Outcomes of Combined Endocardial-Epicardial Ablation Compared With Endocardial Ablation Alone in Patients Who Undergo Epicardial Access

Ammar M. Killu, Siva Mulpuru, Mohammed A. Al-Hijji, Alan Sugrue, Thomas M. Munger, David O. Hodge, Christopher J. McLeod, Douglas L Packer, Suraj Kapa, Samuel J Asirvatham, Paul Andrew Friedman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Percutaneous epicardial access (EpiAcc) is used in an attempt to improve outcomes of ablation. We aim to report our experience in EpiAcc for management of symptomatic ventricular premature complexes (VPC) and ventricular tachycardia (VT). All patients from January 2004 to July 2014 who underwent EpiAcc as part of a VPC or VT ablation procedure were included. Outcomes between those with endocardial-only (Gp1) and endocardial/epicardial (Gp2) ablation and those for VPC and VT ablation were compared. EpiAcc for VPC or VT ablation was attempted in 173 patients; 10 patients were excluded because of failure of access (n = 7) or no ablation performed (n = 3). Of the remaining 163, 131 patients (80.4%) had undergone previous endocardial ablation. Mean age was 53.7 ± 15.7 years; 115 (71%) were men. VT ablation was the indication in 105 patients (64%). The underlying substrate was predominately nonischemic cardiomyopathy (49.1%). Epicardial ablation was performed in 115 (70.6%). Procedural and clinical success was obtained in 92.0% and 69.9% of patients, respectively, with no difference between Gp1 and Gp2. Those who underwent VPC ablation had superior clinical outcomes at 1-year follow-up. EpiAcc is feasible in almost all patients with no previous cardiac surgery and permits acute procedural success in >90% of patients, most of whom had failed previous ablation. However, epicardial ablation was not delivered in 1/3 of patients. Epicardial mapping may be helpful as in the absence of an appropriate epicardial site for ablation, and focus can be shifted to more detailed endocardial mapping and ablation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)842-848
Number of pages7
JournalAmerican Journal of Cardiology
Volume118
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 15 2016

Fingerprint

Ventricular Premature Complexes
Ventricular Tachycardia
Epicardial Mapping
Cardiomyopathies
Thoracic Surgery

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Outcomes of Combined Endocardial-Epicardial Ablation Compared With Endocardial Ablation Alone in Patients Who Undergo Epicardial Access. / Killu, Ammar M.; Mulpuru, Siva; Al-Hijji, Mohammed A.; Sugrue, Alan; Munger, Thomas M.; Hodge, David O.; McLeod, Christopher J.; Packer, Douglas L; Kapa, Suraj; Asirvatham, Samuel J; Friedman, Paul Andrew.

In: American Journal of Cardiology, Vol. 118, No. 6, 15.09.2016, p. 842-848.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{d33c10dfa37e4eb6be9a9afc46c1d0a1,
title = "Outcomes of Combined Endocardial-Epicardial Ablation Compared With Endocardial Ablation Alone in Patients Who Undergo Epicardial Access",
abstract = "Percutaneous epicardial access (EpiAcc) is used in an attempt to improve outcomes of ablation. We aim to report our experience in EpiAcc for management of symptomatic ventricular premature complexes (VPC) and ventricular tachycardia (VT). All patients from January 2004 to July 2014 who underwent EpiAcc as part of a VPC or VT ablation procedure were included. Outcomes between those with endocardial-only (Gp1) and endocardial/epicardial (Gp2) ablation and those for VPC and VT ablation were compared. EpiAcc for VPC or VT ablation was attempted in 173 patients; 10 patients were excluded because of failure of access (n = 7) or no ablation performed (n = 3). Of the remaining 163, 131 patients (80.4{\%}) had undergone previous endocardial ablation. Mean age was 53.7 ± 15.7 years; 115 (71{\%}) were men. VT ablation was the indication in 105 patients (64{\%}). The underlying substrate was predominately nonischemic cardiomyopathy (49.1{\%}). Epicardial ablation was performed in 115 (70.6{\%}). Procedural and clinical success was obtained in 92.0{\%} and 69.9{\%} of patients, respectively, with no difference between Gp1 and Gp2. Those who underwent VPC ablation had superior clinical outcomes at 1-year follow-up. EpiAcc is feasible in almost all patients with no previous cardiac surgery and permits acute procedural success in >90{\%} of patients, most of whom had failed previous ablation. However, epicardial ablation was not delivered in 1/3 of patients. Epicardial mapping may be helpful as in the absence of an appropriate epicardial site for ablation, and focus can be shifted to more detailed endocardial mapping and ablation.",
author = "Killu, {Ammar M.} and Siva Mulpuru and Al-Hijji, {Mohammed A.} and Alan Sugrue and Munger, {Thomas M.} and Hodge, {David O.} and McLeod, {Christopher J.} and Packer, {Douglas L} and Suraj Kapa and Asirvatham, {Samuel J} and Friedman, {Paul Andrew}",
year = "2016",
month = "9",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1016/j.amjcard.2016.06.042",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "118",
pages = "842--848",
journal = "American Journal of Cardiology",
issn = "0002-9149",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Outcomes of Combined Endocardial-Epicardial Ablation Compared With Endocardial Ablation Alone in Patients Who Undergo Epicardial Access

AU - Killu, Ammar M.

AU - Mulpuru, Siva

AU - Al-Hijji, Mohammed A.

AU - Sugrue, Alan

AU - Munger, Thomas M.

AU - Hodge, David O.

AU - McLeod, Christopher J.

AU - Packer, Douglas L

AU - Kapa, Suraj

AU - Asirvatham, Samuel J

AU - Friedman, Paul Andrew

PY - 2016/9/15

Y1 - 2016/9/15

N2 - Percutaneous epicardial access (EpiAcc) is used in an attempt to improve outcomes of ablation. We aim to report our experience in EpiAcc for management of symptomatic ventricular premature complexes (VPC) and ventricular tachycardia (VT). All patients from January 2004 to July 2014 who underwent EpiAcc as part of a VPC or VT ablation procedure were included. Outcomes between those with endocardial-only (Gp1) and endocardial/epicardial (Gp2) ablation and those for VPC and VT ablation were compared. EpiAcc for VPC or VT ablation was attempted in 173 patients; 10 patients were excluded because of failure of access (n = 7) or no ablation performed (n = 3). Of the remaining 163, 131 patients (80.4%) had undergone previous endocardial ablation. Mean age was 53.7 ± 15.7 years; 115 (71%) were men. VT ablation was the indication in 105 patients (64%). The underlying substrate was predominately nonischemic cardiomyopathy (49.1%). Epicardial ablation was performed in 115 (70.6%). Procedural and clinical success was obtained in 92.0% and 69.9% of patients, respectively, with no difference between Gp1 and Gp2. Those who underwent VPC ablation had superior clinical outcomes at 1-year follow-up. EpiAcc is feasible in almost all patients with no previous cardiac surgery and permits acute procedural success in >90% of patients, most of whom had failed previous ablation. However, epicardial ablation was not delivered in 1/3 of patients. Epicardial mapping may be helpful as in the absence of an appropriate epicardial site for ablation, and focus can be shifted to more detailed endocardial mapping and ablation.

AB - Percutaneous epicardial access (EpiAcc) is used in an attempt to improve outcomes of ablation. We aim to report our experience in EpiAcc for management of symptomatic ventricular premature complexes (VPC) and ventricular tachycardia (VT). All patients from January 2004 to July 2014 who underwent EpiAcc as part of a VPC or VT ablation procedure were included. Outcomes between those with endocardial-only (Gp1) and endocardial/epicardial (Gp2) ablation and those for VPC and VT ablation were compared. EpiAcc for VPC or VT ablation was attempted in 173 patients; 10 patients were excluded because of failure of access (n = 7) or no ablation performed (n = 3). Of the remaining 163, 131 patients (80.4%) had undergone previous endocardial ablation. Mean age was 53.7 ± 15.7 years; 115 (71%) were men. VT ablation was the indication in 105 patients (64%). The underlying substrate was predominately nonischemic cardiomyopathy (49.1%). Epicardial ablation was performed in 115 (70.6%). Procedural and clinical success was obtained in 92.0% and 69.9% of patients, respectively, with no difference between Gp1 and Gp2. Those who underwent VPC ablation had superior clinical outcomes at 1-year follow-up. EpiAcc is feasible in almost all patients with no previous cardiac surgery and permits acute procedural success in >90% of patients, most of whom had failed previous ablation. However, epicardial ablation was not delivered in 1/3 of patients. Epicardial mapping may be helpful as in the absence of an appropriate epicardial site for ablation, and focus can be shifted to more detailed endocardial mapping and ablation.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84995377383&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84995377383&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.amjcard.2016.06.042

DO - 10.1016/j.amjcard.2016.06.042

M3 - Article

C2 - 27553109

AN - SCOPUS:84995377383

VL - 118

SP - 842

EP - 848

JO - American Journal of Cardiology

JF - American Journal of Cardiology

SN - 0002-9149

IS - 6

ER -