Trends in Atrial Fibrillation and Ablation Therapy During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic affected many aspects of health care and continues to have an impact as waves of COVID-19 cases re-emerge. Many procedures were negatively impacted by the pandemic, and management was primarily focused on limiting exposure to the virus. We present an analysis of the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) to delineate how COVID-19 affected atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. The NIS was analyzed from 2017-2020 in order to determine the pre- and intra-pandemic impacts on AF ablation procedures. Admissions were identified using the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Clinical Modification codes with a primary diagnosis of AF (ICD-10 CM code I48.0, I48.1, I48.2, or I48.91). Admissions were also assessed for the use of cardiac ablation therapy. Comorbidity diagnoses were identified using the Elixhauser comorbidity software (Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, Rockville, MD, USA); additional ICD-10 codes for diagnoses and procedures used are also provided. The primary outcome of our study was the trend in ablation therapy during AF admissions. Secondary outcomes included health care disparities, inpatient mortality, and length of stay. Ablation therapy was used in 18,885 admissions in 2020, compared to the preceding 3-year average of 20,103 (adjusted Wald test, P = .002). Multivariate logistic regression revealed a greater likelihood of undergoing ablation therapy (odds ratio, 1.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-1.40; P < .001) among 2020 admissions compared to 2017 admissions. Inpatient mortality increased in 2020 compared to the preceding average; however, the difference was not significant. The procedural volume of ablation for AF saw a decrease in 2020; however, surprisingly, more patients were likely to undergo ablation during 2020.

Geographic variability and operator trends of transcatheter edge-to-edge repair in the United States.

BACKGROUNDS: Transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) devices are used for primary mitral regurgitation (MR) and secondary MR. Despite the growing use of TEER devices, there have not been many studies on operator experience or procedure volumes by state. AIMS: We aimed to investigate nationwide operator volume trends and geographic variation in access to TEER. METHODS: The United States Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) National Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Database (MPUPD) was analyzed between 2015 and 2020 for initial TEER procedures. RESULTS: Procedure volume and total operators increased yearly from 2015 to 2019 but declined in 2020. Mean annual procedure volume per operator varied significantly by state, between 0 in multiple states and 35 in North Dakota. In 2019, 994 unique operators were identified, with 295 operators documented performing 10 or more procedures (29.68%). Operators performing 10 or more TEER procedures provided 68.46% of all operations in 2019, averaging 20.94 procedures per operator. CONCLUSIONS: TEER procedures are becoming increasingly common as more operators are being trained. However, significant variability exists in the procedural volume per operator.

Treatment strategies for coronary bifurcation lesions made easy in the current era by introduction of the BIFURCAID app.

Coronary bifurcation lesions account for 15-20% of all percutaneous coronary interventions. Percutaneous revascularization of these lesions is technically challenging and results in lower success rates than nonbifurcation lesions. There are unique procedural considerations and techniques that are employed in the percutaneous revascularization of these lesions. Our objective is to define the procedural complexities of treating coronary bifurcation lesions and describe the leading provisional and dedicated two stent techniques used to optimize procedural and clinical results, as described in the BIFURCAID app.

Evaluation and management of heart rhythm disturbances due to cardiac sarcoidosis.

Cardiac sarcoidosis (CS) affects less than 5% of patients with pulmonary or systemic sarcoidosis, but when present is often associated with a spectrum of clinically significant conduction abnormalities and arrhythmias. The cardinal manifestations of CS include conduction disturbances, arrhythmias, or congestive heart failure. Less commonly, there is concealed subclinical disease. The electrophysiologic evaluation for CS includes a history and physical exam, ECG, and echocardiogram for all sarcoidosis patients, along with MRI, PET/nuclear scans, and EPS for certain subsets of patients. Despite variable data to support their efficacy, glucocorticoids should still be considered in the treatment plan of CS. Antiarrhythmics in isolation are often ineffective in controlling ventricular arrhythmias. Cardiac pacemakers have provided important therapy for patients with conduction defects and implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy provides the strongest insurance to prevent fatal arrhythmias from CS. A recent consensus statement provides guidance for clinicians on the diagnosis and management of arrhythmias associated with CS including indications for ICDs. The use of pacemakers, ICD implantation and early implementation of corticosteroid therapy have led to an improvement in the overall prognosis and clinical outcomes of CS.