Cryoballoon versus Radiofrequency Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation: A Meta-analysis of 16 Clinical Trials.

Introduction: We aimed to study the procedural characteristics, efficacy and safety of cryoballoon ablation (CBA) versus radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for catheter ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods: A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to clinical trials comparing CBA and RFA for AF. Outcomes were evaluated for efficacy, procedure characteristics and safety. For each study, odd ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for endpoints for both approaches. Results: We analyzed a total of 9,957 participants (3,369 in the CBA and 6,588 in RFA group) enrolled in 16 clinical trials. No significant difference was observed between CBA and RFA with regards to freedom from atrial arrhythmia at 12-months, recurrent atrial arrhythmias or repeat catheter ablation. CBA group had a significantly higher transient phrenic nerve injury (OR 14.19, 95% CI: 6.92-29.10;

Safety And Efficacy Of Uninterrupted Periprocedural Apixaban In Patients Undergoing Atrial Fibrillation Catheter Ablation: A Metaanalysis Of 1,057 Patients.

Apixaban (factor Xa inhibitor) is a novel anticoagulant and may be beneficial during atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation for prevention of thromboembolic events. However, the adverse effects of periprocedural apixaban therapy have not been thoroughly evaluated. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the safety of apixaban for anticoagulation in AF ablation. We searched the online databases till October 2015 for studies comparing Apixaban with Vitamin K antagonists in atrial fibrillation patients undergoing catheter ablation. Primary outcome of our study was composite of thromboembolic event and bleeding (includes major and minor bleeding). A total of 1,057 atrial fibrillation patients in 3 studies undergoing catheter ablation were included in this analysis. Zero thromboembolic events were reported in the apixaban group and 1 in the VKA group with no statistical difference (OR 0.75; 95% CI 0.03-18.49). No major differences were observed for the primary outcome (OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.54-1.55), risk of overall bleeding (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.55- 1.58), major bleeding (OR1.37; 95% CI 0.33-5.67), minor bleeding (OR 0.89; 95% CI 0.50-1.55), pericardial effusion (OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.18-1.38) and groin hematoma (OR 1.36; 95% CI 0.70-2.65). Uninterrupted apixaban administration in patients undergoing AF catheter ablation was non-inferior to VKA without increasing the risk of major and minor bleeding

Safety and efficacy of oral factor-Xa inhibitors versus Vitamin K antagonist in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: Meta-analysis of phase II and III randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Aim of our study was to assess the safety and efficacy on factor-Xa inhibitors (FXIs) in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) as compared to Vitamin K antagonist (VKA). METHODS: Phase II and III randomized controlled trials that reported clinical safety and efficacy of FXI in patients with NVAF were identified from MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through December 10, 2015. The primary safety outcome of our study was composite of stroke and systemic embolic event. Secondary outcomes studied were individual endpoints of primary safety outcome, major bleeding, clinically relevant non-major bleed (CRNMB), and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: We included 11 RCTs with a total of 59,164 participants, of which 34,231 patients received oral FXI and 24,933 patients were on VKA with a mean follow-up of 369days. There was a significant reduction in primary outcome with FXI compared to VKA, 1,112 (3.4%) versus 816 (3.6%) events, respectively (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.68-0.99). Use of FXI significantly reduced major bleeding events compared to VKA, OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58-0.96, test for heterogeneity (I(2)=74%). Incidence of CRNMB was not different between FXI and VKA groups, OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.68-1.04. There was a significant reduction in all-cause mortality in FXI group compared to VKA group, OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.83-0.94 with no significant heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: Use of FXI was associated with a significant reduction in major bleeding events and all-cause mortality without increased risk of stroke or SEE compared to VKA

Gastrointestinal complications associated with catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation.

Atrial fibrillation is the most common arrhythmia in the United States. With the ageing population, the incidence and prevalence of atrial fibrillation are on the rise. Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation is a widely accepted treatment modality in patients with drug refractory symptomatic paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation. The close proximity to the left atrium posterior wall makes the thermosensitive esophagus a potential site of injury during catheter ablation of AF leading to various gastrointestinal complications. The major gastrointestinal complications associated with catheter ablation include atrioesophageal fistula, gastroparesis, esophageal thermal lesions and esophageal ulcers. Multiple studies, case reports and series have described these complications with various catheter ablation techniques such as radiofrequency, cryoenergy and high frequency focused ultrasound energy ablation. This review addresses the gastrointestinal complications after AF ablation procedures and aims to provide the clinicians with an overview of clinical presentation, etiology, pathogenesis, prevention and management of these conditions

Catheter ablation of accessory pathway: 14-year trends in utilization and complications in adults in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to determine the temporal trends in utilization of catheter ablation of accessory pathways in the United States. METHODS: All patients from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) ≥18years of age with a primary diagnosis of anomalous atrioventricular excitation syndrome (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Edition, Clinical Modification [ICD-9-CM] code 426.7) were included in the study. Patients who underwent catheter ablation were identified using ICD-9-CM procedure code 37.34. Patients with a concomitant diagnosis of atrial fibrillation, atrial flutter, atrial tachycardia or ventricular arrhythmias were excluded from the analysis. Annual hospital volume was identified using unique hospital identification number and was divided into tertiles for further analysis. RESULTS: A total of 11,601 catheter ablations for anomalous atrioventricular excitation syndrome were studied from 1998 to 2011. The mean length of stay was 1.8days (median 1day). The utilization trends of accessory pathway ablation have steadily declined from 3.9 ablation procedures/million US population in 1998-1999 to 2.5 ablation procedures/million US population in 2010-2011. The second tertile (adjusted OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.20-0.83, p=0.01) and third tertile (adjusted OR 0.39; 95% CI 0.18-0.85, p=0.02) of hospital volume were associated with reduction in cardiac complications as compared to first tertile of hospital volume. Advanced age (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.01-1.04, p=0.002) was independent predictor of cardiac complications. There were no in-hospital deaths. CONCLUSION: Despite decline in ablation trends, it still remains a relatively safe procedure associated with low morbidity and no mortality

Right vVentricular Apical Versus Non-Apical Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator lead: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to study the effect of right ventricular implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) lead positioning on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing ICD placement. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify clinical trials comparing outcomes in patients with ICD leads in apical and non-apical positions. The primary outcome of our study was death at 1-year follow-up. Secondary outcomes studied were death at 3years , total number of shocks , appropriate shocks , inappropriate shocks and cut-to-suture time . RESULTS: We analyzed a total of 3731 patients (2852 in apical and 879 in non-apical ICD groups) enrolled in 4 clinical trials. No significant difference was observed between the apical and non-apical ICD groups in all-cause mortality at 1year (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.51-1.49, p=0.63; I(2)=5.32%). Similarly, no differences were seen between the two groups in death at 3years (OR=0.76; 95% CI 0.56-1.04, p=0.08; I(2)=0%), total number of shocks (OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.81-1.22, p=0.95; I(2)=0%), appropriate shocks (OR 1.00; 95% CI 0.79-1.27, p=0.99; I(2)=0%), inappropriate shocks (OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.70-1.37, p=0.91; I(2)=0%) and cut-to-suture time (Standard mean difference=-0.03; 95% CI -0.20 to 0.14, p=0.73; I(2)=0%). No publication bias was seen. CONCLUSION: Non-apical RV ICD lead implantation is non-inferior to traditional RV apical position with no significant differences in mortality, total number of shocks, appropriate shocks, inappropriate shocks and procedural time

His Bundle Pacing: Hemodynamics and Clinical Outcomes.

From 1993 to 2009, nearly 2.9 million pacemakers were implanted in the United States; the majority of which were dual chamber pacemakers. One of the major physiologic advantages of dual chamber pacing over single chamber ventricular pacing is atrioventricular synchrony, which prevents the pacemaker syndrome. However, patients who are pacemaker dependent or use right ventricle (RV) apical pacing more than 40% of the time are at a risk of developing heart failure from electromechanical dyssynchrony. Studies have also shown that RV pacing results in non-physiological activation of the left ventricle, leading to adverse clinical outcomes. Hence, alternative pacing sites, including the RV outflow tract, the high-RV septal region, bi-ventricular pacing or His-Bundle pacing (HBP) have being explored for a better physiological electromechanical coupling of the ventricles. Although HBP has gained attention due to favorable data and clinical outcomes, it has not gained widespread acceptance into clinical practice. Hence, we aim to review the current experience with HBP and its clinical implications in this article

Role of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator in Non-Ischemic Cardiomyopathy: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prospective Randomized Clinical Trials.

INTRODUCTION: A mortality benefit in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) in ischemic cardiomyopathy is well established. However, the benefit of ICD implantation in non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) on total mortality remains uncertain. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) evaluating the role of primary prevention ICD in NICM patients. METHODS: We performed a systematic review on PubMed, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, EBSCO, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases from the inception through February 2017 to identify RCT evaluating the role of ICD in NICM patients. Mantel-Haenszel risk ratio (RR) fixed effects model was used to summarize data across treatment arms. If heterogeneity (I (2)) ≥25, random effects model was used instead. RESULTS: We analyzed a total of 2573 patients from five RCTs comparing ICD with medical therapy in patients with NICM. The mean follow up for the trials was 48 ± 22 months. There was a significant reduction in (a) all-cause mortality (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71-0.99, p = 0.03) and (b) sudden cardiac death (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.30-0.73, p \u3c 0.001) in ICD group versus medical therapy. CONCLUSION: Our analysis demonstrates that the use of ICD for primary prevention is associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality and SCD in patients with NICM