BACKGROUND:The practise of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) is increasing rapidly and is recommended as the treatment of choice in many patient subgroups. At present, the efficacy of this procedure has been assessed by means of electrocardiographic recording, intermittent Holter monitoring and evaluation of patient symptoms. We sought to evaluate the true efficacy of this procedure in patients with sophisticated permanent pacemakers capable of continuous long-term cardiac rhythm monitoring.METHODS:Twenty-five patients (aged 63.7 (9.4), 20 men), seven with persistent AF and 18 with prolonged paroxysmal AF, underwent a mean of 1.7 AF ablation procedures. All the patients had previously been implanted with a pacemaker or atrial defibrillator device. Data were downloaded from the device Holter before catheter ablation and at 2, 4, 6 and 8 months postprocedure(s). The primary outcome measure was AF burden. The secondary outcomes were patient symptom and quality-of-life measures.RESULTS:Initial AF burden was 43.8 (35.5)%. After catheter ablation(s), this was significantly reduced at 2 months to 23.8 (35.4)% (p=0.023), at 4 months to 21.4 (34.1)% (p=0.008), at 6 months to 14.5 (28.1)% (p=0.002) and at 8 months to 15.0 (29.4%) (p=0.003). Only nine (36%) of 25 patients demonstrated no recurrence of arrhythmia during follow-up completion, consistent with a long-term cure. Quality-of-life indices showed significant improvement after ablation.CONCLUSIONS:Catheter ablation for AF significantly improves patient symptoms and reduces AF burden after long-term beat-to-beat monitoring by implanted cardiac pacemaker and defibrillator devices. However, AF recurrence is common after these procedures.

AIMS:Little is known about the incidence of paroxysmal atrial tachycardias (PAT) in patients with heart failure (HF). The availability of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices with extended diagnostics for AT enables continuous monitoring of PAT episodes. The aim of the study was to assess the incidence over time of PAT in HF patients treated with CRT. METHODS AND RESULTS:Consecutive patients in NYHA functional class III or IV despite optimal drug therapy, QRS duration > or = 130 ms, left ventricular ejection fraction < or = 35%, and left ventricular end-diastolic dimension > or = 55 mm were eligible for enrolment. Patients with permanent or persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) were not included in the study. The first follow-up examination was performed 2 weeks after implantation, to optimize atrial sensing and CRT. Subsequent follow-up examinations were carried out 15 and 28 weeks after implantation, to collect the telemetric data. A total of 173 patients (67 +/- 11 years, M 116) were enrolled. Complete arrhythmia monitoring data were available from 120 patients over a mean follow-up of 183 +/- 23 days. Atrial tachycardia episodes were detected through telemetry in 25 of 120 patients (21%) during at least one follow-up examination. Atrial tachycardia episodes were recorded in 29 and 17% (P = NS) of patients with and without previous history of AF, respectively. CONCLUSION:More than 20% of the overall HF patient population treated with CRT suffer PAT episodes. Paroxysmal atrial tachycardia may interfere with response to CRT. Therefore, telemetric data may be relevant to drive the appropriate therapy in each patient.

ize the coronary sinus tributaries, pacing threshold, lead stability and diaphragmatic threshold.In order to characterize the definitive site the LV lateral wall was divided in two portions in the left anterior oblique view: from 0 to 3 o'clock (anterior, group 1) and from 3 to 6 o'clock (posterior, group 2).

Transvenous left ventricular (LV) leads are primarily inserted "over-the-wire" (OTW). However, a stylet-driven (SD) approach may be a helpful alternative. A new polyurethane-coated, unipolar LV lead can be placed either by a stylet or a guide wire, which can be inserted into the lead body from both ends. The multicenter OVID study evaluates the clinical performance of this new steroid- and nonsteroid eluting lead. The primary endpoint is the LV lead implant success rate after identification of the coronary sinus (CS). Secondary endpoints include complication rate, short- and long-term lead characteristics, overall procedure and LV lead placement duration, total fluoroscopy time, and lead handling characteristics ratings. To date, 96 patients with heart failure (68 +/- 9 years old, 76% men) are enrolled. The CS was identified in 95 patients and, in 85 (88.5%), the LV lead was successfully implanted. The final lead positioning was lateral in 41%, posterolateral in 35%, anterolateral in 18%, and great cardiac vein in 6% of patients. In 70%, the 85 successful implantations, both stylet-driven and guide-wire techniques were used, a stylet only was used in 22%, and a guide wire only in 8%. Mean overall duration of 85 successful procedures was 112 +/- 40 minutes, total fluoroscopy time 28 +/- 15 minutes, and the duration of LV lead placement was 35 +/- 29 minutes. During a 3-month follow-up, the loss of LV capture occurred in three and phrenic nerve stimulation in six patients. The mean long-term pacing threshold is 0.8 V/0.5 ms and pacing impedance is 550 Omega. The OVID data suggest that these new leads are safe and effective. The choice of both OTW and SD techniques during lead implantation offers greater procedural flexibility.

Optimal pharmacological therapy for heart failure improves patients' prognosis and symptoms. Despite this, the long-term prognosis for these patients is very poor and symptoms are debilitating. Biventricular pacing, or resynchronization therapy, should be considered for patients who remain symptomatic despite optimal therapy and have evidence of dyssynchrony.

Aims To determine the effect of an endocardial DC shock on the basic electrophysiology of the human atrium if delivered in sinus rhythm.Methods and results A 5J endocardial R wave synchronized DC shock was delivered in 10 patients in stable sinus rhythm during ICD implantation for ventricular arrhythmias. There was no prior history of atrial fibrillation. Monophasic action potential duration (APD) and atrial effective refractory periods (AERP) were evaluated before, 1 min post DC shock, and 15 min post shock. These parameters were assessed at basic cycle lengths and at atrial paced cycle lengths of 600 ms and 400 ms at two right atrial sites; mid lateral right atrial wall (MRLA) and the right atrial appendage (RAA). There were no significant differences in APD 90, AERP or atrial refractory dispersion at any site or drive cycle length before, immediately after or 15 min after shock delivery.Conclusions There are no significant changes in basic electrophysiological parameters following a DC shock delivered in sinus rhythm in patients with no prior history of atrial fibrillation. This suggests that atrial electrical remodelling occurs as a result of atrial fibrillation and is unrelated to shock artefact. (C) 2003 The European Society of Cardiology. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.