The use of apixaban during the periprocedural period of AF ablation seemed as efficacious and safe as warfarin.

Objective Uninterrupted oral warfarin strategy has become the standard protocol to prevent complications during catheter ablation (CA) for the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). However, little is known about the safety and efficacy of uninterrupted dabigatran therapy in patients undergoing CA for AF. Therefore, this study investigated the safety and efficacy of uninterrupted dabigatran therapy and compared the findings with those for uninterrupted warfarin therapy. Methods Bleeding and thromboembolic events during the periprocedural period were evaluated in 363 consecutive patients who underwent CA for AF at Nagoya University Hospital, and received uninterrupted dabigatran (n=173) or uninterrupted warfarin (n=190) for periprocedural anticoagulation. Results A total of 27 (7%) patients experienced either bleeding or thromboembolic complications. Major bleeding complications occurred in 2 (1%) patients in the dabigatran group (DG) and 2 (1%) patients in the warfarin group (WG). Eight (5%) patients in the DG and 9 (5%) patients in the WG experienced groin hematoma, a type of minor bleeding complication. Meanwhile, no patient in the DG and 1 (1%) in the WG developed cerebral ischemic stroke. Overall, there was no significant difference between the groups for any category. The activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) independently predicted periprocedural complications in the DG. Conclusion Uninterrupted dabigatran therapy in CA for AF thus may be a safe and effective anticoagulant therapy, and appears to be closely similar to continuous warfarin; however, it is essential to pay close attention to the APTT values when using dabigatran during CA.

Greater response to biventricular pacing occurs more frequently in patients with consistent right ventricular pacing, lack of prior history of ventricular arrhythmia, and smaller LAD. An association between patient background characteristics and a super-response to CRT was also identified.

The rate of Sprint Fidelis lead failure continues to increase over time in Japanese patients.

Introduction Data are limited regarding outcomes of cryoballoon ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with heart failure (HF). This large‐scale multicenter study aimed to evaluate the prognosis of patients with HF after cryoballoon ablation for AF. Methods Among 3655 patients undergoing cryoballoon ablation at 17 institutions, 549 patients (15%) (391 with paroxysmal AF and 158 with persistent AF) diagnosed with HF preoperatively were analyzed. Clinical endpoints were recurrence, mortality, and HF hospitalization after ablation. Results Most patients had a preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥ 50%. During a mean follow‐up period of 25.7 months, recurrence, all‐cause death, and HF hospitalization occurred in 29%, 4.0%, and 4.8%, respectively. Cardiac function on echocardiography and B‐type natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels significantly improved postoperatively, and the effect was more pronounced in the nonrecurrence group. Major complications occurred in 33 patients (6.0%), but most complications were phrenic nerve palsy (3.6%). Although death and HF hospitalization occurred more frequently in patients with LVEF ≤ 40% (n = 73) and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III–IV (n = 19) than other subgroups, the BNP levels, and LVEF significantly improved after ablation in all LVEF and NYHA class subgroups. High BNP levels, NHYA class, CHADS2 score, and structural heart disease, but not postablation recurrence, independently predicted death, and HF hospitalization on multivariate analysis. The patients with tachycardia‐induced cardiomyopathy had better recovery of BNP levels and LVEF after ablation than those with structural heart disease. Conclusions Cryoballoon ablation for AF in HF patients is feasible and leads to significantly improved cardiac function.