2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS expert consensus statement on catheter ablation of ventricular arrhythmias: executive summary

Ventricular arrhythmias are an important cause of morbidity and mortality and come in a variety of forms, from single premature ventricular complexes to sustained ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation. Rapid developments have taken place over the past decade in our understanding of these arrhythmias and in our ability to diagnose and treat them. The field of catheter ablation has progressed with the development of new methods and tools, and with the publication of large clinical trials. Therefore, global cardiac electrophysiology professional societies undertook to outline recommendations and best practices for these procedures in a document that will update and replace the 2009 EHRA/HRS Expert Consensus on Catheter Ablation of Ventricular Arrhythmias. An expert writing group, after reviewing and discussing the literature, including a systematic review and meta-analysis published in conjunction with this document, and drawing on their own experience, drafted and voted on recommendations and summarized current knowledge and practice in the field. Each recommendation is presented in knowledge byte format and is accompanied by supportive text and references. Further sections provide a practical synopsis of the various techniques and of the specific ventricular arrhythmia sites and substrates encountered in the electrophysiology lab. The purpose of this document is to help electrophysiologists around the world to appropriately select patients for catheter ablation, to perform procedures in a safe and efficacious manner, and to provide follow-up and adjunctive care in order to obtain the best possible outcomes for patients with ventricular arrhythmias.

2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS expert consensus statement on catheter ablation of ventricular arrhythmias

Ventricular arrhythmias are an important cause of morbidity and mortality and come in a variety of forms, from single premature ventricular complexes to sustained ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation. Rapid developments have taken place over the past decade in our understanding of these arrhythmias and in our ability to diagnose and treat them. The field of catheter ablation has progressed with the development of new methods and tools, and with the publication of large clinical trials. Therefore, global cardiac electrophysiology professional societies undertook to outline recommendations and best practices for these procedures in a document that will update and replace the 2009 EHRA/HRS Expert Consensus on Catheter Ablation of Ventricular Arrhythmias. An expert writing group, after reviewing and discussing the literature, including a systematic review and meta-analysis published in conjunction with this document, and drawing on their own experience, drafted and voted on recommendations and summarized current knowledge and practice in the field. Each recommendation is presented in knowledge byte format and is accompanied by supportive text and references. Further sections provide a practical synopsis of the various techniques and of the specific ventricular arrhythmia sites and substrates encountered in the electrophysiology lab. The purpose of this document is to help electrophysiologists around the world to appropriately select patients for catheter ablation, to perform procedures in a safe and efficacious manner, and to provide follow-up and adjunctive care in order to obtain the best possible outcomes for patients with ventricular arrhythmias.

2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS expert consensus statement on catheter ablation of ventricular arrhythmias: Executive summary

Ventricular arrhythmias are an important cause of morbidity and mortality and come in a variety of forms, from single premature ventricular complexes to sustained ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation. Rapid developments have taken place over the past decade in our understanding of these arrhythmias and in our ability to diagnose and treat them. The field of catheter ablation has progressed with the development of new methods and tools, and with the publication of large clinical trials. Therefore, global cardiac electrophysiology professional societies undertook to outline recommendations and best practices for these procedures in a document that will update and replace the 2009 EHRA/HRS Expert Consensus on Catheter Ablation of Ventricular Arrhythmias. An expert writing group, after reviewing and discussing the literature, including a systematic review and meta-analysis published in conjunction with this document, and drawing on their own experience, drafted and voted on recommendations and summarized current knowledge and practice in the field. Each recommendation is presented in knowledge byte format and is accompanied by supportive text and references. Further sections provide a practical synopsis of the various techniques and of the specific ventricular arrhythmia sites and substrates encountered in the electrophysiology lab. The purpose of this document is to help electrophysiologists around the world to appropriately select patients for catheter ablation, to perform procedures in a safe and efficacious manner, and to provide follow-up and adjunctive care in order to obtain the best possible outcomes for patients with ventricular arrhythmias.

2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS expert consensus statement on catheter ablation of ventricular arrhythmias

Ventricular arrhythmias are an important cause of morbidity and mortality and come in a variety of forms, from single premature ventricular complexes to sustained ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation. Rapid developments have taken place over the past decade in our understanding of these arrhythmias and in our ability to diagnose and treat them. The field of catheter ablation has progressed with the development of new methods and tools, and with the publication of large clinical trials. Therefore, global cardiac electrophysiology professional societies undertook to outline recommendations and best practices for these procedures in a document that will update and replace the 2009 EHRA/HRS Expert Consensus on Catheter Ablation of Ventricular Arrhythmias. An expert writing group, after reviewing and discussing the literature, including a systematic review and meta-analysis published in conjunction with this document, and drawing on their own experience, drafted and voted on recommendations and summarized current knowledge and practice in the field. Each recommendation is presented in knowledge byte format and is accompanied by supportive text and references. Further sections provide a practical synopsis of the various techniques and of the specific ventricular arrhythmia sites and substrates encountered in the electrophysiology lab. The purpose of this document is to help electrophysiologists around the world to appropriately select patients for catheter ablation, to perform procedures in a safe and efficacious manner, and to provide follow-up and adjunctive care in order to obtain the best possible outcomes for patients with ventricular arrhythmias.

2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS expert consensus statement on catheter ablation of ventricular arrhythmias: Executive summary

Ventricular arrhythmias are an important cause of morbidity and mortality and come in a variety of forms, from single premature ventricular complexes to sustained ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation. Rapid developments have taken place over the past decade in our understanding of these arrhythmias and in our ability to diagnose and treat them. The field of catheter ablation has progressed with the development of new methods and tools, and with the publication of large clinical trials. Therefore, global cardiac electrophysiology professional societies undertook to outline recommendations and best practices for these procedures in a document that will update and replace the 2009 EHRA/HRS Expert Consensus on Catheter Ablation of Ventricular Arrhythmias. An expert writing group, after reviewing and discussing the literature, including a systematic review and meta‐analysis published in conjunction with this document, and drawing on their own experience, drafted and voted on recommendations and summarized current knowledge and practice in the field. Each recommendation is presented in knowledge byte format and is accompanied by supportive text and references. Further sections provide a practical synopsis of the various techniques and of the specific ventricular arrhythmia sites and substrates encountered in the electrophysiology lab. The purpose of this document is to help electrophysiologists around the world to appropriately select patients for catheter ablation, to perform procedures in a safe and efficacious manner, and to provide follow‐up and adjunctive care in order to obtain the best possible outcomes for patients with ventricular arrhythmias.

2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS expert consensus statement on catheter ablation of ventricular arrhythmias

Ventricular arrhythmias are an important cause of morbidity and mortality and come in a variety of forms, from single premature ventricular complexes to sustained ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation. Rapid developments have taken place over the past decade in our understanding of these arrhythmias and in our ability to diagnose and treat them. The field of catheter ablation has progressed with the development of new methods and tools, and with the publication of large clinical trials. Therefore, global cardiac electrophysiology professional societies undertook to outline recommendations and best practices for these procedures in a document that will update and replace the 2009 EHRA/HRS Expert Consensus on Catheter Ablation of Ventricular Arrhythmias. An expert writing group, after reviewing and discussing the literature, including a systematic review and meta-analysis published in conjunction with this document, and drawing on their own experience, drafted and voted on recommendations and summarized current knowledge and practice in the field. Each recommendation is presented in knowledge byte format and is accompanied by supportive text and references. Further sections provide a practical synopsis of the various techniques and of the specific ventricular arrhythmia sites and substrates encountered in the electrophysiology lab. The purpose of this document is to help electrophysiologists around the world to appropriately select patients for catheter ablation, to perform procedures in a safe and efficacious manner, and to provide follow-up and adjunctive care in order to obtain the best possible outcomes for patients with ventricular arrhythmias.

2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS expert consensus statement on catheter ablation of ventricular arrhythmias: Executive summary

Ventricular arrhythmias are an important cause of morbidity and mortality and come in a variety of forms, from single premature ventricular complexes to sustained ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation. Rapid developments have taken place over the past decade in our understanding of these arrhythmias and in our ability to diagnose and treat them. The field of catheter ablation has progressed with the development of new methods and tools, and with the publication of large clinical trials. Therefore, global cardiac electrophysiology professional societies undertook to outline recommendations and best practices for these procedures in a document that will update and replace the 2009 EHRA/HRS Expert Consensus on Catheter Ablation of Ventricular Arrhythmias. An expert writing group, after reviewing and discussing the literature, including a systematic review and meta-analysis published in conjunction with this document, and drawing on their own experience, drafted and voted on recommendations and summarized current knowledge and practice in the field. Each recommendation is presented in knowledge byte format and is accompanied by supportive text and references. Further sections provide a practical synopsis of the various techniques and of the specific ventricular arrhythmia sites and substrates encountered in the electrophysiology lab. The purpose of this document is to help electrophysiologists around the world to appropriately select patients for catheter ablation, to perform procedures in a safe and efficacious manner, and to provide follow-up and adjunctive care in order to obtain the best possible outcomes for patients with ventricular arrhythmias.

2019 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS expert consensus statement on catheter ablation of ventricular arrhythmias

Ventricular arrhythmias are an important cause of morbidity and mortality and come in a variety of forms, from single premature ventricular complexes to sustained ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation. Rapid developments have taken place over the past decade in our understanding of these arrhythmias and in our ability to diagnose and treat them. The field of catheter ablation has progressed with the development of new methods and tools, and with the publication of large clinical trials. Therefore, global cardiac electrophysiology professional societies undertook to outline recommendations and best practices for these procedures in a document that will update and replace the 2009 EHRA/HRS Expert Consensus on Catheter Ablation of Ventricular Arrhythmias. An expert writing group, after reviewing and discussing the literature, including a systematic review and meta-analysis published in conjunction with this document, and drawing on their own experience, drafted and voted on recommendations and summarized current knowledge and practice in the field. Each recommendation is presented in knowledge byte format and is accompanied by supportive text and references. Further sections provide a practical synopsis of the various techniques and of the specific ventricular arrhythmia sites and substrates encountered in the electrophysiology lab. The purpose of this document is to help electrophysiologists around the world to appropriately select patients for catheter ablation, to perform procedures in a safe and efficacious manner, and to provide follow-up and adjunctive care in order to obtain the best possible outcomes for patients with ventricular arrhythmias.

Idiopathic Ventricular Arrhythmias Originating From the Parietal Band

Backgrounds—

The parietal band is one of the muscle bands in the right ventricle. This study investigated the electrocardiographic and electrophysiological characteristics and ablation outcome of idiopathic ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) originating from the parietal band.

Methods and Results—

We studied 14 patients with idiopathic VA origins in the parietal band among 294 consecutive patients with VA origins in the right ventricle. The QRS morphologies of the parietal band VAs were characterized by a left bundle branch block and left inferior (n=12) or superior (n=2) axis pattern with the presence of a notch in the middle of the QRS in all cases, precordial transition at ≤lead V3 in 7 patients, and a slow QRS onset in 4 patients. During parietal band VAs, a far-field ventricular electrogram with an early activation was always recorded in the His bundle region, regardless of the location of the VA origins. During the catheter ablation, a mean number of 10.4±7.4 radiofrequency applications with a duration of 1099±1034 seconds were delivered. Catheter ablation was successful in 10 patients, and VAs recurred in 4 during a mean follow-up period of 41±24 months. A change in the QRS morphology was observed spontaneously in 4 patients, immediately after the ablation in 4, and at the time of a VA recurrence in 2.

Conclusions—

Idiopathic VAs rarely originated from the parietal band. The catheter ablation of the parietal band VAs was always challenging, requiring a large amount of the radiofrequency energy delivery for a successful ablation with a relatively high recurrence rate.

Efficacy of an Anatomical Approach in Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation of Idiopathic Ventricular Arrhythmias Originating From the Left Ventricular Outflow Tract

Background—

When anatomic obstacles preclude radiofrequency catheter ablation of idiopathic ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) originating from the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT), an alternative approach from the anatomically opposite side (endocardial versus epicardial or above versus below the aortic valve) may be considered (anatomic ablation). The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy of an anatomic ablation in idiopathic LVOT VAs.

Methods and Results—

We studied 229 consecutive patients with idiopathic LVOT VAs. Radiofrequency ablation from the first suitable site was successful in 190 patients, and in the remaining 39 patients, it was unsuccessful or had to be abandoned because of anatomic obstacles. In 22 of these 39 patients, an anatomic ablation was successful, and the VA origins were located in the intramural LVOT in 17 patients, basal left ventricular summit in 4, and LVOT septum near the His bundle in 1. The anatomic ablation was highly successful for idiopathic VAs originating from the intramural LVOT (>75%) and lateral LVOT, whereas it was unlikely to be successful for idiopathic VAs originating from the basal left ventricular summit (25%) and sepal LVOT.

Conclusions—

When a standard catheter ablation targeting the best electrophysiological measure of idiopathic LVOT VAs was unsuccessful or had to be abandoned because of anatomic obstacles, an anatomic ablation was moderately successful. These idiopathic LVOT VAs with a successful anatomic ablation commonly arose from the intramural LVOT among the left coronary cusp, aortomitral continuity, and epicardium, occasionally the basal left ventricular summit, and rarely the LVOT septum near the His bundle.

Challenging Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation of Idiopathic Ventricular Arrhythmias Originating From the Left Ventricular Summit Near the Left Main Coronary Artery

Background—

Radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) of idiopathic ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) originating from the basal portion of the left ventricular (LV) summit, which is divided from the apical LV (A-LV) summit by the great cardiac vein (GCV), is challenging. This study investigated the efficacy of RFCA and electrocardiographic and electrophysiological characteristics of these VAs.

Methods and Results—

Forty-five consecutive patients with symptomatic idiopathic LV summit VAs were studied. RFCA was successful within the main trunk of the GCV in 16 patients and within a branch of the GCV traversing the basal LV (B-LV) summit in 7. Transpericardial RFCA was successful on the epicardial surface in the A-LV summit in 6 patients and was abandoned in 14 with the B-LV summit VAs because of the close proximity to the coronary arteries and thick fat pads. RFCA was successful at the aortomitral continuity in 3 patients (2 with a failed transpericardial RFCA), and left coronary cusp in 1. The RFCA success rate of the A-LV summit VAs including the GCV VAs was 100% (22/22), whereas that of the B-LV summit VAs was 48% (11/23). The B-LV summit VAs could be differentiated from the A-LV summit VAs by left bundle branch block pattern, QRS duration ≤175 ms, precordial transition ≥V1, and maximum deflection index of ≥0.55.

Conclusions—

This study revealed that ≈50% of the B-LV summit VAs could be eliminated by a direct approach through a GCV branch running below the proximal left coronary arteries and a remote approach from the adjacent endocardial sites.

Prevalence and Electrocardiographic and Electrophysiological Characteristics of Idiopathic Ventricular Arrhythmias Originating From Intramural Foci in the Left Ventricular Outflow Tract

Backgrounds—

Idiopathic ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) originating from the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) sometimes require catheter ablation from both the endocardial and epicardial sides for their elimination, suggesting the presence of intramural VA foci. This study investigated the prevalence and electrocardiographic and electrophysiological characteristics of these idiopathic intramural LVOT VAs when compared with the idiopathic endocardial and epicardial LVOT VAs.

Methods and Results—

We studied 82 consecutive VAs with origins in the aortomitral continuity (n=30), LV summit (n=34), and intramural site (n=18). The maximum deflection index (the time to the maximum deflection in the precordial leads/QRS duration) was the largest in LV summit VAs (0.52±0.07), smallest in aortomitral continuity VAs (0.45±0.06), and midrange in intramural VAs (0.49±0.05). The electrocardiographic and electrophysiological characteristics of the intramural LVOT VAs were similar to those of the aortomitral continuity VAs. The intramural LVOT VAs exhibited a significantly smaller R-wave amplitude ratio in leads III to II, and ratio of the Q-wave amplitude in leads aVL to aVR, and a significantly earlier and later local ventricular activation time relative to the QRS onset at the His bundle and successful ablation sites than the LV summit VAs, respectively.

Conclusions—

Intramural sites account for a significant proportion of LVOT VAs. The electrocardiographic and electrophysiological characteristics of the idiopathic intramural LVOT VAs were midrange between those of the idiopathic endocardial and epicardial LVOT VAs, and more similar to those of the idiopathic endocardial LVOT VAs than those of the idiopathic epicardial LVOT VAs.

Anatomical Consideration in Catheter Ablation of Idiopathic Ventricular Arrhythmias

Idiopathic ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) are ventricular tachycardias (VTs) or premature ventricular contractions (PVCs) with a mechanism that is not related to myocardial scar. The sites of successful catheter ablation of idiopathic VA origins have been progressively elucidated and include both the endocardium and, less commonly, the epicardium. Idiopathic VAs usually originate from specific anatomical structures such as the ventricular outflow tracts, aortic root, atrioventricular (AV) annuli, papillary muscles, Purkinje network and so on, and exhibit characteristic electrocardiograms based on their anatomical background. Catheter ablation of idiopathic VAs is usually safe and highly successful, but can sometimes be challenging because of the anatomical obstacles such as the coronary arteries, epicardial fat pads, intramural and epicardial origins, AV conduction system and so on. Therefore, understanding the relevant anatomy is important to achieve a safe and successful catheter ablation of idiopathic VAs. This review describes the anatomical consideration in the catheter ablation of idiopathic VAs.

Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation of Idiopathic Ventricular Arrhythmias Originating From Intramural Foci in the Left Ventricular Outflow Tract

Backgrounds—

Idiopathic ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) originating from the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) sometimes require catheter ablation from the endocardial and epicardial sides for their elimination, suggesting the presence of intramural VA foci. This study investigated the efficacy of sequential and simultaneous unipolar radiofrequency catheter ablation from the endocardial and epicardial sides in treating intramural LVOT VAs.

Methods and Results—

Fourteen consecutive LVOT VAs, which required sequential or simultaneous irrigated unipolar radiofrequency ablation from the endocardial and epicardial sides for their elimination, were studied. The first ablation was performed at the site with the earliest local ventricular activation and best pace map on the endocardial or epicardial side. When the first ablation was unsuccessful, the second ablation was delivered on the other surface. If this sequential unipolar ablation failed, simultaneous unipolar ablation from both sides was performed. The first ablation was performed on the epicardial side in 9 VAs and endocardial side in 5 VAs. The intramural LVOT VAs were successfully eliminated by the sequential (n=9) or simultaneous (n=5) unipolar catheter ablation. Simultaneous ablation was most likely to be required for the elimination of the VAs when the distance between the endocardial and epicardial ablation sites was >8 mm and the earliest local ventricular activation time relative to the QRS onset during the VAs of <–30 ms was recorded at those ablation sites.

Conclusions—

LVOT VAs originating from intramural foci could usually be eliminated by sequential unipolar radiofrequency ablation and sometimes required simultaneous ablation from both the endocardial and epicardial sides.

An Ethical Analysis of Withdrawal of Therapy in Patients with Implantable Cardiac Electronic Devices: Application of a Novel Decision Algorithm

Patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), which include pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs), may request deactivation of their devices as they approach the end of life. The Heart Rhythm Society (2010) has stated that "ethically, and legally, there are no differences between refusing CIED therapy and requesting withdrawal of CIED therapy." On the basis of the principle that there is no ethical distinction between withholding and withdrawing treatment, this professional organization has suggested that both the antibradycardia and antitachycardia features of these devices may be disabled at the patient's request. We argue that disabling ICD shocks is analogs to a do-not-resuscitate order and is ethically permissible whereas withdrawing pacing from a pacemaker-dependent patient is an act of intentionally hastening death and not morally licit.

Prevalence of externalized conductors in Riata and Riata ST silicone leads: results from the prospective, multicenter Riata Lead Evaluation Study

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Following a class I recall of St. Jude Medical Riata/Riata ST silicone implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads, we report on the phase I results of the Riata Lead Evaluation Study, a prospective, multicenter investigation to assess the prevalence of externalized conductors (ECs) and the electrical dysfunction in these leads.

METHODS

We enrolled patients previously implanted with Riata/Riata ST leads and performed cinefluoroscopy using multiple views. A physician panel adjudicated the images for the presence of EC. The prevalence of EC was stratified and compared by lead model and patient characteristics. Upon occurrence of a lead revision, another physician panel determined whether electrical dysfunction had occurred based on predefined criteria.

RESULTS

Seven hundred seventy six patients with Riata/Riata ST silicone leads (8Fr/7Fr = 66.6%/33.4%; single-/dual-coil = 12.9%/87.1%) across 23 centers were analyzed. Implant duration was 4.8 ± 0.9 years for 7Fr and 6.5 ± 1.6 years for 8Fr leads (P <.001). The prevalence of EC was significantly lower in 7Fr compared with 8Fr leads for the entire study population (9.3% vs 24.2%, P < .001) and for leads implanted ≤6 years (9.4% vs 18.8%, P = .006). Other than lead size, there were no significant differences in lead, patient, or electrical characteristics between leads with and without EC. Over a period of 9.8 ± 2.0 months, the overall prevalence of electrical dysfunction was 1.3% (confidence interval 0.49%-2.1%), with only 3 of 10 cases occurring in leads with EC.

CONCLUSION

Larger-diameter Riata leads were more prone to EC than smaller-diameter Riata ST leads. The prevalence of electrical dysfunction was not associated with EC.

Cardiovascular implantable electronic device implantation with uninterrupted dabigatran: comparison to uninterrupted warfarin

BACKGROUND

While continuation of oral anticoagulation (OAC) with warfarin may be preferable to interruption and bridging with heparin for patients undergoing cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation, it is uncertain whether the same strategy can be safely used with dabigatran.

OBJECTIVE AND METHODS

To determine the risk of bleeding and thromboembolic complications associated with uninterrupted OAC during CIED implantation, replacement, or revision, the outcomes of patients receiving uninterrupted dabigatran (D) were compared to those receiving warfarin (W).

RESULTS

D was administered the day of CIED implant in 48 patients (age 66 ± 12.4 years, 13 F and 35 M, 21 ICDs and 27 PMs), including new implant in 25 patients, replacement in 14 patients, and replacement plus lead revision in 9 patients. D was held the morning of the procedure in 14 patients (age 70 ± 11 years, 4 F and 10 M, 5 ICDs and 9 PMs). W was continued in 195 patients (age 60 ± 14.4 years, 54 F, and 141 M), including new implant in 122 patients, replacement in 33 patients, and replacement plus lead revision or upgrade in 40 patients. Bleeding complications occurred in 1 of 48 patients (2.1%) with uninterrupted dabigatran (a late pericardial effusion), 0 of 14 with interrupted D, and 9 of 195 patients (4.6%) on W (9 pocket hematomas), P = 0.69. Fifty percent of bleeding complications were associated with concomitant antiplatelet medications.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of bleeding complications is similar during CIED implantation with uninterrupted D or W. The risks are higher when OAC is combined with antiplatelet drugs.