No abstract

Figure-of-eight sutures provided efficient hemostasis following AF ablation, with significantly reduced postprocedure recovery time including time to hemostasis, extubation, and transport out of the lab.

Background The utility of protamine sulfate for heparin reversal in catheter‐based atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is unclear when using the suture closure technique for vascular hemostasis. Objective This study sought to address if protamine sulfate use for heparin reversal reduces vascular access complications in AF catheter ablation when suture techniques are used for postprocedural vascular hemostasis. Methods This is a retrospective multicenter observational study of 294 consecutive patients who underwent catheter ablation for AF with subsequent vascular access hemostasis by means of a figure‐of‐eight suture or stopcock technique. A total of 156 patients received protamine for heparin reversal before sheath removal while 138 patients did not receive protamine. The two groups were compared for procedural activated clotting time (ACT), access site complications, and duration of hospital stay. Results Baseline demographic characteristics were comparable in both groups. Despite higher ACT before venous sheath removal in patients not receiving protamine (288.0 ± 44.3 vs 153.9 ± 32.0 seconds; P < .001), there was no significant difference in groin complications, postoperative thromboembolic events, or duration of hospital stay between the two groups. Suture failure requiring manual compression was rarely observed in this cohort (0.34%). Conclusion With modern vascular access and sheath management techniques, for patients undergoing catheter ablation for AF, simple suture closure techniques can obviate the need for protamine administration to safely achieve hemostasis after removal of vascular sheaths.

Introduction: Immune checkpoint inhibitors have emerged as a promising, novel therapy for multiple malignancies. Immune-related adverse reactions pose a serious concern with use of these agents and reportedly involve multiple organ systems, notably cardiotoxicity. Early identification and management of these adverse events is essential in the prevention of morbidity and mortality. Hypothesis: Immune checkpoint inhibitors cause multiple cardiotoxic effects, and patients with prior cardiac history have a higher likelihood of cardiotoxicity. Methods: 1. A retrospective analysis of 150 patients was performed who had received immunotherapy with either the cytotoxic T lymphocyte associated antigen 4 inhibitors (CTLA4) or with the programmed cell death inhibitors (PD1) or programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors for a period of two years at a Tertiary health Care from 7/1/2016-6/30/2018. 2. Patients' cardiac diagnoses prior to the initiation of therapy were noted and included, including history of heart failure, coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation, and sudden cardiac arrest. 3. Patients’ clinic visits and hospitalizations with admitting and discharge diagnosis, electrocardiogram, echocardiogram, troponin T, and NT-proBNP were reviewed. Results: 6% of patients had new onset heart failure (both preserved and reduced), 1.3% had evidence of myocardial infarction, 2% had new atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular rate, and 0.6% had fulminant myocarditis. Of patients with new cardiac events, 60% had a history of cardiac disease, which was significantly higher than in patients without (p< 0.05). There were no age or sex differences between the groups with and without cardiotoxicity. Conclusion: Immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors have broadened the horizon for treatment of multiple solid and hematological malignancies. Nonetheless, new adverse effects on multiple organ systems, specifically cardiac involvement, occur with these therapies, which are important and potentially detrimental toxicities. Patients with a history of prior cardiovascular disease have higher likelihood to develop cardiotoxicity.