Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices in ventricular tachycardia ablation multicenter experience

Yeruva Madhu Reddy, Larry Chinitz, Moussa Mansour, T. Jared Bunch, Srijoy Mahapatra, Vijay Swarup, Luigi Di Biase, Sudharani Bommana, Donita Atkins, Roderick Tung, Kalyanam Shivkumar, J. David Burkhardt, Jeremy Ruskin, Andrea Natale, Dhanunjaya Lakkireddy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

61 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background-Data on relative safety, efficacy, and role of different percutaneous left ventricular assist devices for hemodynamic support during the ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation procedure are limited. Methods and Results-We performed a multicenter, observational study from a prospective registry including all consecutive patients (N=66) undergoing VT ablation with a percutaneous left ventricular assist devices in 6 centers in the United States. Patients with intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP group; N=22) were compared with patients with either an Impella or a TandemHeart device (non-IABP group; N=44). There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics between both the groups. In non-IABP group (1) more patients could undergo entrainment/activation mapping (82% versus 59%; P=0.046), (2) more number of unstable VTs could be mapped and ablated per patient (1.05±0.78 versus 0.32±0.48; P<0.001), (3) more number of VTs could be terminated by ablation (1.59±1.0 versus 0.91±0.81; P=0.007), and (4) fewer VTs were terminated with rescue shocks (1.9±2.2 versus 3.0±1.5; P=0.049) when compared with IABP group. Complications of the procedure trended to be more in the non-IABP group when compared with those in the IABP group (32% versus 14%; P=0.143). Intermediate term outcomes (mortality and VT recurrence) during 12±5-month follow-up were not different between both groups. Left ventricular ejection fraction =15% was a strong and independent predictor of in-hospital mortality (53% versus 4%; P<0.001). Conclusions-Impella and TandemHeart use in VT ablation facilitates extensive activation mapping of several unstable VTs and requires fewer rescue shocks during the procedure when compared with using IABP.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)244-250
Number of pages7
JournalCirculation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
Volume7
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Heart-Assist Devices
Ventricular Tachycardia
Shock
Hospital Mortality
Stroke Volume
Multicenter Studies
Observational Studies
Registries
Hemodynamics
Safety
Recurrence
Equipment and Supplies
Mortality

Keywords

  • Catheter ablation
  • Intra-aortic balloon pumping
  • Tachycardia
  • Ventricular

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Physiology (medical)

Cite this

Reddy, Y. M., Chinitz, L., Mansour, M., Bunch, T. J., Mahapatra, S., Swarup, V., ... Lakkireddy, D. (2014). Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices in ventricular tachycardia ablation multicenter experience. Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology, 7(2), 244-250. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCEP.113.000548

Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices in ventricular tachycardia ablation multicenter experience. / Reddy, Yeruva Madhu; Chinitz, Larry; Mansour, Moussa; Bunch, T. Jared; Mahapatra, Srijoy; Swarup, Vijay; Di Biase, Luigi; Bommana, Sudharani; Atkins, Donita; Tung, Roderick; Shivkumar, Kalyanam; Burkhardt, J. David; Ruskin, Jeremy; Natale, Andrea; Lakkireddy, Dhanunjaya.

In: Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2014, p. 244-250.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Reddy, YM, Chinitz, L, Mansour, M, Bunch, TJ, Mahapatra, S, Swarup, V, Di Biase, L, Bommana, S, Atkins, D, Tung, R, Shivkumar, K, Burkhardt, JD, Ruskin, J, Natale, A & Lakkireddy, D 2014, 'Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices in ventricular tachycardia ablation multicenter experience', Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 244-250. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCEP.113.000548
Reddy, Yeruva Madhu ; Chinitz, Larry ; Mansour, Moussa ; Bunch, T. Jared ; Mahapatra, Srijoy ; Swarup, Vijay ; Di Biase, Luigi ; Bommana, Sudharani ; Atkins, Donita ; Tung, Roderick ; Shivkumar, Kalyanam ; Burkhardt, J. David ; Ruskin, Jeremy ; Natale, Andrea ; Lakkireddy, Dhanunjaya. / Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices in ventricular tachycardia ablation multicenter experience. In: Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology. 2014 ; Vol. 7, No. 2. pp. 244-250.
@article{c76a7f2cd5854756bf2b19d8a4403e36,
title = "Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices in ventricular tachycardia ablation multicenter experience",
abstract = "Background-Data on relative safety, efficacy, and role of different percutaneous left ventricular assist devices for hemodynamic support during the ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation procedure are limited. Methods and Results-We performed a multicenter, observational study from a prospective registry including all consecutive patients (N=66) undergoing VT ablation with a percutaneous left ventricular assist devices in 6 centers in the United States. Patients with intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP group; N=22) were compared with patients with either an Impella or a TandemHeart device (non-IABP group; N=44). There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics between both the groups. In non-IABP group (1) more patients could undergo entrainment/activation mapping (82{\%} versus 59{\%}; P=0.046), (2) more number of unstable VTs could be mapped and ablated per patient (1.05±0.78 versus 0.32±0.48; P<0.001), (3) more number of VTs could be terminated by ablation (1.59±1.0 versus 0.91±0.81; P=0.007), and (4) fewer VTs were terminated with rescue shocks (1.9±2.2 versus 3.0±1.5; P=0.049) when compared with IABP group. Complications of the procedure trended to be more in the non-IABP group when compared with those in the IABP group (32{\%} versus 14{\%}; P=0.143). Intermediate term outcomes (mortality and VT recurrence) during 12±5-month follow-up were not different between both groups. Left ventricular ejection fraction =15{\%} was a strong and independent predictor of in-hospital mortality (53{\%} versus 4{\%}; P<0.001). Conclusions-Impella and TandemHeart use in VT ablation facilitates extensive activation mapping of several unstable VTs and requires fewer rescue shocks during the procedure when compared with using IABP.",
keywords = "Catheter ablation, Intra-aortic balloon pumping, Tachycardia, Ventricular",
author = "Reddy, {Yeruva Madhu} and Larry Chinitz and Moussa Mansour and Bunch, {T. Jared} and Srijoy Mahapatra and Vijay Swarup and {Di Biase}, Luigi and Sudharani Bommana and Donita Atkins and Roderick Tung and Kalyanam Shivkumar and Burkhardt, {J. David} and Jeremy Ruskin and Andrea Natale and Dhanunjaya Lakkireddy",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1161/CIRCEP.113.000548",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "7",
pages = "244--250",
journal = "Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology",
issn = "1941-3149",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices in ventricular tachycardia ablation multicenter experience

AU - Reddy, Yeruva Madhu

AU - Chinitz, Larry

AU - Mansour, Moussa

AU - Bunch, T. Jared

AU - Mahapatra, Srijoy

AU - Swarup, Vijay

AU - Di Biase, Luigi

AU - Bommana, Sudharani

AU - Atkins, Donita

AU - Tung, Roderick

AU - Shivkumar, Kalyanam

AU - Burkhardt, J. David

AU - Ruskin, Jeremy

AU - Natale, Andrea

AU - Lakkireddy, Dhanunjaya

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Background-Data on relative safety, efficacy, and role of different percutaneous left ventricular assist devices for hemodynamic support during the ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation procedure are limited. Methods and Results-We performed a multicenter, observational study from a prospective registry including all consecutive patients (N=66) undergoing VT ablation with a percutaneous left ventricular assist devices in 6 centers in the United States. Patients with intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP group; N=22) were compared with patients with either an Impella or a TandemHeart device (non-IABP group; N=44). There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics between both the groups. In non-IABP group (1) more patients could undergo entrainment/activation mapping (82% versus 59%; P=0.046), (2) more number of unstable VTs could be mapped and ablated per patient (1.05±0.78 versus 0.32±0.48; P<0.001), (3) more number of VTs could be terminated by ablation (1.59±1.0 versus 0.91±0.81; P=0.007), and (4) fewer VTs were terminated with rescue shocks (1.9±2.2 versus 3.0±1.5; P=0.049) when compared with IABP group. Complications of the procedure trended to be more in the non-IABP group when compared with those in the IABP group (32% versus 14%; P=0.143). Intermediate term outcomes (mortality and VT recurrence) during 12±5-month follow-up were not different between both groups. Left ventricular ejection fraction =15% was a strong and independent predictor of in-hospital mortality (53% versus 4%; P<0.001). Conclusions-Impella and TandemHeart use in VT ablation facilitates extensive activation mapping of several unstable VTs and requires fewer rescue shocks during the procedure when compared with using IABP.

AB - Background-Data on relative safety, efficacy, and role of different percutaneous left ventricular assist devices for hemodynamic support during the ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation procedure are limited. Methods and Results-We performed a multicenter, observational study from a prospective registry including all consecutive patients (N=66) undergoing VT ablation with a percutaneous left ventricular assist devices in 6 centers in the United States. Patients with intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP group; N=22) were compared with patients with either an Impella or a TandemHeart device (non-IABP group; N=44). There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics between both the groups. In non-IABP group (1) more patients could undergo entrainment/activation mapping (82% versus 59%; P=0.046), (2) more number of unstable VTs could be mapped and ablated per patient (1.05±0.78 versus 0.32±0.48; P<0.001), (3) more number of VTs could be terminated by ablation (1.59±1.0 versus 0.91±0.81; P=0.007), and (4) fewer VTs were terminated with rescue shocks (1.9±2.2 versus 3.0±1.5; P=0.049) when compared with IABP group. Complications of the procedure trended to be more in the non-IABP group when compared with those in the IABP group (32% versus 14%; P=0.143). Intermediate term outcomes (mortality and VT recurrence) during 12±5-month follow-up were not different between both groups. Left ventricular ejection fraction =15% was a strong and independent predictor of in-hospital mortality (53% versus 4%; P<0.001). Conclusions-Impella and TandemHeart use in VT ablation facilitates extensive activation mapping of several unstable VTs and requires fewer rescue shocks during the procedure when compared with using IABP.

KW - Catheter ablation

KW - Intra-aortic balloon pumping

KW - Tachycardia

KW - Ventricular

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84900433341&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84900433341&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1161/CIRCEP.113.000548

DO - 10.1161/CIRCEP.113.000548

M3 - Article

C2 - 24532564

AN - SCOPUS:84900433341

VL - 7

SP - 244

EP - 250

JO - Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology

JF - Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology

SN - 1941-3149

IS - 2

ER -