Background: Slow pathway (SP) ablation is the cornerstone for atrioventricular nodal reentry tachycardia (AVNRT) treatment, and a low-voltage bridge offers a good target during mapping using low x-ray exposure. We aimed to assess a new tool to identify SP by activation mapping using the last CARTO3® version, i.e.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown)
December 2021
A young male with β-thalassemia major was implanted with a single-chamber Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) for a cardiac arrest due to ventricular fibrillation. He received multiple inappropriate shocks due to atrioventricular nodal re-entrant tachycardia (AVNRT) treated with radiofrequency catheter ablation and then to high-rate atrial tachycardia refractory to amiodarone and not inducible during electrophysiological study. He refused empirical pulmonary vein isolation.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFAims: The traditional technique for subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) implantation involves three incisions and a subcutaneous pocket. Recently, a two-incision and intermuscular (IM) technique has been adopted. The PRAETORIAN score is a chest radiograph-based tool that predicts S-ICD conversion testing.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBackground: A two-incision technique, in association with inter-muscular positioning of the subcutaneous defibrillator (S-ICD), is now the most frequently adopted implantation approach in Europe. Ultrasound-guided serratus anterior plane block (SAPB) has been proposed to provide anesthesia/analgesia during S-ICD implantation.
Objective: We performed a case-control analysis in which a standardized SAPB approach was compared with the typical local anesthesia and sedation approach.
G Ital Cardiol (Rome)
November 2013
The indications for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy for the prevention of sudden cardiac death in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction have rapidly expanded over the last 10 years on the basis of the very satisfying results of the numerous randomized clinical trials that have provided the framework for guidelines. However, the analysis of clinical practice in the real world has highlighted some important criticisms in the complex process of selection-management of those patients candidates for ICD therapy: 1) approximately one fourth of all ICD implantations is not justified by clinical evidence, 2) approximately one half of patients with an indication for ICD therapy do not undergo implantation, 3) the benefits from ICD therapy do not apply uniformly to all patients, 4) the relationship between the lifesaving benefit and the potential for harm of ICD therapy is still scarcely known. The main reason for this clinical scenario can be ascribed to the guideline recommendations that are based only on few standard cut-off criteria and therefore too generic and insufficiently detailed.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF