RETRACTED:B-AB03-04 CEREBRAL MICROEMBOLIC SIGNAL BURDEN DURING PULSED FILED ABLATION: PRELIMINARY RESULTS FROM ROBOTICALLY ASSISTED TRANSCRANIAL DOPPLER.

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal). This article has been retracted at the request of the authors. The authors inadvertently specified some ablation settings in the methods section that should not have been reported because they can be potentially linked to a specific pulsed field ablation technology that is currently under investigation for FDA approval. The Authors apologize for the inconvenience caused by this oversight, http://dx.doi.org/.

Results from the prospective, multicenter AMBULATE-CAP trial: Reduced use of urinary catheters and protamine with hemostasis via the Mid-Bore Venous Vascular Closure System (VASCADE® MVP) following multi-access cardiac ablation procedures.

INTRODUCTION: Manual compression (MC), historically the most common method to achieve hemostasis after percutaneous vascular procedures, is time consuming, requires prolonged bedrest, and is uncomfortable for patients and clinicians. Recent studies demonstrate the efficacy and safety of vascular closure devices and suggest shorter times to hemostasis and patient ambulation compared with MC. The current study evaluated the feasibility of the VASCADE® venous vascular closure system (VVCS) while allowing for urinary catheter (UC) elimination, and elimination of protamine and/or same calendar day discharge (SCDD). METHODS AND RESULTS: In this prospective, multicenter trial, patients were enrolled and assigned to the following groups: no UC, no protamine, and/or SCDD (no co-enrollment in no protamine and SCDD). After completing the catheter-based cardiac procedure, access sites were closed using the VVCS. Outcomes included final hemostasis (all sites) without major access site-related complications at 30 days, rates of access site closure-related complications, device success, and study group success. All 168 patients had hemostasis without major access site-related complications through 30 days. In the no UC group, 160 out of 164 (97.6%) patients did not receive a UC. Additionally, 39 out of 41 (95.1%) patients received heparin without protamine reversal and no access site bleeding-related ambulation delays, and 18 out of 18 (100%) patients were discharged on the same day. There were no major access site closure-related complications, few minor complications, and adverse events were generally mild and well managed. CONCLUSION: The VVCS was effective for achieving hemostasis following catheter-based procedures; access site closure-related complications and adverse events were well managed.

Is transesophageal echocardiography necessary in patients undergoing ablation of atrial fibrillation on an uninterrupted direct oral anticoagulant regimen? Results from a prospective multicenter registry.

BACKGROUND: Thromboembolic stroke is a rare but devastating consequence of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is recommended to rule out left atrial appendage thrombus; however, its use is variable. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess whether TEE is mandatory in patients undergoing AF ablation on uninterrupted direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). METHODS: Data from our prospective multicenter registry of patients with AF undergoing radiofrequency catheter ablation on uninterrupted DOACs were analyzed. All the included patients were on anticoagulation for at least 4 weeks before ablation. All AF ablation procedures were performed under intracardiac echocardiography guidance. Before transseptal puncture, heparin bolus was administered, followed by continuous infusion, with a target activated clotting time of >300 seconds. RESULTS: A total of 6186 patients (3180 on apixaban [51.4%], 2528 on rivaroxaban [40.9%], 404 on dabigatran [6.5%], and 74 on edoxaban [1.2%]) were analyzed. The mean age of the study population was 69.4 ± 10.3 years; 4194 patients (67.8%) were male, and 5120 patients (82.8%) had persistent and long-standing persistent AF. The mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 2.86 ± 1.58; the mean CHADS2 score was 1.65 ± 1.14. Intracardiac echocardiography ruled out left atrial appendage and left atrial thrombi in all patients and revealed "smoke" in 1672 patients (27.03%). Transient ischemic attack was noted in 1 patient with long-standing persistent AF in the setting of a missed dose of rivaroxaban before ablation. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that performing AF ablation in patients on uninterrupted DOACs without TEE is safe and feasible in high stroke risk patients. Elimination of routine preablation TEE would have significant economic and clinical implications.

Visual, tactile, and contact force feedback: which one is more important for catheter ablation? Results from an in vitro experimental study.

BACKGROUND: During radiofrequency ablation, effective contact is crucial in determining lesions efficacy. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare operators' ability to assess contact pressure using visual and tactile feedbacks together or alone in an experimental model. METHODS: In a in vitro experimental setup replicating manual catheter manipulation and recording the applied force, evaluators were asked to identify three levels of force (first, ablation, and maximum contact) as the catheter contacted the tissue model using (1) visual feedback only by fluoroscopy, "blinded" to touch; (2) tactile feedback only, blinded to fluoroscopy; and (3) both tactile and visual feedback together. The latter was regarded as reference. The experiment was repeated using a catheter force sensing technology during robotic navigation. RESULTS: During manual navigation, tighter association was shown for the visual method than for the tactile method: median difference with reference: first contact -1 (P = .97) vs -2 (P = .90); ablation contact 2 (P = .1) vs -7 (P = .03); maximum contact 2 (P = .06) vs -28 (P = .02). Bland-Altman plot and Deming regression confirmed for the visual method the good agreement with reference and the absence of bias at any level and showed for the tactile higher values and proportional bias that reached statistical significance at ablation and maximum contact. During robotic navigation, agreement was higher for the tactile than for the visual only method. CONCLUSION: During manual navigation, visual feedback alone is in better agreement with the reference compared to the tactile only approach. During robotic navigation, agreement is looser for the visual only approach. More objective feedback of contact pressure during ablation procedures is desirable.

WITHDRAWN: Hybrid Procedure (Endo/Epicardial) Versus Standard Manual Ablation in Patients Undergoing Ablation of Longstanding Persistent Atrial Fibrillation: Results from a Single Center.

This article has been withdrawn at the request of the author(s) and/or editor. The Publisher apologizes for any inconvenience this may cause. The full Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal can be found at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy.