to receive ISBCS than White patients. Patients residing in rural areas showed a higher likelihood of ISBCS (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.17-1.35) than patients in metropolitan areas. Patients undergoing surgery at a hospital, compared with an ambulatory setting (OR, 2.71; 95% CI, 2.53-2.89), were more likely to receive ISBCS. Patients with bilateral complex versus noncomplex cataract (OR, 3.23; 95% CI, 2.95-3.53) were more likely to receive ISBCS. Patients with a Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) of 1 to 2 (OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.29-1.62), 3 to 4 (OR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.47-1.97), 5 to 6 (OR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.62-2.39), and CCI ≥ 7 (OR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.55-2.50) were more likely to receive ISBCS than those with a CCI of 0. In contrast, patients with glaucoma (OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.76-0.89), macular degeneration (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.68-0.82), and macular hole or epiretinal membrane (OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.48-0.65) were less likely to undergo ISBCS than those without. Cumulatively, no significant difference was found in endophthalmitis rates within 42 days between ISBCS (1.74 per 1000 ISBCS procedures) and DSBCS (1.01 per 1000 DSBCS procedures; P = 0.15). Similarly, there was no significant cumulative difference between CME rates (P = 0.45) in ISBCS (1.79 per 100 ISBCS procedures) and DSBCS (1.96 per 100 DSBCS procedures). CONCLUSIONS: Overall use of ISBCS among Medicare beneficiaries remained low over the past decade, although rates of endophthalmitis and CME were comparable to DSBCS. Race, geography, and systemic and ocular comorbidities were associated with receiving ISBCS. ISBCS represents a potential opportunity to improve access to cataract surgery.