Background—: We report the experience in a cohort of consecutive patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation during catheter ablation of unstable ventricular tachycardia (VT) at our center. Methods and Results—: From 2010 to 2015, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was initiated in 64 patients (average age: 63±15 years; left ventricular ejection fraction in 27±9%; cardiogenic shock in 23%, and electrical storm in 62% of patients) undergoing 74 unstable VT catheter ablation procedures. At least one VT was terminated in 81% of procedures with baseline inducible VT, and VT noninducibility was achieved in 69%. Acute heart failure occurred in 5 patients: 3 underwent emergency heart transplantation, 1 had left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation, and 1 patient eventually died because of subsequent mesenteric ischemia. All other patients were discharged alive. After a median follow-up of 21 months (13–28 months), VT recurrence was 33%; overall survival was 56 out of 64 patients (88%). Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation–supported ablation was the bridge to LVAD in 6.9% and to heart transplantation in 3.5% of patients. VT recurrence was related to ablation success (after 180 days of follow up: 19% when VT was noninducible, 42% if nonclinical VT was inducible, 75% when clinical VT was inducible, and 75% in untested patients, P <0.001). Incidence of all-cause death, heart transplantation, and LVAD was independently related to ablation outcome (at 180 days of follow-up: 9% when noninducibility was achieved, 50% in case of inducible VT, and 75% in untested patients, P <0.001). At multivariable analyses, noninducibility (hazard ratio 0.198; P =0.001) and left ventricular ejection fraction (hazard ratio 0.916; P =0.008) correlated with all-cause death, LVAD, and heart transplantation. Conclusions—: Ablation of unstable VTs can be safely supported by extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, which allows rhythm stabilization with low procedure mortality, bridging decompensated patients to permanent LVAD or heart transplantation. Successful ablation is associated with better outcomes than unsuccessful ablation.

Background: Large-scale studies evaluating long-term recurrence rates in both idiopathic and non-idiopathic PVC catheter ablation (CA) patients have not been reported. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of idiopathic and non-idiopathic PVC CA, investigating the predictors of acute and long-term efficacy. Methods: This retrospective multicentric study included 439 patients who underwent PVC CA at three institutions from April-2015 to December-2021. Clinical success at 6 months’ follow-up, defined as a reduction of at least 80% of the pre-procedural PVC burden, was deemed the primary outcome. The secondary aims of the study were: clinical success at the last available follow-up, predictors of arrhythmic recurrences at long-term follow-up, and safety outcomes. Results: The median age was 51 years, with 24.9% patients being affected suffering from structural heart disease. The median pre-procedural PVC burden was 20.1%. PVCs originating from the RVOT were the most common index PVC observed (29.1%), followed by coronary cusp (CC) and non-outflow tract (OT) LV PVCs (23.1% and 19.0%). The primary outcome at 6 months was reached in 85.1% cases, with a significant reduction in the 24 h% PVC burden (−91.4% [−83.4; −96.7], p < 0.001); long-term efficacy was observed in 82.1% of cases at almost 3-year follow-up. The presence of underlying structural heart disease and non-OT LV region origin (aHR 1.77 [1.07–2.93], p = 0.027 and aHR = 1.96 [1.22–3.14], p = 0.005) was independently associated with recurrences. Conclusion: CA of both idiopathic and non-idiopathic PVCs showed a very good acute and long-term procedural success rate, with an overall low complication. Predictors of arrhythmic recurrence at follow-up were underlying structural heart disease and non-OT LV origin.

Background: Optimal antithrombotic therapy after left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion is still not clear. The aim of this study was to investigate the role of different antithrombotic regimens after the procedure. Methods and Results: We retrospectively analyzed data of 260 patients who underwent LAA occlusion and divided them into four groups according to therapy at discharge: dual antiplatelet therapy (group A, 71.5%); oral anticoagulants (group B, 19%); “minimal” antithrombotic therapy (single antiplatelet agent or without any antithrombotic therapy; group C, 4.5%) and other therapeutic regimens (such as a combination of antiplatelets and anticoagulants; group D, 4.5%). We analyzed baseline characteristics, procedural data, and clinical and transesophageal follow-up for each group. The incidence of adverse events was low in the whole population and had a similar distribution among groups. The majority of bleeding events was registered during the first 3 months after the procedure (34 out of 46, 70%). Ischemic events (2%), as well as silent left atrial thrombosis, were rare and not significantly higher in the population discharged with “minimal” antithrombotic therapy. Conclusion: Our experience seems to suggest that LAA occlusion was associated with a low incidence of adverse events, regardless of antithrombotic therapy. A “minimal” drug regimen may be feasible without losing efficacy on embolic prevention for patients with high bleeding risk.

Aims : To chart the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the activity of interventional electrophysiology services in affected regions. Methods and results : We reviewed the electrophysiology laboratory records in three affected cities: Wenzhou in China, Milan in Italy, and London in the UK. We inspected catheter lab records and interviewed electrophysiologists in each centre to gather information on the impact of the pandemic on working patterns and on the health of staff members and patients. There was a striking decline in interventional electrophysiology activity in each of the centres. The decline occurred within a week of the recognition of widespread community transmission of the virus in each region and shows a striking correlation with the national figures for new diagnoses of COVID-19 in each case. During the period of restriction, workflow dropped to <5% of normal, consisting of emergency cases only. In two of three centres, electrophysiologists were redeployed to perform emergency work outside electrophysiology. Among the centres studied, only Wenzhou has seen a recovery from the restrictions in activity. Following an intense nationwide programme of public health interventions, local transmission of COVID-19 ceased to be detectable after 18 February allowing the electrophysiology service to resume with a strict testing regime for all patients. Conclusion : Interventional electrophysiology is vulnerable to closure in times of great social difficulty including the COVID-19 pandemic. Intense public health intervention can permit suppression of local disease transmission allowing resumption of some normal activity with stringent precautions.

BACKGROUND: Epicardial approach in ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation is still regarded as a second-step strategy, due to the risk of complications. We evaluated the frequency that epicardial ablation targets were identified and ablation performed following pericardial access compared with unnecessary pericardial access for different VT causes and potential markers of epicardial VT. METHODS: All VT ablation procedures including epicardial approach over a 10-year period were included. First-line epicardial approach was indicated in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) and postmyocarditis VT; in patients with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy (IDCM) and postmyocardial infarction, indications resulted from available imaging techniques or 12-lead VT morphology. The epicardial approach was considered useful if epicardial ablation was performed after epicardial mapping. Feasibility, complications, and long-term outcome were reported. RESULTS: Four hundred and eighty-eight subjects with a median age of 60 years (interquartile range, 47–65) and of left ventricle ejection fraction 41% (interquartile range, 30–55) underwent 626 epicardial VT ablations. Percutaneous access had a success rate of 92.2% and a complication rate of 3.6%. Overall, epicardial approach was, respectively, indicated to 11.8% of postmyocardial infarction patients, 49.5% in IDCM, 94% in myocarditis, and 90.7% in ARVC. Epicardial ablation at the first ablation attempt was performed in 9.3% of postmyocardial infarction patients, 28.8% in IDCM, 86.5% in myocarditis, and 81.3% in patients with ARVC. In first-line epicardial group, ARVC and myocarditis showed the highest odds for epicardial ablation (OR, 4.057 [95% CI, 1.299–8.937]; P =0.007; OR, 3.971 [95% CI, 1.376–11.465]; P =0.005, respectively). IDCM independently predicted unnecessary epicardial approach (OR, 2.7 [95% CI, 1.7–4.3]; P <0.001). After a follow-up of 41 months (interquartile range, 19–64), patients with IDCM experienced higher rate of recurrences and mortality compared with other causes. CONCLUSIONS: Epicardial approach is integral part of ablation armamentarium regardless of the VT cause, with high feasibility and low complication rate in experienced centers. Our data support its use at first ablation attempt in VTs related to ARVC and myocarditis.