Asirvatham, Samuel J

Renal Vein Stimulation Increases Blood PressureBackgroundNeurocardiogenic syncope (NCS) is a common and sometimes debilitating disorder, with no consistently effective treatment. NCS is due to a combination of bradycardia and vasodilation leading to syncope. Although pacemaker devices have been tried in treating the bradycardic aspect of NCS, no device‐based therapy exists to treat the coexistent vasodilation that occurs. The renal sympathetic innervation has been the target of denervation to treat hypertension. We hypothesized that stimulation of the renal sympathetic nerves can increase blood pressure and counteract vasodilation in NCS.Methods and ResultsHigh‐frequency stimulation (800–900 pps, 10 V, 30–200 seconds) was performed using a quadripolar catheter in the renal vein of 7 dogs and 1 baboon. A significant increase in blood pressure (BP; mean [SD] systolic BP 117 [±28] vs. 128 [±33], diastolic BP 75 [±19] vs. 87 [±29] mmHg) was noted during the stimulation, which returned to baseline after cessation of stimulation. The mean increase in systolic and diastolic BP was 13.0 (±3.3) (P = 0.006) and 10.2 (±4.6) (P = 0.08), respectively.ConclusionWe report the first ever study of feasibility and safety of high‐frequency electrical stimulation of the renal sympathetic innervation to increase BP in animal models. This has potential applications in the treatment of hypotensive states such as NCS.

Percutaneous Lead Revision for Cardiac PerforationIntroductionCardiac perforation is an infrequent but potentially life‐threatening complication associated with placement of a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED). The objective of this study was to determine the outcomes of percutaneous lead revision in patients who had lead perforation of the myocardium after CIED placement.Methods and ResultsWe reviewed records of 1,458 patients who underwent CIED lead extraction or repositioning. Of these, 31 (2.1%) had the procedure performed for lead perforation as a complication of CIED placement. Demographic, clinical, and follow‐up characteristics of the patients were analyzed. Mean (SD) patient age was 65 (23) years. Cardiac perforation was detected within 24 hours after implantation in 9 patients, within 1 month in 17, and greater than 1 month in 5. Pericardiocentesis was performed with a pigtail drainage catheter in place before the lead revision in 17 patients (55%) who had pericardial effusion, with or without hemodynamic compromise. All culprit leads were successfully managed with percutaneous lead removal (n = 3 [10%]), new lead placement (n = 12 [38%]), or lead repositioning (n = 16 [52%]). Of the 17 patients with pericardiocentesis before the reoperation, none had tamponade develop; in contrast, 3 of the remaining 14 patients had tamponade develop and required urgent pericardiocentesis. All patients survived without requiring open chest surgery.ConclusionPercutaneous removal or repositioning of the perforating lead is feasible and appears effective. Placement of a prophylactic pericardial drain catheter may reduce the incidence of urgent pericardiocentesis during or after a procedure.

IntroductionAbandoned cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) leads remain a contraindication to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies, largely due to in vitro data showing endocardial heating secondary to the radiofrequency field. We tested the hypothesis that abandoned CIED leads do not pose an increased risk of clinical harm for patients undergoing MRI.MethodsThis single‐center retrospective study examined the outcomes of patients who had device generators removed before MRI, rendering the device leads abandoned. Information was gathered through chart review. Data collected included lead model, pacing threshold before MRI, anatomic region examined, threshold data after generator reimplantation, and clinical patient outcome.ResultsPatients (n = 19, 11 men and eight women) ranged in age from 19 to 85 at the time of MRI. There was a mean of 1.63 abandoned leads at the time of imaging; none of the leads were MRI conditional. Of the three implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) leads, two of three were dual coil. Most (31/35) of the scans performed were of the central nervous system, including head and spinal imaging. There were no adverse events associated with MRI in any of these patients with abandoned leads within 7 days of the scan. No lead malfunctions or clinically significant change in pacing thresholds were noted with generator reimplantation.ConclusionThe use of MRI in patients with abandoned cardiac device leads appears feasible when performed under careful monitoring, with no adverse events, although the experience is small. MRI did not affect the function of leads that were subsequently reconnected to a cardiac device.

Mitral Valve Injury with Catheter AblationIntroductionAn increasing number of catheter ablations involve the mitral annular region and valve apparatus, increasing the risk of catheter interaction with the mitral valve (MV) complex. We review our experience with catheter ablation‐related MV injury resulting in severe mitral regurgitation (MR) to delineate mechanisms of injury and outcomes.MethodsWe searched the Mayo Clinic MV surgical database over a 19‐year period (1993–2012) and the electrophysiologic procedures database over a 23‐year period (1990–2013) and identified 9 patients with catheter ablation related MV injury requiring clinical intervention.ResultsIndications for ablation included atrial fibrillation (AF) [n = 4], ventricular tachycardia (VT) [n = 3], and left‐sided accessory pathways [n = 2]. In all 4 AF patients, a circular mapping catheter entrapped in the MV apparatus was responsible for severe MR. In all 3 VT patients, radiofrequency energy delivery led to direct injury to the MV apparatus. In the 2 patients with accessory pathways, both mechanisms were involved (1 per patient). Six patients required surgical intervention (5 MV repair, 1 catheter removal). One patient developed severe functional MR upon successful endovascular catheter disentanglement that improved spontaneously. Two VT patients with persistent severe postablation MR were managed nonsurgically, 1 of whom died 3 months postprocedure.ConclusionCircular mapping catheter entrapment and ablation at the mitral annulus are the most common etiologies of MV injury during catheter ablation. Close surveillance of the MV is needed during such procedures and early surgical repair is important for successful salvage if significant injury occurs.

Electromagnetic Interference with Ventricular Assist DeviceBackgroundHemodynamic instability hinders activation and entrainment mapping during ventricular tachycardia ablation. The Impella 2.5 microaxial flow device (MFD; Abiomed Inc., Danvers, MA, USA) is used to prevent hemodynamic instability during electrophysiologic study. However, electromagnetic interference (EMI) generated by this device can preclude accurate electroanatomic mapping.MethodsImpella was placed in the left ventricle of 7 canines for circulatory support. Electroanatomic mapping during sinus rhythm, ventricular pacing, and ventricular fibrillation (VF) was performed using magnet‐ (CARTO3, Biosense Webster Inc., Diamond Bar, CA, USA) and impedance‐ (EnSite Velocity System/EnSite NavX, St. Jude Medical Inc., St. Paul, MN, USA) based systems. Distance from device to points with severe EMI precluding acquisition was compared to points with mild/no EMI. Two methods were used to reduce EMI: (1) titration of MFD performance, and (2) impedance‐only mapping combined with manual annotation of activation.ResultsSevere EMI did not occur during impedance‐based mapping. Severe EMI was observed using CARTO3 at 9.4% of all points attempted at maximum performance level (P8) of device. Severe EMI occurred at points closer to device (40.1 ± 16.8 mm) versus (55.5 ± 20.0 mm) for mild/no EMI, P < 0.0001. Severe EMI using CARTO3 was resolved by either (1) reduction of performance from P8 to P6 or (2) impedance‐only mapping with manual annotation.ConclusionConcurrent use of MFD caused EMI to prevent acquisition of points with magnet‐based mapping. Predictors for EMI were distance from device and performance level. Temporary reductions to P6 or impedance‐only mapping are 2 methods to resolve EMI.

IntroductionAdjudication of thousands of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD)‐treated arrhythmia episodes is labor intensive and, as a result, is most often left undone. The objective of this study was to evaluate an automatic classification algorithm for adjudication of ICD‐treated arrhythmia episodes.MethodsThe algorithm uses a machine learning algorithm and was developed using 776 arrhythmia episodes. The algorithm was validated on 131 dual‐chamber ICD shock episodes from 127 patients adjudicated by seven electrophysiologists (EPs). Episodes were classified by panel consensus as ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF) or non‐VT/VF, with the resulting classifications used as the reference. Subsequently, each episode electrogram (EGM) data was randomly assigned to three EPs without the atrial lead information, and to three EPs with the atrial lead information. Those episodes were also classified by the automatic algorithm with and without atrial information. Agreement with the reference was compared between the three EPs consensus group and the algorithm.ResultsThe overall agreement with the reference was similar between three‐EP consensus and the algorithm for both with atrial EGM (94% vs 95%, P = 0.87) and without atrial EGM (90% vs 91%, P = 0.91). The odds of accurate adjudication, after adjusting for covariates, did not significantly differ between the algorithm and EP consensus (odds ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval: 0.97–1.06).ConclusionsThis algorithm performs at a level comparable to an EP panel in the adjudication of arrhythmia episodes treated by both dual‐ and single‐chamber ICDs. This type of algorithm has the potential for automated analysis of clinical ICD episodes, and adjudication of EGMs for research studies and quality analyses.