Citations

ABSTRACT Ventricular arrhythmias (VA), including ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation, are critical cardiac conditions that are often managed by catheter ablation among those unresponsive to pharmacologic therapy. The choice of anesthesia and sedation regimens for VA ablations may impact arrhythmia inducibility and hemodynamic stability, which can affect procedural success and complication rates. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of sedation versus general anesthesia (GA) among patients undergoing VA ablation. The review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023441553). Database searches were conducted across five major databases from inception to March 9, 2024 to identify randomized trials or observational studies including adult patients undergoing ablations for VA. Screening and data extraction were completed in duplicate. Risk-of-bias assessments were conducted using ROBINS-I as all included studies were observational, and the quality of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE framework. Six observational studies (N = 16,435) were included. No significant differences were found between sedation and GA for total procedure time (MD: −14.16 minutes; 95%CI: −38.61 to 10.29 minutes), arrhythmia non-inducibility (RR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.33–1.58), acute ablation success (RR: 1.06; 95% CI: 0.65–1.71), or procedural complications (RR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.28–1.85). However, sedation was associated with significantly lower intraprocedural hemodynamic instability (RR: 0.28; 95% CI: 0.12–0.70). These findings indicate that while sedation and GA have comparable outcomes, sedation may be associated with less hemodynamic instability during VA ablation. However, more high-quality studies are needed to confirm these results.

Background: PAINESD score was established as a predictor of periprocedural acute hemodynamic instability, long-term mortality and heart failure among patients undergoing catheter ablation for ventricular tachycardia (VT-CA). Objective: To assess the validity of PAINESD score and compare outcomes of high-risk patients undergoing catheter ablation for ventricular tachycardia (VT) with and without mechanical circulatory support (MCS) use during procedure. Methods: We conducted an observational dual-center study of consecutive patients with SHD undergoing VT-CA over a decade (2012-2022). The PAINESD score, based on 7 variables (COPD, age >60 years, general anesthesia, ischemic cardiomyopathy, NYHA class III or IV, ejection fraction <25%, VT storm, and diabetes mellitus), was calculated and categorized into low risk (<10), intermediate risk (10-16), and high risk (>16) as previously reported. Two survival analyses were performed to compare outcomes between different groups: one using all-cause mortality or heart transplant as the event, and another using recurrent or repeat ablation as the event. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to calculate hazard ratios for each PAINESD category and to determine the hazard ratio for the use of MCS among high-risk patients. Results: We found that between 2012 to 2022, 559 ablations were performed on 441 patients. There were 296 (53%), 182 (32.6%) and 81(14.5%) patients in low, medium, and high risk. Using low risk as reference, aHR for medium risk was 2.1 (1.24-3.7; p=0.006) and for high risk was 4.6(2.54-8.3; p <0.001). Among patients with high PAINESD score (n=81), 5 patients (6.2%) required MCS (Intra-arterial balloon pump (IABP)=1, ECMO only=1, ECMO+IABP=1, bypass=2). 4/5 (80%) patients on MCS stayed on them post procedure, except one patient on IABP. In this cohort, there was no difference between patients with and without MCS in primary outcome [aHR= 1.6 (0.48-5.4); p=0.43] and in secondary OUTCOME [1.29 (0.3-5.5; p=0.735)]. Conclusion: PAINESD was a significant predictor of mortality or heart failure, but it did not help in prediction of recurrence of VT, or repeat VT-CA.

Background: Patients undergoing epicardial access for ventricular tachycardia (VT) have a higher rate of complications and VT recurrence post-procedure. Data regarding electrophysiological factors driving the outcomes are scant. Objective: To compare the factors and outcomes associated with epicardial vs endocardial VT ablation. Methods: A single-center, retrospective study of patients undergoing catheter ablation for scar-related VT was conducted. Data collected included demographics, comorbidities, medications, relevant laboratory abnormalities, electrocardiograms, echocardiograms, detailed procedural characteristics, and outcomes. Results: Our cohort of 554 patients had 89 (16.1%) epicardial and 465 (83.9%) endocardial VT ablations. Patients undergoing epicardial ablation had a greater frequency of NICM, and more patients had undergone sympathetic modulation for VT (p < 0.05) but had lesser frequency of valve surgery, and CABG. Epicardial ablation was associated with greater use of both short-term (<3 months) and long-term (>6 months) anti-arrhythmic drugs (AAD) (p<0.01). Epicardial access was obtained by micropuncture or needle-in-needle technique for 22.5% (n=20) of patients. Except for more use of general anesthesia and the lesser usage of drugs for VT induction during epicardial procedures, there were no significant differences. Epicardial ablation had a higher risk of acute complications (<30 days) after the procedure (driven by pericarditis) (25% vs 7.8%, p<0.01). On survival analysis, epicardial access was associated with an increase in VT recurrence and repeat ablation (p<0.01) during a mean follow-up of 1072 days. On multivariate analysis, after adjusting for age, sex and comorbidities, epicardial access was an independent predictor of VT recurrence or repeat ablation [aHR 1.61 (CI: 1.18- 2.2)] Conclusion: Patients undergoing epicardial ablations with fewer comorbidities demonstrated increased AAD usage prior to and after the procedure, and a higher risk of acute complications after the procedure. Epicardial access was an independent predictor of VT recurrence or repeat ablation.

Background: In recent years, catheter ablation has emerged as a sustainable, first-line therapy for the management of ventricular tachycardia (VT). Given the rise of the “obesity paradox” theory in atrial ablation outcomes, we sought to study the effect of BMI on patients undergoing structural VT ablation. Purpose: To assess the outcomes of VT ablation, specifically VT recurrence, in patients with elevated vs. normal BMI. Methods: Clinical characteristics and demographic data were collected for VT patients who underwent ablation at Mayo Clinic Rochester from 2012-2022. Patient BMI was classified as non-obese (<30 kg/m2), obese (30-40 kg/m2), and morbidly obese (≥40 kg/m2). The endpoint was a composite of initial monomorphic VT recurrence and repeat ablation after adjusting for age, sex, and comorbidities. Results: A total of 399 patients underwent 508 ablations. 51.4% of ablations had a BMI <30, 39.2% were between 30-40, and 9.4% were ≥40. There was a greater prevalence of hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus in morbidly obese patients (p <0.01). Morbidly obese individuals also had a significantly increased rate of general anesthesia during ablation and long VT cycle lengths. The Kaplan-Meier curve demonstrates no statistically significant differences in time to VT recurrence among the three BMI groups (p = 0.324). Neither morbid-obesity (aHR= 1.20; CI = 0.94-1.56, p = 0.14) nor nonmorbid-obesity (aHR = 0.92; CI = 0.76-1.10, p = 0.4), compared to non-obesity was a significant independent predictor of VT recurrence or repeat ablation on multivariate regression after adjusting for age, sex and comorbidities. Conclusion: There was no significant association between BMI groups and VT recurrence or repeat ablation, and no difference in complications. We did not find the obesity paradox to be relevant for VT ablation in our patient population. Further study would be needed with larger samples to corroborate these findings.

Abstract Background Ventricular tachycardia (VT) is a life-threatening arrhythmia that can complicate structural heart disease. While catheter ablation is effective in treating this condition, the recurrence of VT after the procedure continues to be a concern. Consequently, there is a need for a reliable system to evaluate the likelihood of arrhythmia recurrence following an ablation. Objective To predict recurrence or repeat ablation after a VT catheter ablation procedure using machine learning (ML) models. Methods We conducted a single-center, retrospective study of all patients undergoing catheter ablation for scar-related VT between 2012 and 2022. Data collected included demographics, comorbidities, medications, relevant laboratory abnormalities, electrocardiograms, echocardiograms, detailed procedural characteristics, and outcomes. Python version 3.8.5 for exploratory data analysis (EDA) and visualization. Using six different ML models from the training set (90:10 split), we used 34 variables to predict the primary outcome, including VT recurrence or repeat catheter ablation. The accuracy of these models was compared using ROC curves based on their performance on the test set. Results Out of 508 VT ablation procedures, 261 experienced a recurrence. Support Vector Classifier (SVM) performed the best, having an AUC of 0.73, followed by logistic regression at 0.69 (Figure A). SVM yielded sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of 0.73, 0.73, 0.79, and 0.67, respectively. The F1 score was 0.70. Among the factors with the highest feature importance in the model, the most influential variable was the proceduralist’s experience level, followed by QRS width at baseline, LVEF, and patient’s age (Figure B). Conclusion Our model can predict recurrent VT after ablation with reasonable accuracy, outperforming the existing clinical risk scores significantly. Larger training sample sizes will help achieve more robust ML models and improve predictive accuracy further.Figure A: ROC curve depicting the AUROCB. Feature importance graph

Background: Catheter ablation is an effective tool to reduce ventricular tachycardia (VT) burden. There is a lack of robust data studying the characteristics and outcomes of VT ablation in patients with ischemic (ICM) versus non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM). Aims: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of ICM vs NICM on outcomes of VT ablation. Methods: A single-center, retrospective study of patients undergoing catheter ablation for VT was conducted. Results: A total of 168 patients, undergoing 200 VT ablation procedures, were included in this study. NICM group (112 procedures) was compared to ICM group (88 procedures). Patients in the ICM group were older (66.6 ± 13.4 vs 58.9 ± 14.4 years) and had higher rates of prior myocardial infarction (65.9% vs 3.6) and coronary artery bypass graft surgery (40.9% vs 1.8%). Overall, ICM group had more comorbidities like hypertension (80.7% vs 52.7%), diabetes mellitus (23.9% vs 12.5%), chronic kidney disease (45.5% vs 35.7%), stroke (17% vs 7.1%), and lower left ventricular ejection fraction (36.8 ± 13.2% vs 43.1 ± 14.7%). The ICM group had lower incidence of prior cardiac valvular surgery (9.1% vs 29.5%). The inducibility of VT (93% vs 93.5%; p= 1.0) and the number of different VT morphologies induced during the case (1.9 ± 1.5 vs 2.3 ± 2.5; p=0.19) was similar between the two groups. There was no acute mortality in either group. There was a non-significant trend towards greater VT recurrence in the NICM group (43.2% vs 33.3%, p= 0.19). However, patients with NICM had a lower VT-free survival as determined by Kaplan-Meier analysis (p=0.05) [Figure]. Long term mortality was higher in ICM group when compared to NICM group (18.2% vs 8.9%, p<0.01). Conclusion: Patients undergoing VT ablation in the NICM group when compared to the ICM group were noted to be younger, had fewer comorbidities, and lower long-term mortality. However, they had significantly less VT-free survival, likely owing to more challenging substrate responsible for VT.

Introduction: Accurate pre-procedure localization of the premature ventricular contractions (PVCs) is critical in preparing for the ablation. So far, no tools exist for artificial intelligence guided PVC-localization. Hypothesis: Trained deep learning model will be able to predict the site of origin (SOO) of PVCs using 12 lead electrocardiogram (ECG). Methods: We analyzed 707 ECG-ablation pairs from 2403 patients who had at least one ECG flagged for PVCs in the 6 months prior to their procedure. First, we used a cohort of 100,000 ECGs without PVCs and 10,000 ECGs with PVCs to train a convolutional neural network (CNN) to isolate the ECG segments with PVCs in them from a 12-lead ECG (Figure 1). We then trained two models, one utilizing a 10-second 12-lead ECG, and the other with just the isolated PVC beats as input. The models were trained using the Keras framework with TensorFlow (Google). Results: The mean age of the patients in the cohort was 61.2 ± 15.0 years. 66.3 percent of patients underwent left ventricle ablation, 54.6 percent had outflow ablation, and 55.3 percent had ablation of sites with leftward axis (septal location for midline and left ventricle PVCs). The model trained on 10-second ECGs yielded validation and test AUCs of 0.941 and 0.931 for outflow, 0.898 and 0.891 for ventricle, and 0.863 and 0.846 for leftward axis (Figure 1A). The model trained on isolated segments containing PVC beats yielded validation and test AUCs of 0.966 and 0.957 for outflow, 0.879 and 0.907 for ventricle, and 0.846 and 0.829 for SOO for leftward axis (Figure 1B). Conclusions: We have trained an accurate convolutional neural network that can predict SOO using the surface ECG. Further fine-tuning would be needed to refine the model and develop prediction of specific sites.

Abstract Background Catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia (VT) may be performed under general anesthesia (GA) or monitored anesthesia care (MAC). There is a paucity of data studying these two sedation strategies with respect to intraprocedural characteristics, and outcomes of VT ablation. Purpose The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of anesthesia techniques on VT inducibility and outcomes. Methods A single-center, retrospective study of patients undergoing catheter ablation for scar-related VT, from 2016-2022, was conducted. Data collected included demographics, comorbidities, medications, relevant laboratory abnormalities, electrocardiograms, echocardiograms, detailed procedural characteristics, and outcomes. Results One hundred sixty-eight patients who underwent a total of 200 VT ablation procedures were included. The patients undergoing GA had a greater burden of comorbidities including congestive heart failure (77.2% vs. 60.9%), hypertension (66.9% vs. 60.0%), atrial arrhythmias (50.7% vs. 43.8%), diabetes mellitus (21.3% vs. 9.4%), chronic kidney disease (44.1% vs. 31.3%), prior stroke (11.8% vs. 10.9%), myocardial infarction (31.6% vs. 29.7%), pre-existing implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (86.8% vs. 71.9%) and had a higher median number of antiarrhythmic drugs at baseline (2 vs. 1) [Figure 1]. There was a greater percentage of patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (58.1% vs. 51.6%) in the GA cohort. The mean left ventricular ejection fraction was not different among the two groups (39.3 ± 13.9 vs. 42.5 ± 15.3). The GA group had more hemodynamic instability at baseline (p &lt; 0.01), and during VT induction (p &lt; 0.01). There was no significant difference in the number of VT induced, or tachycardia cycle length, in each group. Despite higher radiofrequency energy delivery time in the GA group as compared to the MAC group, the GA group had higher VT inducibility post-procedure and were more likely to be discharged on antiarrhythmic drugs. Even though the recurrence of VT was higher in the GA group compared to the MAC group (41.9% vs. 31.3%), the VT-free survival curves were not significantly different by Kaplan-Meier analysis (p=0.19) [Figure 2]. In a multivariate regression analysis, the sedation strategy was not an independent predictor of VT recurrence (p=NS). However, baseline hemodynamic instability was an independent predictor of VT recurrence after accounting for all intraprocedural characteristics (p=0.008). Conclusion Patients undergoing VT ablation under GA have more comorbidities and tend to be on more antiarrhythmic drugs. The GA group had more hemodynamic instability during the procedure and had greater overall VT recurrence, however, not significant in a time-based analysis. The greater overall recurrence in the GA group could be because they represent a sicker population, or the hemodynamics during the procedure preclude adequate ablation of the VT circuit elements.Figure 1Figure 2

Abstract Background Catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia (VT) has emerged as the mainstay of management for these sick patients. There is a lack of long-term data studying the characteristics and outcomes of VT ablation in females and the comparison with males. Purpose The purpose of the study was to assess the impact of sex on outcomes of catheter ablation for ventricular tachycardia. Methods A single-center retrospective study of 200 procedures in 168 patients undergoing catheter ablation for scar-related VT under GA or MAC sedation was conducted. Data collected included demographics, comorbidities, medications, relevant laboratory abnormalities, electrocardiograms, structural data including echocardiograms and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, detailed procedural characteristics, and outcomes. Results Females undergoing VT ablation were younger (49.4 ± 15.6 vs. 65.5 ± 12.2 years) [Figure 1]. Females had a lower burden of comorbidities, including congestive heart failure (30.0 % vs. 82.5%), hypertension (27.5% vs. 74.4%), atrial arrhythmias (20.0% vs. 55.6%), chronic kidney disease (25.0% vs. 43.8%), prior myocardial infarction (15.0% & 35.0%), and coronary artery bypass graft surgery (0.0% & 23.8%). Females were on fewer antiarrhythmic drugs at baseline. During the procedure, males had a greater likelihood of undergoing general anesthesia (72.5% vs. 50.0%) and associated hemodynamic instability at baseline (30.0% vs. 12.5%). It was more likely for VT to be induced in males, and females required more induction medications. There was no difference in complication rates between males and females. A greater proportion of males were discharged and maintained on antiarrhythmic drugs after the procedure. There was no significant difference in VT recurrence or long-term mortality. Using Kaplan-Meier analysis, no difference was seen in long-term VT-free survival by sex (p=0.20) [Figure 2]. In a multivariate regression model, female sex had no bearing on the VT-free survival. Conclusion Females undergoing catheter ablation for VT are younger and have fewer comorbidities. They tend to be on fewer antiarrhythmic drugs at baseline, and after ablation. Interestingly, despite a healthier baseline profile, females do not experience less VT recurrence or mortality compared to males. Further study would be needed to investigate this association.Figure 1Figure 2

Abstract Background Catheter ablation has emerged as the first-line therapy for management of ventricular tachycardia (VT) over the last decade. There is a reluctance for older patients to be referred for catheter ablation with concerns for complications and poor outcomes. Purpose The purpose of the study was to assess the safety and outcomes of catheter ablation for VT in patients more than 74 years of age in comparison to younger patients. Methods A single-center retrospective study of 200 procedures in 168 patients undergoing catheter ablation for scar-related VT was conducted. Data collected included demographics, comorbidities, medications, relevant laboratory abnormalities, electrocardiograms, Holter, device electrograms, structural data including echocardiograms and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, detailed procedural characteristics, and outcomes. Results The mean age in the older cohort was 77.7 ± 3.7 years compared to 57.6 ± 13.1 years in the younger group (p &lt; 0.01) [Figure 1]. The geriatric patients had more males (93.6% vs. 75.8%) and had greater proportion of comorbidities including congestive heart failure (89.4% vs. 66.7%), hypertension (91.5% & 56.9%), atrial arrhythmias (66.0% vs. 43.1%), chronic kidney disease (68.1% vs. 31.4%), prior myocardial infarction (53.2% vs. 24.2%), and stroke (21.3% vs. 8.5%). The older patients were on more antiarrhythmic drugs at baseline. During the procedure, the number of cases with VT induction and hemodynamic stability was similar in older and younger groups. In cases where VT was induced, the older patients had a greater number of VTs induced (2.7 ± 3.0 vs. 1.9 ± 1.8), with slower cycle lengths (454.9 ± 122.6 vs. 379.3 ± 108.1 milliseconds). There was no difference noted in the procedural complications between the two groups. Older patients were more likely to be discharged on antiarrhythmic medications (87.2% vs. 71.2%) and had higher long-term mortality (29.8% vs. 7.8%). The older group was less likely to have a repeat ablation procedure (8.5% vs 24.2%). There was no difference in long-term VT-free survival rates among the two groups [Figure 2]. Conclusion Patients more than 74 years of age undergoing catheter ablation for structural VT have a greater comorbidity burden but demonstrate similar procedural complications and VT-free survival rates, when compared to the younger cohort.Figure 1Figure 2