RVOT arrhythmias. (Cardiol J 2014; 21, 3: 284-292)

A b s t r a c tBackground: Ensuring a haemodynamically effective cardiac rhythm is a challenge in patients waiting for pacemaker reimplantation after transcutaneous lead extraction due to an infection of the implanted system. Aim:The authors report a retrospective analysis of temporary pacing with an active fixation lead (AFTP) connected to an externalised pacemaker in patients after transvenous lead extraction (TLE) due to an infection.Methods: AFTP was used in 34 patients (12 women) aged from 38 to 88 years (mean 67.5 years). This represented 24.5% of the population of patients undergoing TLE due to infective indications. In 32 cases, the indication for temporary pacing was atrioventricular block, and in 2 patients sick sinus syndrome. The lead was implanted via the internal jugular vein puncture into the right ventricle in 33 cases and into the right atrium in 1 case. Leads were secured to the skin and attached to externalised pacemakers.Results: AFTP was used for 4 to 26 days (average 14.5 days). Re-implantation was performed in 29 patients (85.3% of the study group). There was no early infection recurrence. Three patients died during AFTP (8.8% of the study group), including two due to septic shock, and a cardiac arrest due to pulseless electrical activity in another patient. Conclusions:Temporary pacing with an active fixation lead is an effective and safe method to ensure a hemodynamically stable heart rhythm for a period ranging from a few to several days after the surgery in patients after transcutaneous lead extraction due to infective indications.

Background: Multiple randomised clinical trials have proven that cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) reduces morbidity and mortality in appropriately selected patients with congestive heart failure and is recommended for such patients as per the European Society of Cardiology guidelines. Aim: In this paper we compare the indications and demographics in cardiac resynchronisation recipients in Poland and other European countries. Methods: In 2015 and 2016, physicians from 42 European countries participated in the second edition of the European Cardiac Resynchronisation Therapy Survey. For 14 months, 288 implanting centres gathered data regarding demography, indications, implanting methods, and guidance compatibility from 11,088 patients receiving CRT. Results: The survey revealed that a vast group of patients were eligible for CRT implantation (although some of them with relatively weak guidance recommendations) and showed essential variety in clinical practice when national data were benchmarked. Conclusions: The population of CRT recipients in Poland and other European countries did not differ in terms of demographic and clinical characteristics. In most cases, indications for CRT were in accordance with the guidelines; however some devices were implanted in patients beyond the guideline recommendations. For these procedures, the decision regarding CRT implantation relies mainly on the physicians' experience.

A b s t r a c tBackground: Antiarrhythmic treatment of patients with recurrent ventricular tachyarrhythmia, in whom catheter ablation and amiodarone treatment were ineffective or contraindicated, is an unsolved clinical problem. Aim:The study aims to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of mexiletine in patients with recurrent ventricular tachyarrhythmias and/or electrical storm events, in whom standard treatment strategies failed to prevent ventricular tachyarrhythmia. Methods:We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of all patients treated with mexiletine for recurrent ventricular tachycardia and/or ventricular fibrillation in our institution between January 2011 and September 2015. The primary endpoints were total number of electrical storm events and ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF) episodes after the beginning of mexiletine therapy. Secondary endpoints were total number of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapies and discontinuation of the therapy. Events were compared with a matched duration period before initiating mexiletine. Patients served as self-controls.Results: Seventeen patients were included in the study; 11 patients were males. Mean age was 64.2 ± 15.4 years. The median time of mexiletine treatment was eight months (interquartile range [IR]: 1-22 months). The mexiletine dose was 600 mg/day in 13 patients and 400 mg/day in four patients. In four patients the dose was modified during treatment in a range from 400 to 600 mg/day depending on clinical decision. Treatment with mexiletine significantly reduced the number of electrical storm events (14 episodes Conclusions:Mexiletine was a sufficiently tolerated antiarrhythmic drug in short-term treatment of ventricular tachyarrhythmias in the studied population. Mexiletine may be effective in the treatment of recurring ventricular tachyarrhythmias or electrical storm events.