Aims Pulmonary vein (PV) isolation is a curative treatment for patients with atrial fibrillation. The aim of this study was to evaluate prospectively the effects of adenosine administration on the PV activity and atrio-venous conduction after PV isolation. Methods and results Twenty-nine patients (21 m; age: 55 ± 8 years) were submitted to ostial PV isolation guided by basket catheter recordings. After successful isolation, the effects of a 12 mg intravenous bolus of adenosine were tested in 62 PVs. In 22/62 PVs (35%), left atrium (LA)-to-PV conduction was transiently (16.6 ± 7.1 s, range: 3.8-27.9 s) or permanently (3 PVs) restored in response to adenosine administration. The prevalence of this phenomenon was 39% in left superior PVs, 43% in right superior PVs, and 22% in left inferior PVs (p = 0.365). It occurred more frequently in the presence of dissociated PV activity (11/15 PVs, 73% vs. 11/47 PVs, 23%; p = 0.002), whereas it was not influenced by the median duration of the radiofrequency current (RFC) delivery for each ) min vs. 16 (IQR: 11-24) min: p = 0.636]. A lengthening or shortening of the LA-PV conduction time was observed at LA-PV conduction appearance and disappearance in 36% and 55% of the cases, respectively. Further RFC applications (median: 5.5 min, IQR: 4-11 min) at the residual conduction breakthrough(s) indicated by the basket catheter recordings definitively eliminated adenosineinduced recovery of LA-PV conduction in all cases. Finally, when present, intrinsic PV discharge was invariably depressed by adenosine administration. Conclusions Adenosine may transiently or permanently re-establish LA-PV conduction after apparently successful PV isolation. This phenomenon is abolished by additional RFC delivery. However, its possible influence on the clinical results of PV ablation must be evaluated by properly designed, randomized studies.

Among NYHA functional class II/III nonischemic cardiomyopathy patients, an abnormal TWA test is associated with a 4-fold higher risk of cardiac death and life-threatening arrhythmias. Patients with normal TWA tests have a very good prognosis and are likely to benefit little from ICD therapy.

In this large cohort of new ICD implants, event rates were similar and extremely low in both groups. These data indicate a limited clinical relevance for DT testing, thus supporting a strategy of omitting DT during an ICD implant. (Safety of Two Strategies of ICD Management at Implantation [SAFE-ICD]; NCT00661037).

Background: Optimal timing for catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia is an important unresolved issue. There are no randomized trials evaluating the benefit of ablation after the first implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) shock. Methods: We conducted a 2-phase, prospective, multicenter, randomized clinical trial. Patients with ischemic or nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy and primary or secondary prevention indication for ICD were enrolled in an initial observational phase until first appropriate shock (phase A). After reconsenting, patients were randomly assigned 1:1 in phase B to immediate ablation (within 2 months from shock delivery) or continuation of standard therapy. The primary end point was a composite of death from any cause or hospitalization for worsening heart failure. Amiodarone intake was not allowed except for documented atrial tachyarrhythmias. On July 23, 2021, phase B of the trial was interrupted as a result of the first interim analysis on the basis of the Bayesian adaptive design. Results: Of the 517 patients enrolled in phase A, 154 (30%) had ventricular tachycardia, 56 (11%) received an appropriate shock over a median follow-up of 2.4 years (interquartile range, 1.4-4.4), and 47 of 56 (84%) agreed to participate in phase B. After 24.2 (8.5-24.4) months, the primary end point occurred in 1 of 23 (4%) patients in the ablation group and 10 of 24 (42%) patients in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.11 [95% CI, 0.01-0.85]; P=0.034). The results met the prespecified termination criterion of >99% Bayesian posterior probability of superiority of treatment over standard therapy. No deaths were observed in the ablation group versus 8 deaths (33%) in the control group (P=0.004); there was 1 worsening heart failure hospitalization in the ablation group (4%) versus 4 in the control group (17%; P=0.159). ICD shocks were less frequent in the ablation group (9%) than in the control group (42%; P=0.039). Conclusions: Ventricular tachycardia ablation after first appropriate shock was associated with a reduced risk of the combined death or worsening heart failure hospitalization end point, lower mortality, and fewer ICD shocks. These findings provide support for considering ventricular tachycardia ablation after the first ICD shock.

Continuous ECG monitoring is a valuable tool for long-term follow-up after AF catheter ablation facilitating reliable assessment of symptomatic and asymptomatic AF episodes. This may have clinical implications with regards to anticoagulation therapy in high-risk patients.