OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to investigate the effects of percutaneous left ventricular assist device (pLVAD) support during catheter ablation of unstable ventricular tachycardia (VT). BACKGROUND: Mechanical cardiac support during ablation of unstable VT is being increasingly used, but there is little available information on the potential hemodynamic benefits. METHODS: Twenty-three consecutive procedures in 22 patients (ischemic, n = 11) with structural heart disease and hemodynamically unstable VT were performed with either pLVAD support (n = 10) or no pLVAD support (intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation, n = 6; no support, n = 7). Procedural monitoring included vital signs, left atrial pressure, arterial blood pressure, cerebral perfusion/oximetry, VT characteristics, and ablation outcomes. RESULTS: The pLVAD group was maintained in VT significantly longer than the non-pLVAD group (66.7 min vs. 27.5 min; p = 0.03) and required fewer early terminations of sustained VT for hemodynamic instability (1.0 vs. 4.0; p = 0.001). More patients in the pLVAD group had at least 1 VT termination during ablation than non-pLVAD patients (9 of 10 [90%] vs. 5 of 13 [38%]; p = 0.03). There were no differences between groups in duration of cerebral deoxygenation, hypotension or perioperative changes in left atrial pressure, brain natriuretic peptide levels, lactic acid, or renal function. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with scar-related VT undergoing catheter ablation, pLVAD support was able to safely maintain end-organ perfusion despite extended periods of hemodynamically unstable VT. Randomized studies are necessary to determine whether this enhanced ability to perform entrainment and activation mapping will translate into a higher rate of clinical success.
OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to investigate the effects of percutaneous left ventricular assist device (pLVAD) support during catheter ablation of unstable ventricular tachycardia (VT). BACKGROUND: Mechanical cardiac support during ablation of unstable VT is being increasingly used, but there is little available information on the potential hemodynamic benefits. METHODS: Twenty-three consecutive procedures in 22 patients (ischemic, n = 11) with structural heart disease and hemodynamically unstable VT were performed with either pLVAD support (n = 10) or no pLVAD support (intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation, n = 6; no support, n = 7). Procedural monitoring included vital signs, left atrial pressure, arterial blood pressure, cerebral perfusion/oximetry, VT characteristics, and ablation outcomes. RESULTS: The pLVAD group was maintained in VT significantly longer than the non-pLVAD group (66.7 min vs. 27.5 min; p = 0.03) and required fewer early terminations of sustained VT for hemodynamic instability (1.0 vs. 4.0; p = 0.001). More patients in the pLVAD group had at least 1 VT termination during ablation than non-pLVADpatients (9 of 10 [90%] vs. 5 of 13 [38%]; p = 0.03). There were no differences between groups in duration of cerebral deoxygenation, hypotension or perioperative changes in left atrial pressure, brain natriuretic peptide levels, lactic acid, or renal function. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with scar-related VT undergoing catheter ablation, pLVAD support was able to safely maintain end-organ perfusion despite extended periods of hemodynamically unstable VT. Randomized studies are necessary to determine whether this enhanced ability to perform entrainment and activation mapping will translate into a higher rate of clinical success.
Authors: Edmond M Cronin; Frank M Bogun; Philippe Maury; Petr Peichl; Minglong Chen; Narayanan Namboodiri; Luis Aguinaga; Luiz Roberto Leite; Sana M Al-Khatib; Elad Anter; Antonio Berruezo; David J Callans; Mina K Chung; Phillip Cuculich; Andre d'Avila; Barbara J Deal; Paolo Della Bella; Thomas Deneke; Timm-Michael Dickfeld; Claudio Hadid; Haris M Haqqani; G Neal Kay; Rakesh Latchamsetty; Francis Marchlinski; John M Miller; Akihiko Nogami; Akash R Patel; Rajeev Kumar Pathak; Luis C Saenz Morales; Pasquale Santangeli; John L Sapp; Andrea Sarkozy; Kyoko Soejima; William G Stevenson; Usha B Tedrow; Wendy S Tzou; Niraj Varma; Katja Zeppenfeld Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2020-10 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Nilesh Mathuria; Geru Wu; Francia Rojas-Delgado; Mossaab Shuraih; Mehdi Razavi; Andrew Civitello; Leo Simpson; Guilherme Silva; Suwei Wang; MacArthur Elayda; Bharat Kantharia; Steve Singh; O H Frazier; Jie Cheng Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2016-08-06 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Vaibhav R Vaidya; Christopher V Desimone; Malini Madhavan; Amit Noheria; Mohammed Shahid; Jacob Walters; Dorothy J Ladewig; Susan B Mikell; Susan B Johnson; Scott H Suddendorf; Samuel J Asirvatham Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2014-06-03
Authors: Edmond M Cronin; Frank M Bogun; Philippe Maury; Petr Peichl; Minglong Chen; Narayanan Namboodiri; Luis Aguinaga; Luiz Roberto Leite; Sana M Al-Khatib; Elad Anter; Antonio Berruezo; David J Callans; Mina K Chung; Phillip Cuculich; Andre d'Avila; Barbara J Deal; Paolo Della Bella; Thomas Deneke; Timm-Michael Dickfeld; Claudio Hadid; Haris M Haqqani; G Neal Kay; Rakesh Latchamsetty; Francis Marchlinski; John M Miller; Akihiko Nogami; Akash R Patel; Rajeev Kumar Pathak; Luis C Sáenz Morales; Pasquale Santangeli; John L Sapp; Andrea Sarkozy; Kyoko Soejima; William G Stevenson; Usha B Tedrow; Wendy S Tzou; Niraj Varma; Katja Zeppenfeld Journal: Europace Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Jad A Ballout; Oussama M Wazni; Khaldoun G Tarakji; Walid I Saliba; Mohamed Kanj; Mohamed Diab; Mandeep Bhargava; Bryan Baranowski; Thomas J Dresing; Thomas D Callahan; Daniel J Cantillon; John Rickard; David O Martin; Niraj Varma; Mark J Niebauer; Mina K Chung; Patrick J Tchou; Bruce D Lindsay; Ayman A Hussein Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2020-04-12