No abstract

No abstract

Aims Catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) has a considerable risk of procedural complications. Major vascular complications (MVCs) appear to be the most frequent. This study investigated gender differences in MVCs in patients undergoing CA for AF in a high‐volume tertiary center. Methods A total of 4734 CAs for AF (65% paroxysmal, 26% repeated procedures) were performed at our center between January 2006 and August 2018. Patients (71% males) aged 60 ± 10 years and had a body mass index of 29 ± 4 kg/m2 at the time of the procedure. Radiofrequency point‐by‐point ablation was employed in 96.3% of procedures with the use of three‐dimensional navigation systems and facilitated by intracardiac echocardiography. Pulmonary vein isolation was mandatory; cavotricuspid isthmus and left atrial substrate ablation were performed in 22% and 38% procedures, respectively. MVCs were defined as those that resulted in permanent injury, required intervention, or prolonged hospitalization. Their rates and risk factors were compared between genders. Results A total of 112 (2.4%) MVCs were detected: 54/1512 (3.5%) in females and 58/3222 (1.8%) in males (p < .0001). On multivariate analysis, lower body height was the only risk factor for MVCs in females (p = .0005). On the contrary, advanced age was associated with MVCs in males (p = .006). Conclusion Females have a higher risk of MVCs following CA for AF compared to males. This difference is driven by lower body size in females. Low body height in females and advanced age in males are independent predictors of MVCs. Ultrasound‐guided venipuncture lowered the MVC rate in males.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has been reported as an attractive option for cases of failed catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia (VT) in structural heart disease. However, even this strategy can fail for various reasons. For the first time, this case series describes three re-do cases of SBRT which were indicated for three different reasons. The purpose in the first case was the inaccuracy of the determination of the treatment volume by indirect comparison of the electroanatomical map and CT scan. A newly developed strategy of co-registration of both images allowed precise targeting of the substrate. In this case, the second treatment volume overlapped by 60% with the first one. The second reason for the re-do of SBRT was an unusual character of the substrate–large cardiac fibroma associated with different morphologies of VT from two locations around the tumor. The planned treatment volumes did not overlap. The third reason for repeated SBRT was the large intramural substrate in the setting of advanced heart failure. The first treatment volume targeted arrhythmias originating in the basal inferoseptal region, while the second SBRT was focused on adjacent basal septum without significant overlapping. Our observations suggested that SBRT for VT could be safely repeated in case of later arrhythmia recurrences (i.e., after at least 6 weeks). No acute toxicity was observed and in two cases, no side effects were observed during 32 and 22 months, respectively. To avoid re-do SBRT due to inaccurate targeting, the precise and reproducible strategy of substrate identification and co-registration with CT image should be used.

No abstract