First-line endoepicardial VT substrate ablation achieves good long-term results in AC. Left-dominant AC is associated with an increased risk of recurrence. The Bi/Uni-LVA ratio identifies patients with limited epicardial arrhythmogenic substrate in whom the indication of epicardial approach should be more cautiously assessed.

No abstract

The outcome of pulmonary vein isolation in patients with paroxysmal AF is well documented by an ICM. The success rate is dependent of the previous AFB that can be randomly variable and lower than expected. ERATs predict late recurrence.

Background: The impact of contact force (CF) monitoring in pulmonary vein (PV) isolation after a circumferential anatomic ablation ( (PACE 2016; 39:361-369) atrial fibrillation ablation, contact force monitoring, pulmonary vein gaps, radiofrequency ablation, Carto system

Background Rates of cardiac‐device infections have increased in recent years, but the current incidence and risk factors for infection in patients with implantable cardioverter‐defibrillators (ICDs) are not well known. Hypothesis The increasing number of ICD infections is related to accumulated pocket manipulations over time. Methods This single‐center, prospective study included patients that underwent ICD implantation from 2008 to 2015. The endpoint was time to infection. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify independent risk factors related to infection. Results The study included a total of 570 patients, of whom 419 (73.5%) underwent a first implantation. Mean age was 59 ± 14 years, and 80% were male. During a median follow‐up of 36 months (interquartile range, 18–61 months; 1887 patient‐years), infection was identified in 26 patients (4.56%), an incidence of 14.9 × 1000 patient‐years. Median time to infection was 9.7 months (interquartile range, 1.35–23.4 months), and 38.5% were late infections (beyond 12 months of follow‐up). In patients with replacement implants, the incidence was 3‐fold higher than in first implantations (27.7 vs 9.1 × 1000 patient‐years; P = 0.002). Cox regression identified 2 independent predictors of ICD infection: cumulative number of interventions at the generator pocket (hazard ratio: 1.92, 95% confidence interval: 1.42‐2.6, P < 0.001) and pocket hematoma (hazard ratio: 7.0, 95% confidence interval: 2.7‐17.9, P < 0.0001). Conclusions The incidence of infection in ICD patients is greater than previously reported, largely due to late infections. Each new cumulative intervention at the same generator pocket nearly doubles the risk of infection.