Background Cardiac sympathetic denervation (CSD) is a useful therapeutic option in patients with structural heart disease (SHD) and ventricular tachycardia (VT) who are otherwise refractory to standard antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) therapy or catheter ablation (CA). In this study, we sought to retrospectively analyze the long‐term outcomes of CSD in patients with refractory VT and/or VT storm with a majority of the patients being taken up for CSD ahead of CA. Methods We included consecutive patients with SHD who underwent CBD from 2010 to 2019 owing to refractory VT. A complete response to CSD was defined as a greater than 75% reduction in the frequency of ICD shocks for VT. Results A total of 65 patients (50 male, 15 female) were included. The underlying VT substrate was ischemic heart disease (IHD) in 30 (46.2%) patients while the remaining 35 (53.8%) patients had other nonischemic causes. The mean duration of follow‐up was 27 ± 24 months. A complete response to CSD was achieved in 47 (72.3%) patients. There was a significant decline in the number of implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator (ICD) or external defibrillator shocks post‐CSD (24 ± 37 vs. 2 ± 4, p < .01). Freedom from a combined endpoint of ICD shock or death at 2 years was 51.5%. An advanced New York Heart Association class (III and IV) was the only parameter found to be associated with this combined endpoint. Conclusion The current retrospective analysis re‐emphasizes the role of surgical CSD and explores its role ahead of CA in the treatment of patients with refractory VT or VT storm.
Introduction We aimed to study the immediate hemodynamic effects of thoracoscopic bilateral cardiac sympathetic denervation (CSD) for recurrent ventricular tachycardia (VT) or VT storm. Method We studied a group of 18 adults who underwent bilateral thoracoscopic CSD; the blood pressure (BP) and Heart Rate (HR) were continuously monitored during the surgery and up to 6 h post-operatively. Results Immediately on removal of the sympathetic ganglia, the patients had a drop in both the systolic (110 mm Hg to 95.8 mm Hg, p < 0.001) and diastolic BP (69.4 mm Hg to65 mm Hg, p = 0.007) along with a drop in the HR (81.6 bpm to 61.2 bpm, p < 0.001).At 6 h after CSD, the systolic and diastolic BP did not recover significantly, while there was recovery in HR (61.2 bpm to 66 bpm, p = 0.02). There was no significant difference between those with and without left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction. Conclusion The acute hemodynamic changes during the perioperative period of CSD are significant but not serious. Awareness of this is useful for peri-operative management.
Background: Cardiac Sympathetic Denervation (CSD) involves surgical removal of lower half of the stellate ganglion and the T1-T4 ganglia for reducing sympathetic discharge to the heart. CSD is a useful therapeutic option in patients with ventricular tachycardia (VT) when they are non-responsive to standard drug therapy or catheter ablation. We report here the clinical profile and long-term outcome of all our patients who underwent CSD for refractory VT or VT storm. Method: Data of all patients who underwent CSD from 2010 to 2019 was analysed. They were regularly followed up, focusing on arrhythmia recurrence. Complete response to CSD was defined as more than 75% decrease in the frequency of VT. Results: A total of 65 patients (50 male, 15 female) underwent CSD in the above-mentioned period and the duration of follow-up was 27±24 months.The underlying substrate was for VT was coronary artery disease in 30 (46.2%) patients and 35 (53.8%) patients had a variety of other causes. Complete response to CSD was attained in 47 (72.3%) patients. There was a significant decline in the incidence of number shocks after CSD (24±37 vs 2±4; p <0.01). Freedom from a combined end point of ICD shock or death at the end of two years was 51.5%. Advanced NYHA class (III and IV) was the only parameter shown to have significant association with this combined end point. Conclusion: The current retrospective analysis reemphasize the role of surgical CSD in the treatment of patients with refractory VT or VT storm.
Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background The effect of right ventricular (RV) pacing on left ventricular (LV) function has been extensively evaluated, and so has the effect of the RV pacing lead on tricuspid valve function. However, the effects on RV function per se have not been evaluated systematically. Purpose We aimed to assess the RV dimensions and RV function six months after dual chamber pacemaker implantation performed for atrioventricular (AV) block by detailed echocardiography, including three-dimensional (3D) echocardiography. Method All adult patients undergoing dual chamber pacemaker from January 2018 to March 2019 for symptomatic AV block with a structurally normal heart were included in the study. They underwent pre-procedure detailed echocardiography specifically directed at measuring RV dimensions and function [including 3D RV ejection fraction (EF)] and a repeat detailed echocardiogram at six-month follow-up, by the same echocardiographer. The echocardiographic parameters at baseline and after six-month follow-up were compared. Results All patients had more than 75% ventricular pacing in these six months. At six-month follow-up, there was no significant change in LVEF, while there was a mild decrease in RVEF as outlined in the Table 1. While there was some overlap between RVEF range of values at baseline and after six months, 23 (38.3%) patients showed a drop in RVEF by >5%. Conclusion Our study shows a change in several RV function parameters in a majority of patients six months after pacemaker implantation for AV block. RV Function at six month follow-up Parameters Pre-procedure Six-Month Follow-up p value (Paired t-test) PASP (mm Hg) 20.2 ± 1.3 26.1 ± 12.2 <0.001 FAC (%) 42.6 ± 3.4 39.4 ± 6 <0.001 TAPSE (mm) 18.4 ±3.8 15.6 ± 4.7 <0.001 RIMP 0.66 ± 0.09 0.61 ± 0.11 0.003 RV E/E’ 9.4 ± 2.1 7.7 ± 2.1 <0.001 RV S’ 13.6 ± 2.4 10.7 ± 2.4 <0.001 RVEF % [By 3D Echocardiography] 47.7± 5.1 44.9 ± 7.4 <0.001 TR Jet Area (cm2) 0.03 ± 0.26 0.55 ± 0.96 <0.001 RV= Right Ventricle; RA= Right Atrium; RVOT = Right Ventricular Outflow Tract; PASP = Pulmonary Artery Systolic Pressure; FAC= Fractional Area Change; TAPSE= Tricuspid Annular Plane Systolic Excursion; RIMP = Right Ventricular Index of Myocardial Performance; TR = Tricuspid Regurgitation S’ = Peak Systolic Annular Velocity; RVEF = Right Ventricular Ejection Fraction; 3D = Three Dimensional Abstract Figure. Change in RVEF in 6 months
Aims The effect of right ventricular (RV) pacing on left ventricular (LV) function has been extensively evaluated, but the effect on RV function per se has not been evaluated systematically. We aimed to assess the effect of dual chamber pacemaker on RV function. Methods and Results All consecutive patients undergoing dual chamber pacemaker from January 2018 to March 2019 for AV block with a structurally normal heart were included. They underwent pre‐procedure detailed echocardiography (including three‐dimensional [3D] RV ejection fraction [RVEF]), a screening echocardiogram 2 days after pacemaker implantation and again a detailed echocardiogram at 6‐month follow‐up. We compared the baseline echocardiographic RV parameters with those 6 months after the pacemaker implantation. A total of 60 patients underwent successful pacemaker implantation. At 6 months, most of the patients were pacemaker dependent with pacing percentage of 98.9% ± 2.4%; there was a significant increase in TR and a mean drop in RVEF by 2.8 ± 5%, with 23 (38.3%) having at least a 5% decrease in RVEF. The drop in RVEF positively correlated with TR vena contracta at 6 months but did not correlate with pulmonary artery systolic pressure at 6 months. Conclusion Our study shows the presence of demonstrable RV dysfunction as early as 6 months in a majority of patients who have undergone pacemaker implantation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.