Dose-dependent pulmonary vein reconnection in response to adenosine: relevance of atrioventricular block during infusion

2024 European Heart Rhythm Association/Heart Rhythm Society/Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society/Latin American Heart Rhythm Society expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation

In the last three decades, ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) has become an evidence-based safe and efficacious treatment for managing the most common cardiac arrhythmia. In 2007, the first joint expert consensus document was issued, guiding healthcare professionals involved in catheter or surgical AF ablation. Mounting research evidence and technological advances have resulted in a rapidly changing landscape in the field of catheter and surgical AF ablation, thus stressing the need for regularly updated versions of this partnership which were issued in 2012 and 2017. Seven years after the last consensus, an updated document was considered necessary to define a contemporary framework for selection and management of patients considered for or undergoing catheter or surgical AF ablation. This consensus is a joint effort from collaborating cardiac electrophysiology societies, namely the European Heart Rhythm Association, the Heart Rhythm Society, the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society, and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society.

2024 European Heart Rhythm Association/Heart Rhythm Society/Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society/Latin American Heart Rhythm Society expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation

In the last three decades, ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) has become an evidence-based safe and efficacious treatment for managing the most common cardiac arrhythmia. In 2007, the first joint expert consensus document was issued, guiding healthcare professionals involved in catheter or surgical AF ablation. Mounting research evidence and technological advances have resulted in a rapidly changing landscape in the field of catheter and surgical AF ablation, thus stressing the need for regularly updated versions of this partnership which were issued in 2012 and 2017. Seven years after the last consensus, an updated document was considered necessary to define a contemporary framework for selection and management of patients considered for or undergoing catheter or surgical AF ablation. This consensus is a joint effort from collaborating cardiac electrophysiology societies, namely the European Heart Rhythm Association, the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the Asia Pacific HRS, and the Latin American HRS.

2024 European Heart Rhythm Association/Heart Rhythm Society/Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society/Latin American Heart Rhythm Society expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation

In the last three decades, ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) has become an evidence-based safe and efficacious treatment for managing the most common cardiac arrhythmia. In 2007, the first joint expert consensus document was issued, guiding healthcare professionals involved in catheter or surgical AF ablation. Mounting research evidence and technological advances have resulted in a rapidly changing landscape in the field of catheter and surgical AF ablation, thus stressing the need for regularly updated versions of this partnership which were issued in 2012 and 2017. Seven years after the last consensus, an updated document was considered necessary to define a contemporary framework for selection and management of patients considered for or undergoing catheter or surgical AF ablation. This consensus is a joint effort from collaborating cardiac electrophysiology societies, namely the European Heart Rhythm Association, the Heart Rhythm Society, the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society, and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society .

Pathophysiological and Molecular Basis of the Side Effects of Ticagrelor: Lessons from a Case Report

Ticagrelor is currently considered a first-line choice in dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) following revascularization of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). However, its use is correlated with an increased incidence of two side effects, dyspnea and bradyarrhythmias, whose molecular mechanisms have not yet been defined with certainty and, consequently, neither of the therapeutic decisions they imply. We report the case of a patient with acute myocardial infarction treated with ticagrelor and aspirin as oral antithrombotic therapy after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), manifesting in a significant bradyarrhythmic episode that required a switch of antiplatelet therapy. Starting from this case report, this article aims to gather the currently available evidence regarding the molecular mechanisms underlying these side effects and propose possible decision-making algorithms regarding their management in clinical practice.

Ticagrelor-Related Severe Dyspnoea: Mechanisms, Characteristic Features, Differential Diagnosis and Treatment

With a growing number of patients on ticagrelor therapy after stent implantation, we observe many cases of side effects of the drug, mostly dyspnoea and bradycardia. In our article we present 2 patients, in which the symptoms were particularly severe. Then we describe possible mechanisms of these complications, explain how to carry out differential diagnosis, discuss when to switch ticagrelor to other antiplatelet drug and finally we present the way to deal with the symptoms.

Reconnection Rate and Long-Term Outcome with Adenosine Provocation During Cryoballoon Ablation for Pulmonary Vein Isolation

Background

Adenosine can unmask dormant conduction during pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for atrial fibrillation (AF). Studies of adenosine use in radiofrequency PVI show high reconnection rates and conflicting results for long-term success, however there is limited data with cryoballoon ablation (CBA).

Methods

A prospectively maintained database of patients undergoing first CBA at a single institution was analyzed. Adenosine use was at the discretion of the primary operator. Additional freezes were delivered for reconnected veins until dormant conduction was eliminated. The primary endpoint, time to AF recurrence defined as any episode < 30 seconds after a 3-month blanking period, was assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis.

Results

From 2011 to 2015, 406 patients underwent CBA, 361 of whom had > 3 months follow-up. The mean age was 61.7 years, 69% were male, and the prevalence of paroxysmal AF was 79% with no significant difference between those that did and did not receive adenosine (77% vs 86%, respectively, p = 0.23). Adenosine testing was performed in 78 patients (21.6%) with a mean dose of 10.6 mg/vein. Of the 306 veins evaluated, 17 (6%) demonstrated dormant conduction. Over a median 14.4 months follow-up, there was no significant difference in freedom from AF with adenosine use (p= 0.86).

Conclusions

Dormant conduction with adenosine is uncommon following CBA and its use does not improve long-term success rates.

Comparison between local and systemic injection of adenosine for detecting dormant conduction after PV isolation

BACKGROUND

Adenosine administration after pulmonary vein (PV) isolation is effective for identifying dormant conduction (DC). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of local injection of adenosine into the PV with systemic intravenous injection.

METHODS

After complete PV isolation was performed, adenosine was injected directly into the PV (local method, 6-18 mg) and the femoral vein (systemic method, 12-30 mg) sequentially. We compared the incidence of DC and the hemodynamic effect of adenosine between the methods.

RESULTS

We analyzed 150 PVs in 40 patients who underwent atrial fibrillation ablation. A total of 16 DCs were seen in 14 patients with either the local or systemic method. Among them, two DCs were detected only by the local method (detection rate: local 10.7% vs systemic 9.3%). The effective doses of adenosine required to induce atrioventricular (AV) block or detect DC were 7.7 ± 3.1 mg (local) and 13.1 ± 3.4 mg (systemic), respectively (P < 0.001). The time interval between adenosine injection and AV block was shorter with the local than systemic method (5.8 seconds vs 11.7 seconds, P < 0.001). Six DCs (four with local and two with systemic method) were detected without manifested AV block. Additionally, there were fewer decrements in blood pressure with the local than systemic method.

CONCLUSION

Local adenosine injection via the PV was comparable to systemic administration for detecting DC after PV isolation. Furthermore, the local method required a smaller dose of adenosine, took less time to induce AV block, and resulted in less systemic hemodynamic compromise than did the systemic method.