Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Safety and feasibility of cardiac electrophysiology procedures in ambulatory surgery centers.
Aryana, Arash; Thihalolipavan, Sudarone; Willcox, Mark E; Swarup, Somya; Zagrodzky, Jason; Wang, H James; Lupercio, Florentino A; Kenigsberg, David N; Kenigsberg, Sophia; Mahapatra, Rhea A; O'Neill, Padraig Gearoid; Compton, Steven J; Natale, Andrea; Ellenbogen, Kenneth A; Swarup, Vijendra.
Affiliation
  • Aryana A; Mercy Medical Group of Sacramento, Sacramento, California; Mercy General Hospital, Sacramento, California; Division of Cardiology, Creighton University School of Medicine, Omaha, Nebraska. Electronic address: a_aryana@outlook.com.
  • Thihalolipavan S; Arizona Heart Rhythm Center, Phoenix, Arizona; Arizona Cardiovascular Research Center, Phoenix, Arizona.
  • Willcox ME; Alaska Heart and Vascular Institute, Anchorage, Alaska.
  • Swarup S; Arizona Heart Rhythm Center, Phoenix, Arizona.
  • Zagrodzky J; Texas Cardiac Arrhythmia Institute, Saint David's Medical Center, Austin, Texas; Heart of Texas Surgery Center, Waco, Texas.
  • Wang HJ; Complete Cardiology Care, Deltona, Florida.
  • Lupercio FA; Complete Cardiology Care, Deltona, Florida.
  • Kenigsberg DN; Florida Heart Rhythm Specialists, Fort Lauderdale, Florida; Fort Lauderdale Heart and Rhythm Surgical Center, Fort Lauderdale, Florida; HCA Florida Westside Hospital, Plantation, Florida.
  • Kenigsberg S; Florida Heart Rhythm Specialists, Fort Lauderdale, Florida.
  • Mahapatra RA; University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
  • O'Neill PG; Mercy Medical Group of Sacramento, Sacramento, California; Mercy General Hospital, Sacramento, California.
  • Compton SJ; Alaska Heart and Vascular Institute, Anchorage, Alaska.
  • Natale A; Texas Cardiac Arrhythmia Institute, Saint David's Medical Center, Austin, Texas; Division of Cardiology, Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, University of Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy; Department of Internal Medicine, Metro Health Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine,
  • Ellenbogen KA; Division of Cardiology and VCU Pauley Heart Center, Medical College of Virginia/VCU School of Medicine, Richmond, Virginia.
  • Swarup V; Arizona Heart Rhythm Center, Phoenix, Arizona; Arizona Cardiovascular Research Center, Phoenix, Arizona.
Heart Rhythm ; 2024 Aug 05.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39111610
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Despite their improved safety, by and large, cardiac electrophysiology procedures including catheter ablation (CA), are presently performed in hospital outpatient departments.

OBJECTIVE:

This large multicenter study investigated the safety and outcomes associated with various cardiac electrophysiology procedures performed at 6 ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs), primarily during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic under the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospitals Without Walls program.

METHODS:

We retrospectively analyzed the outcomes from consecutive electrophysiology procedures performed in ASCs with same-day discharge, including transesophageal echocardiography, cardioversion, cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation, electrophysiology studies, and CA for atrial fibrillation (AF), atrial flutter (AFL)/supraventricular tachycardia, ventricular premature complexes (VPCs), and atrioventricular node.

RESULTS:

Altogether, 4037 procedures were performed, including 779 transesophageal echocardiography/cardioversion procedures (19.3%), 1453 CIED implantation procedures (36.0%), 26 electrophysiology studies (0.6%), and 1779 CA procedures (44.1%) for AF (75.4%), AFL/supraventricular tachycardia (18.8%), VPC (4.7%), and atrioventricular node (1.1%). Overall, 80.2% of CA procedures were for left-sided atrial arrhythmias (AF/atypical AFL) requiring transseptal catheterization. Left-sided VPC ablation procedures (42.2%) were performed using a transseptal/retrograde approach. Adverse event rates were low, but comparable between CIED implantation and CA (0.76% vs 0.73%; P = .93), as were the incidences of urgent/unplanned postprocedure hospitalization (0.48% vs 0.45%; P = .89), respectively. Moreover, the adverse event rates in ASCs vs hospital outpatient departments did not differ for CIED (0.76% vs 0.65%; P = .71) or CA (0.73% vs 0.80%; P = .79).

CONCLUSION:

The results from this large multicenter study suggest that ASCs represent a safe and effective setting to perform a variety of cardiac electrophysiology procedures including CA. These findings bear important implications for healthcare delivery and policy.
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: Heart Rhythm Year: 2024 Document type: Article Country of publication: United States

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: Heart Rhythm Year: 2024 Document type: Article Country of publication: United States