The role of expert focus echocardiography during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Focus Echocardiography has routinely been used to offer quick diagnosis in critical care environments, predominantly by clinicians with limited training. During the COVID-19 pandemic, international guidance recommended all echocardiography scans were performed as focus studies to limit operator viral exposure in both inpatient and outpatient settings. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of eFoCUS, a focus scan performed by fully trained echocardiographers following a minimum dataset plus full interrogation of any pathology found. METHODS: All diagnostic echocardiograms, performed by fully trained echocardiographers during an 8-week period during the first UK COVID-19 wave, were included. The number of images acquired was compared in the following categories: admission status, COVID status, image quality, indication, invasive ventilation, pathology found, echocardiographer experience, and whether eFoCUS was deemed adequate to answer the clinical question. RESULTS: In 87.4% of the 698 scans included, the operator considered that the eFOCUS echo protocol, with additional images when needed, was sufficient to answer the clinical question on the request. Echocardiographer experience did not affect the number of images acquired. Less images were acquired in COVID-19 positive patients compared to negative/asymptomatic (38 ± 12 vs. 42 ± 12, p = .001), and more images were required when a valve pathology was identified. CONCLUSION: eFoCUS echocardiography is an effective protocol for use during the COVID-19 pandemic. It provides sufficient diagnostic information to answer the clinical question but differs from standard focus/limited protocols by enabling the identification and interrogation of significant pathology and incidental findings, preventing unnecessary repeat scans and viral exposure of operators.

Generic ICD programming and outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Generic ICD programming, where shock-reduction programming is extrapolated from trials of one manufacturer to another, may reduce non-essential ICD therapies beyond that seen in randomized trials. However, the benefits and risks are unknown. The purpose of this retrospective cohort study was to evaluate the impact of a standardized programming protocol, based on generic programming, across manufacturers. METHODS: We included all new ICDs in a single center (2009-2019). In 2013 a standardized programming protocol based on generic programming was introduced, incorporating high detection rates (200 bpm for primary prevention) and long detection (30/40 or equivalent in VF zone) for all patients. Patients were classified into three groups based on implant programming: pre-guideline (PS), post-guideline and guideline compliant (GC) and post-guideline but not guideline compliant (NGC). The end-points were the first occurrence of any device therapy (ATP or shock), ICD shock, syncope and all-cause mortality. Survival analysis was used to evaluate outcomes. RESULTS: 1003 patients were included (mean follow-up 1519 ± 1005 days). In primary prevention patients (n = 583) freedom from ICD therapy (91.5% vs. 73.6%, p < .001) or shock (94.7% vs 84.8%, p = .02) were significantly higher in GC compared to PS patients, without significant increase in syncope or mortality. In secondary prevention patients (n = 420) freedom from any ICD therapy or any shock were non-significantly higher in GC compared to PS patients, without an increase in syncope or mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In primary prevention patients a standardized programming protocol, incorporating generic programming, reduced the burden of ICD therapy without an increase in adverse outcomes.

Fractional Flow Reserve in the Transradial Era: Will Hand Vein Adenosine Infusion Suffice?: A Comparative Study of the Extent, Rapidity, and Stability of Hyperemia From Hand and Femoral Venous Routes of Adenosine Administration.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess adenosine infusion via a cannula in the back of the hand compared with central venous access to achieve peak hyperemia during fractional flow reserve (FFR). BACKGROUND: Adenosine is often used to induce maximal hyperemia when measuring FFR. The gold standard is continuous infusion via a large central vein; however, the increasing use of the transradial route for angiography makes it desirable to have an alternative route for adenosine. Peripheral venous access is frequently obtained in the hand, but concern exists as to whether adenosine delivery from this site can achieve adequate vasodilation for accurate FFR measurement. Our aim was to address this. METHODS: Subjects were selected from patients presenting for coronary angiography/intervention who required a pressure-wire study. Subjects received intravenous adenosine infusion sequentially via 2 routes: first, via a 20-gauge hand cannula, and then, after a washout period, via a 5- or 6-F femoral venous sheath. Adenosine was administered at 140 µg/kg/min from each site. Data interpretation was blinded. Minimal FFR achieved with intravenous adenosine from each infusion site was recorded as was the time to peak hyperemia. RESULTS: Paired (hand and femoral adenosine) recordings taken from 84 vessels in 61 patients were suitable for blinded analysis. The mean FFR measured using adenosine administered via hand and femoral routes was 0.85 with an SD of 0.08 (intraclass correlation=0.986). Time to peak hyperemia was longer on average with hand-administered adenosine compared with femoral adenosine administration (63 s vs. 43 s; mean difference, 22 s with a 95% confidence interval: 18 s to 27 s; p<0.0001). Formal comparison of FFR stability using Mann-Whitney analysis (2 tailed) gives p=0.43, indicating no significant evidence of a difference in stability between the 2 routes. CONCLUSIONS: Hand vein adenosine infusion produced FFR values very similar to those obtained using central femoral vein adenosine administration, with no systematic bias toward higher or lower reading from 1 site. This has important practical implications for radial access cases involving pressure-wire studies.