Silent and non‐silent thromboembolic events after ventricular tachycardia ablation: Modifiable risk with postprocedure anticoagulation?

SafeTy and Efficacy of Direct Oral Anticoagulant versus Aspirin for Reduction Of RisK of CErebrovascular Events in Patients Undergoing Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation (STROKE-VT)

BACKGROUND

The STROKE-VT is a multicenter, randomized controlled trial that studied the differences in cerebrovascular events (CVE) between direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) vs. ASA use post-procedurally in patients undergoing left ventricular arrhythmia (LVA) ablation [ventricular tachycardia (VT) or premature ventricular contraction (PVC)] using radiofrequency ablation (RFA).

METHODS

246 patients scheduled for LVA-RFA were randomized 1:1 post-procedurally to receive DOAC or ASA. The study's primary endpoint was the incidence of stroke or TIA, or MRI detected asymptomatic cerebrovascular events (ACE) at 24 hours and 30 days follow-up. The secondary endpoints included procedure-related complications (composite of any vascular complication, pericardial complication, heart block, thromboembolic event excluding stroke or TIA) and in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

There were no differences between groups regarding baseline and ablation characteristics (except the percentage of patients undergoing VT ablation, rate of amiodarone use, and total RFA time). Post-procedure cerebrovascular events (stroke and TIA) were lower in the DOAC arm versus ASA arm (0% vs. 6.5%, p<0.001 and 4.9% vs. 18%, p < 0.001; respectively). Patients in the ASA group had higher MRI detected ACE compared to the DOAC group both at 24 hours (23% vs. 12%, p = 0.03) and 30 days (18% vs. 6.5%, p = 0.006) follow-up. The acute procedure-related complication and in-hospital mortality were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

DOAC utilization following endocardial/epicardial ablation for LVA-RFA was associated with reduced risk of transient ischemic attack or stroke, and asymptomatic MRI-detected cerebrovascular event.

Percutaneous versus Surgical Intervention for Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis: A Systematic Review

Aortic stenosis is a disease that is increasing in prevalence and manifests as decreased cardiac output, which if left untreated can result in heart failure and ultimately death. It is primarily a disease of the elderly who often have multiple comorbidities. The advent of transcatheter aortic valve therapies has changed the way we treat these conditions. However, long-term results of these therapies remain uncertain. Recently, there has been an increasing number of studies examining the role of both surgical aortic valve replacement and transcatheter aortic valve replacement. We therefore performed a systematic review using Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Two investigators searched papers published between January 1, 2007, and to date using the following terms: "aortic valve stenosis," "aortic valve operation," and "transcatheter aortic valve therapy." Both strategies in aortic stenosis treatment highlighted specific indications alongside the pitfalls such as structural valve degeneration and valve thrombosis which have a bearing on clinical outcomes. We propose some recommendations to help clinicians in the decision-making process as technological improvements make both surgical and transcatheter therapies viable options for patients with aortic stenosis. Finally, we assess the role of finite element analysis in patient selection for aortic valve replacement. THVT and AVR-S are both useful tools in the armamentarium against aortic stenosis. The decision between the two treatment strategies should be best guided by a strong robust evidence base, ideally with a long-term follow-up. This is best performed by the heart team with the patient as the center of the discussion.

2020 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

This executive summary of the valvular heart disease guideline provides recommendations for clinicians to diagnose and manage valvular heart disease as well as supporting documentation to encourage their use.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 1, 2010, to March 1, 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Reports, and other selected database relevant to this guideline. Structure: Many recommendations from the earlier valvular heart disease guidelines have been updated with new evidence and provides newer options for diagnosis and treatment of valvular heart disease. This summary includes only the recommendations from the full guideline which focus on diagnostic work-up, the timing and choice of surgical and catheter interventions, and recommendations for medical therapy. The reader is referred to the full guideline for graphical flow charts, text, and tables with additional details about the rationale for and implementation of each recommendation, and the evidence tables detailing the data considered in developing these guidelines.