Catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia: strategies to improve outcomes

Catheter ablation of ventricular arrhythmias has evolved considerably since it was first described more than 3 decades ago. Advancements in understanding the underlying substrate, utilizing pre-procedural imaging, and evolving ablation techniques have improved the outcomes of catheter ablation. Ensuring safety and efficacy during catheter ablation requires adequate planning, including analysis of the 12 lead ECG and appropriate pre-procedural imaging. Defining the underlying arrhythmogenic substrate and disease eitology allow for the developed of tailored ablation strategies, especially for patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathies. During ablation, the type of anesthesia can affect VT induction, the quality of the electro-anatomic map, and the stability of the catheter during ablation. For high risk patients, appropriate selection of hemodynamic support can increase the success of VT ablation. For patients in whom VT is hemodynamically unstable or difficult to induce, substrate modification strategies can aid in safe and successful ablation. Recently, there has been an several advancements in substrate mapping strategies that can be used to identify and differentiate local late potentials. The incorporation of high-definition mapping and contact-sense technologies have both had incremental benefits on the success of ablation procedures. It is crucial to harness newer technology and ablation strategies with the highest level of peri-procedural safety to achieve optimal long-term outcomes in patients undergoing VT ablation

Use and Outcomes Associated With Perioperative Amiodarone in Cardiac Surgery

Background: In randomized controlled trials, perioperative administration of amiodarone has been shown to reduce the incidence of postoperative atrial arrhythmias and length of stay (LOS) among patients undergoing coronary bypass surgery. However, little is known about the use or effectiveness of perioperative amiodarone in routine clinical practice. Methods and Results: We studied patients \u3e /=18 years old without a previous history of atrial or ventricular arrhythmias who underwent elective coronary bypass surgery between 2013 and 2014 within a network of 235 US hospitals. Perioperative amiodarone was defined as receipt of amiodarone either on the day of or the day preceding surgery. We used covariate-adjusted modeling and instrumental variable methods to examine the association between receipt of amiodarone and the development of atrial arrhythmias, in-hospital mortality, readmission, LOS, and cost. Of 12 758 patients, 2195 (17.2%) received perioperative amiodarone, 3330 (26.1%) developed atrial arrhythmias postoperatively, and the average LOS was 6.4 days (+/-2.6 days). Instrumental variable analysis showed that receipt of perioperative amiodarone was associated with lower risk of atrial arrhythmias (risk difference -11 percentage points, 95% CI -19 to -4 percentage points; P=0.002) and a shorter LOS (-0.7 day, 95% CI -1.39 to -0.01 days; P=0.048). There was no association between receipt of perioperative amiodarone and in-hospital mortality, cost, or readmission. Conclusions: Among patients undergoing coronary bypass surgery without previous arrhythmias, perioperative amiodarone is associated with a lower risk of atrial arrhythmias and shorter LOS. These findings are consistent with previous randomized trials and lend support to current guideline recommendations

Derivation and Validation of an Inâ Hospital Mortality Prediction Model Suitable for Profiling Hospital Performance in Heart Failure

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/142499/1/jah32925_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/142499/2/jah32925.pd

Radiofrequency catheter ablation of ventricular arrhythmias in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

Background: Compared to other non-ischemic substrates, there is limited data on the role and outcome of catheter ablation in HCM. The objective of this study is to assess the safety and efficacy of catheter ablation for the treatment of VT in patients with HCM. Methods: Fourteen patients with HCM and drug refractory VT who underwent catheter ablation at a single center were included in this study. The data was evaluated retrospectively. Acute success, procedure-related complications, and long-term outcomes were documented during follow up. Results: Among the 14 patients (mean age 48.2 ± 8.2 years, 85.7% males, mean LVEF 42.6 ± 6.5%), 4 had an apical aneurysm. Eleven patients had evidence of scar-related VT and three patients had a bundle-branch re-entry VT. The most common sites for scar-related VT were the border-zones of the apical aneurysms, basal septum, and LV lateral wall. Patient either underwent an endocardial ablation or a combined endocardial and epicardial ablation. Acute success was achieved in all patients. In 6 patients VT was terminated during ablation. In two patients, non-clinical VTs were inducible at the end of the procedure. No major or minor complications were observed during and after the procedure in all patients. During long-term follow up, elimination of VTs reached 78%. Conclusion: Catheter ablation of VT in patients with HCM is safe and successful in eliminating VT. Combining endocardial and epicardial ablation techniques can potentially lead to better outcomes in these patients. Bundle branch re-entry should be considered as a potential mechanism of VT in patients with HCM

Cardiac Rehabilitation Utilization During an Acute Cardiac Hospitalization: A NATIONAL SAMPLE

BACKGROUND: Inpatient cardiac rehabilitation (ICR) programs provide important services to hospitalized patients by delivering risk factor education, daily ambulation, and facilitation of referral to outpatient cardiac rehabilitation. However, little is known about ICR utilization or practice patterns. METHODS: We examined the use of ICR, between January 2007 and June 2011, in a geographically and structurally diverse sample of US hospitals (Premier, Inc). RESULTS: Among 458 hospitals, there were 1 343 537 admissions with a qualifying diagnosis for outpatient cardiac rehabilitation. Formal ICR was available at 223 (49%) of these hospitals. Overall, patient utilization of ICR was low (21.2%) and varied by indication. Utilization was highest in those undergoing cardiac surgery (43.3%) and lowest in patients with medically managed myocardial infarction (15.6%) or heart failure (10.6%). A larger bed count, the presence of cardiac interventional services, and Midwest location were associated with increased likelihood of a hospital having an ICR program. In multivariable hierarchical analysis adjusting for known hospital characteristics among hospitals that provided ICR, multiple patient factors were associated with a lower likelihood of ICR utilization, including older age, more comorbidities, female sex, and Medicare insurance, but unspecified hospital characteristics explained the vast majority of the variability. CONCLUSIONS: We found substantial variation in the delivery of ICR across US hospitals and by patient condition. Overall, only a minority of eligible patients ever received ICR and fewer than half of hospitals treating cardiac patients provided formal ICR services. This substantial gap in the secondary prevention of heart disease warrants further investigation and intervention