M J Pekka Raatikainen1, David O Arnar2, Katja Zeppenfeld3, Jose Luis Merino4, Francisco Levya5, Gerhardt Hindriks6, Karl-Heinz Kuck7. 1. Department of Medicine Division of Cardiology, Central Finland Health Care District, Jyväskylä and University of Eastern Finland, Building 1 D/9, FI-40620 Jyväskylä, Finland pekka.raatikainen@ksshp.fi. 2. The Heart Centre, Department of Medicine, Landspitali - The National University Hospital, Reykjavik, Iceland. 3. Department of Cardiology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, Netherlands. 4. Unidad Electrofisiologia Cardiaca Robotizada-Hospital Universitario La Paz, Madrid, Spain. 5. Centre for Cardiovascular Sciences, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK. 6. Department of Electrophysiology, Heart Centre, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany. 7. Deparment of Cardiology, Ak St. Georg, Hamburg, Germany.
Abstract
AIMS: There has been large variations in the use of invasive electrophysiological therapies in the member countries of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). The aim of this analysis was to provide comprehensive information on cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) and catheter ablation therapy trends in the ESC countries over the last five years. METHODS: The European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) has collected data on CIED and catheter ablation therapy since 2008. Last year 49 of the 56 ESC member countries provided data for the EHRA White Book. This analysis is based on the current and previous editions of the EHRA White Book. Data on procedure rates together with information on economic aspects, local reimbursement systems and training activities are presented for each ESC country and the five geographical ESC regions. RESULTS: In 2013, the electrophysiological procedure rates per million population were highest in Western Europe followed by the Southern and Northern European countries. The CIED implantation and catheter ablation rate was lowest in the Eastern European and in the non-European ESC countries, respectively. However, in some Eastern European countries with relative low gross domestic product procedure rates exceeded those of some wealthier Western countries, suggesting that economic resources are not the only driver for utilization of arrhythmia therapies. CONCLUSION: These statistics indicate that despite significant improvements, there still is considerable heterogeneity in the availability of arrhythmia therapies across the ESC area. Hopefully, these data will help identify areas for improvement and guide future activities in cardiac arrhythmia management. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
AIMS: There has been large variations in the use of invasive electrophysiological therapies in the member countries of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). The aim of this analysis was to provide comprehensive information on cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) and catheter ablation therapy trends in the ESC countries over the last five years. METHODS: The European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) has collected data on CIED and catheter ablation therapy since 2008. Last year 49 of the 56 ESC member countries provided data for the EHRA White Book. This analysis is based on the current and previous editions of the EHRA White Book. Data on procedure rates together with information on economic aspects, local reimbursement systems and training activities are presented for each ESC country and the five geographical ESC regions. RESULTS: In 2013, the electrophysiological procedure rates per million population were highest in Western Europe followed by the Southern and Northern European countries. The CIED implantation and catheter ablation rate was lowest in the Eastern European and in the non-European ESC countries, respectively. However, in some Eastern European countries with relative low gross domestic product procedure rates exceeded those of some wealthier Western countries, suggesting that economic resources are not the only driver for utilization of arrhythmia therapies. CONCLUSION: These statistics indicate that despite significant improvements, there still is considerable heterogeneity in the availability of arrhythmia therapies across the ESC area. Hopefully, these data will help identify areas for improvement and guide future activities in cardiac arrhythmia management. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
Authors: Katarzyna Wiechecka; Bartosz Wiechecki; Agnieszka Kapłon-Cieślicka; Agata Tymińska; Monika Budnik; Dominika Hołowaty; Krzysztof Jakubowski; Marcin Michalak; Elżbieta Świętoń; Przemysław Stolarz; Roman Steckiewicz; Marcin Grabowski; Piotr Scisło; Janusz Kochanowski; Krzysztof J Filipiak; Grzegorz Opolski Journal: Cardiol J Date: 2019-06-21 Impact factor: 2.737
Authors: Simon Pecha; Liesa Castro; Julia Vogler; Matthias Linder; Nils Gosau; Stephan Willems; Hermann Reichenspurner; Samer Hakmi Journal: Heart Vessels Date: 2018-04-05 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Javier Higueras; Carmen Olmos; Julián Palacios-Rubio; Juan Carlos Gómez-Polo; Pedro Martínez-Losas; Virginia Ruiz-Pizarro; Ramón Bover; Julián Pérez-Villacastín Journal: Cardiol J Date: 2018-08-29 Impact factor: 2.737
Authors: Victor Nauffal; Peter Marstrand; Larry Han; Victoria N Parikh; Adam S Helms; Jodie Ingles; Daniel Jacoby; Neal K Lakdawala; Sunil Kapur; Michelle Michels; Anjali T Owens; Euan A Ashley; Alexandre C Pereira; Joseph W Rossano; Sara Saberi; Christopher Semsarian; James S Ware; Samuel G Wittekind; Sharlene Day; Iacopo Olivotto; Carolyn Y Ho Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2021-10-07 Impact factor: 35.855
Authors: Alan Sugrue; Christopher V DeSimone; Charles J Lenz; Douglas L Packer; Samuel J Asirvatham Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2015-12-09 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Sofia Monaci; Karli Gillette; Esther Puyol-Antón; Ronak Rajani; Gernot Plank; Andrew King; Martin Bishop Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 4.566