Santos Volgman, Annabelle

Abstract Background Pulsed‐field ablation (PFA) has emerged as an innovative alternative to radiofrequency (RF) and cryoablation because it selectively targets myocardial tissue. Thus, we aim to estimate the efficacy and safety of PFA versus thermal ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. Methods A systematic review and meta‐analysis were retrieved from PubMed, WOS, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and CENTRAL through September 2023. We used RevMan V. 5.4 to pool dichotomous data using risk ratio (RR) and continuous data using mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). PROSPERO ID: CRD42023480321 Results We included 17 studies with a total of 2255 patients. PFA was significantly associated with a decreased incidence of AF recurrence (RR: 0.66 with 95% CI [0.51, 0.87], p = .003). However, there was no significant difference between PFA and thermal ablation in arrhythmia recurrence (RR: 0.92 with 95% CI [0.74, 1.46], p = .42). PFA was significantly associated with decreased total procedure time (MD: −15.15 with 95% CI [−20.23, −10.07], p < .00001), decreased heart rate change (MD: −7.39 with 95% CI [−12.16, −2.62], p = .002), decreased phrenic nerve palsy (RR: 0.38 with 95% CI [0.15, 0.98], p = .05), and reduced esophageal lesions (RR: 0.09 with 95% CI [0.01, 0.69], p = .02). On the contrary, PFA was significantly associated with increased pericardial tamponade (RR: 6.14 with 95% CI [1.43, 26.33], p = .01). Conclusion PFA was significantly associated with decreased AF recurrence, total procedure time, heart rate change, phrenic nerve palsy, esophageal lesion, and increased incidence of pericardial tamponade compared with thermal ablation.

Heart failure (HF) is a chronic, debilitating condition associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and socioeconomic burden. Patients with end-stage HF (ESHF) who are not a candidate for advanced therapies will continue to progress despite standard medical therapy. Thus, the focus of care shifts from prolonging life to controlling symptoms and improving quality of life through palliative care ( PC). Because the condition and prognosis of HF patients evolve and can rapidly deteriorate, it is imperative to begin the discussion on end-of-life (EOL) issues early during HF management. These include the completion of an advance directive, do-not-resuscitate orders, and policies on device therapy and discontinuation as part of advance care planning (ACP). ESHF patients who do not have indications for advanced therapies or those who wish not to have a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) or heart transplant (HT) often experience high symptom burden despite adequate medical management. The proper identification and assessment of symptoms such as pain, dyspnea, nausea, depression, and anxiety are essential to the management of ESHF and may be underdiagnosed and undertreated. Psychological support and spiritual care are also crucial to improving the quality of life during EOL. Caregivers of ESHF patients must also be provided supportive care to prevent compassion fatigue and improve resilience in patient care. In this narrative review, we compare the international guidelines and provide an overview of end-of-life and palliative care for patients with ESHF.

There is a growing appreciation for differences in epidemiology, treatment, and outcomes of cardiovascular conditions by sex. Historically, cardiovascular clinical trials have under-represented females, but findings have nonetheless been applied to clinical care in a sex-agnostic manner. Thus, much of the collective knowledge about sex-specific cardiovascular outcomes result from post hoc and secondary analyses. In some cases, these investigations have revealed important sex-based differences with implications for optimizing care for female patients with arrhythmias. This review explores the available evidence related to cardiac arrhythmia care among females, with emphasis on areas in which important sex differences are known or suggested. Considerations related to improving female enrollment in clinical trials as a way to establish more robust clinical evidence for the treatment of females are discussed. Areas of remaining evidence gaps are provided, and recommendations for areas of future research and specific action items are suggested. The overarching goal is to improve appreciation for sex-based differences in cardiac arrhythmia care as 1 component of a comprehensive plan to optimize arrhythmia care for all patients.