ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Pulse field ablation (PFA) is a novel catheter ablation technology with potential safety benefits due to its tissue selectivity. It has the potential to directly damage or interact with the functionality of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) in the form of electromagnetic interference (EMI). The aim of our study was to assess the impact of PFA on CIEDs. METHODS: PFA lesions (45 per CIED) were applied from the Farapulse system to CIEDs (< 5 cm from the lead tip and < 15 cm from the generator). All devices were checked before and after PFA application for proper sensing and pacing functionality as well as for integrity of shock circuits in ICDs using a heart simulator. Moreover, devices were then interrogated for any spontaneous reprogramming, mode switching or other EMI effects. RESULTS: In total, 44 CIEDs were tested (16 pacemaker, 21 ICDs, 7 CRT-P/D) with 1980 PFA applications. There was no change in device settings, functionality and electrical parameters, and there was no macroscopic damage to the devices. The risk of damage to the electric components or leads on a patient-based analysis is 0/44 (95% CI 0-8%) and on a PFA pulse-based analysis is 0/1980 (95% CI 0-0.2%). Clinically relevant EMI appeared with oversensing and pacing inhibition but not tachycardia detection. CONCLUSIONS: Bipolar PFA appears safe and does not result in damage to CIEDs or leads. Clinically relevant EMI does occur, but appropriate peri-procedural programming may mitigate this. In vivo studies are needed to confirm our findings.
ABSTRACT
Background: Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) or left atrial tachycardia is well established. To avoid body movement and pain, sedative and analgesic agents are used. Objective: The aim was to investigate safety of sedation/anti-pain protocol administered by electrophysiology (EP) staff. Methods: A total of 3211 consecutive patients (61% male) undergoing left atrial ablation for paroxysmal AF (37.1%), persistent AF (35.3%) or left atrial tachycardia (27.6%) were included. Midazolam, fentanyl, and propofol were administered by EP staff. In case of respiratory depression, endotracheal intubation (eIT) or noninvasive ventilation (NIV) was implemented. Risk factors for eIT or NIV were analyzed. Results: Mean doses of propofol, midazolam, and fentanyl were 33.7 ± 16.7 mg, 3 ± 11.1 mg, and 0.16 ± 2.2 mg, respectively. Norepinephrine was administered in 396 of 3211 patients (12.3%) because of blood pressure drop (mean arterial pressure <60 mm Hg). NIV was necessary in 47 patients (1.5%) and eIT in 1 patient (0.03%). Procedure duration, high body mass index (BMI), high CHADS2-VASC2 score, high age, low glomerular filtration rate, diabetes mellitus, and low baseline oxygen saturation were associated with NIV or eIT. The only independent predictor for NIV/eIT was high BMI (>30.1 ± 9.0 kg/m2). Therefore, patients with a BMI of ≥30 had a 40% higher risk for the need of NIV/eIT during the procedure in our study. Conclusion: Sedation/anti-pain control including midazolam, propofol, and fentanyl administered by EP staff is safe, with only 1.53% requirement of NIV/eIT. High BMI (>30 kg/m2) emerged as an independent predictor for eIT/NIV.
