Background: Despite their improved safety, by and large, cardiac electrophysiology procedures including catheter ablation (CA), are presently performed in hospital outpatient departments. Objective: This large multicenter study investigated the safety and outcomes associated with various cardiac electrophysiology procedures performed at 6 ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs), primarily during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic under the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospitals Without Walls program. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the outcomes from consecutive electrophysiology procedures performed in ASCs with same-day discharge, including transesophageal echocardiography, cardioversion, cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation, electrophysiology studies, and CA for atrial fibrillation (AF), atrial flutter (AFL)/supraventricular tachycardia, ventricular premature complexes (VPCs), and atrioventricular node. Results: Altogether, 4037 procedures were performed, including 779 transesophageal echocardiography/cardioversion procedures (19.3%), 1453 CIED implantation procedures (36.0%), 26 electrophysiology studies (0.6%), and 1779 CA procedures (44.1%) for AF (75.4%), AFL/supraventricular tachycardia (18.8%), VPC (4.7%), and atrioventricular node (1.1%). Overall, 80.2% of CA procedures were for left-sided atrial arrhythmias (AF/atypical AFL) requiring transseptal catheterization. Left-sided VPC ablation procedures (42.2%) were performed using a transseptal/retrograde approach. Adverse event rates were low, but comparable between CIED implantation and CA (0.76% vs 0.73%; P = .93), as were the incidences of urgent/unplanned postprocedure hospitalization (0.48% vs 0.45%; P = .89), respectively. Moreover, the adverse event rates in ASCs vs hospital outpatient departments did not differ for CIED (0.76% vs 0.65%; P = .71) or CA (0.73% vs 0.80%; P = .79). Conclusion: The results from this large multicenter study suggest that ASCs represent a safe and effective setting to perform a variety of cardiac electrophysiology procedures including CA. These findings bear important implications for healthcare delivery and policy.

Aryana, A., Thihalolipavan, S., Willcox, M.e., Swarup, S., Zagrodzky, J., Wang, H.j., et al. (2024). Safety and feasibility of cardiac electrophysiology procedures in ambulatory surgery centers. HEART RHYTHM [10.1016/j.hrthm.2024.07.123].

Safety and feasibility of cardiac electrophysiology procedures in ambulatory surgery centers

Natale, Andrea;
2024-08-05

Abstract

Background: Despite their improved safety, by and large, cardiac electrophysiology procedures including catheter ablation (CA), are presently performed in hospital outpatient departments. Objective: This large multicenter study investigated the safety and outcomes associated with various cardiac electrophysiology procedures performed at 6 ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs), primarily during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic under the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospitals Without Walls program. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the outcomes from consecutive electrophysiology procedures performed in ASCs with same-day discharge, including transesophageal echocardiography, cardioversion, cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation, electrophysiology studies, and CA for atrial fibrillation (AF), atrial flutter (AFL)/supraventricular tachycardia, ventricular premature complexes (VPCs), and atrioventricular node. Results: Altogether, 4037 procedures were performed, including 779 transesophageal echocardiography/cardioversion procedures (19.3%), 1453 CIED implantation procedures (36.0%), 26 electrophysiology studies (0.6%), and 1779 CA procedures (44.1%) for AF (75.4%), AFL/supraventricular tachycardia (18.8%), VPC (4.7%), and atrioventricular node (1.1%). Overall, 80.2% of CA procedures were for left-sided atrial arrhythmias (AF/atypical AFL) requiring transseptal catheterization. Left-sided VPC ablation procedures (42.2%) were performed using a transseptal/retrograde approach. Adverse event rates were low, but comparable between CIED implantation and CA (0.76% vs 0.73%; P = .93), as were the incidences of urgent/unplanned postprocedure hospitalization (0.48% vs 0.45%; P = .89), respectively. Moreover, the adverse event rates in ASCs vs hospital outpatient departments did not differ for CIED (0.76% vs 0.65%; P = .71) or CA (0.73% vs 0.80%; P = .79). Conclusion: The results from this large multicenter study suggest that ASCs represent a safe and effective setting to perform a variety of cardiac electrophysiology procedures including CA. These findings bear important implications for healthcare delivery and policy.
5-ago-2024
Online ahead of print
Rilevanza internazionale
Articolo
Sì, ma tipo non specificato
Settore MED/11
Settore MEDS-07/B - Malattie dell'apparato cardiovascolare
English
Ambulatory
Ambulatory surgery center
Atrial fibrillation
Cardiac implantable electronic device
Catheter ablation
Aryana, A., Thihalolipavan, S., Willcox, M.e., Swarup, S., Zagrodzky, J., Wang, H.j., et al. (2024). Safety and feasibility of cardiac electrophysiology procedures in ambulatory surgery centers. HEART RHYTHM [10.1016/j.hrthm.2024.07.123].
Aryana, A; Thihalolipavan, S; Willcox, Me; Swarup, S; Zagrodzky, J; Wang, Hj; Lupercio, Fa; Kenigsberg, Dn; Kenigsberg, S; Mahapatra, Ra; O'Neill, Pg;...espandi
Articolo su rivista
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2108/383866
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 0
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact