Alternative vascular accesses in electrophysiological operating rooms: focus on the quality of life in the early postoperative period

Atrial fibrillation is the most common arrhythmia, the incidence of which increases in parallel with the progressive aging of the population. Atrial fibrillation worsens the prognosis of patients and significantly reduces the quality of life. Improvement of the technical and methodological aspects of catheter procedures leads to their widespread introduction into clinical practice both for the prevention of embolic events and for rhythm control. The need to provide access to the main vessels, more often to the femoral veins, the use of large bore introducers, as well as aggressive regimens of antithrombotic therapy in the postoperative period, bring to the fore local complications of catheter procedures and necessitates to maintain a horizontal position to achieve stable hemostasis. The use of ultrasound imaging can significantly reduce the number of vascular events. However, long-term immobilization often leads to back pain, urinary retention, and infectious complications, which is more pronounced in the older patient population. In order to reduce the immobilization time, many hemostasis systems have been developed, which have disadvantages and require additional costs for the treatment of patients. In this regard, the development and introduction into clinical practice of novel vascular access types to improve the quality of life in the early postoperative period seems relevant. For this purpose, a randomized study is conducted, which compares the efficacy and safety of the distal femoral access, which makes it possible to activate patients as soon as possible after surgery.

1. Stewart S, Hart CL, Hole DJ, et al. Population prevalence, incidence, and predictors of atrial fibrillation in the Renfrew/ Paisley study. Heart. 2001;86(5):516-21. doi:10.1136/heart.86.5.516.

2. Go AS, Hylek EM, Phillips KA, et al. Prevalence of Diagnosed Atrial Fibrillation in Adults National Implications for Rhythm Management and Stroke Prevention: the AnTicoagulation and Risk Factors In Atrial Fibrillation (ATRIA) Study. JAMA. 2001;285(18):2370-5. doi:10.1001/jama.285.18.2370.

3. Conen D. Epidemiology of atrial fibrillation. Eur Heart J. 2018;39(16):1323-4. doi:10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.120.316340.

4. Schnabel RB, Yin X, Larson MG, et al. Fifty-Year Trends in Atrial Fibrillation Prevalence, Incidence, Risk Factors, and Mortality in the Community Renate. Lancet. 2015;386(9989):154-62. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61774-8.

5. Thrall G, Lane D, Carroll D, Lip GYH. Quality of Life in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review. Am J Med. 2006;119(5):448.e1-19. doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2005.10.057.

6. Andersson T, Magnuson A, Bryngelsson IL, et al. All-cause mortality in 272 186 patients hospitalized with incident atrial fibrillation 1995-2008: A Swedish nationwide long-term casecontrol study. Eur Heart J. 2013;34(14):1061-7. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehs469.

7. Stewart S, Hart CL, Hole DJ, et al. A population-based study of the long-term risks associated with atrial fibrillation: 20-Year follow-up of the Renfrew/Paisley study. Am J Med. 2002;113(5):359-64. doi:10.1016/S0002-9343(02)01236-6.

8. Stewart S, Murphy N, Walker A, et al. Cost of an emerging epidemic: An economic analysis of atrial fibrillation in the UK. Heart. 2004;90(3):286-92. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2002.008748.

9. Kim MH, Johnston SS, Chu BC, et al. Estimation of total incremental health care costs in patients with atrial fibrillation in the united states. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2011;4(3):313-20. doi:10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.110.958165.

10. Kolbin AS, Mosikyan AA, Tatarsky BA. Socioeconomic burden of atrial fibrillations in Russia: seven-year trends (20102017). Journal of Arrhythmology. 2018;(92):42-8. (In Russ.) doi:10.25760/VA-2018-92-42-48.

11. Asad ZUIA, Yousif A, Khan MS, et al. Catheter Ablation Versus Medical Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Circ: Arrhythmia Electrophysiol. 2019;12(9):1-13. doi:10.1161/CIRCEP.119.007414.

12. Imberti JF, Ding WY, Kotalczyk A, et al. Catheter ablation as firstline treatment for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Heart. 2021;107(20):1630-6. doi:10.1136/heartjnl-2021-319496.

13. Richter S, Di Biase L, Hindricks G. Atrial fibrillation ablation in heart failure. Eur Heart J. 2019;40(8):663-72. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehy778.

14. Tzikas A, Shakir S, Gafoor S, et al. Left atrial appendage occlusion for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: Multicentre experience with the AMPLATZER Cardiac Plug. EuroIntervention. 2016;11(10):1170-9. doi:10.4244/EIJY15M01_06.

15. Reddy VY, Doshi SK, Kar S, et al. 5-Year Outcomes After Left Atrial Appendage Closure: From the PREVAIL and PROTECT AF Trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70(24):2964-75. doi:0.1016/j. jacc.2017.10.021.

16. Cappato R, Calkins H, Chen S-A, et al. Worldwide Survey on the Methods, Efficacy, and Safety of Catheter Ablation for Human Atrial Fibrillation. Circulation. 2005;111:1100-5. doi:10.1161/01.CIR.0000157153.30978.67.

17. Tonchev IR, Nam MCY, Gorelik A, et al. Relationship between procedural volume and complication rates for catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. EP Europace. 2021;23(7):1024-32. doi:10.1093/europace/euaa415.

18. Packer DL, Mark DB, Robb RA, et al. Effect of Catheter Ablation vs Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy on Mortality, Stroke, Bleeding, and Cardiac Arrest among Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: The CABANA Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA — J Am Med Assoc. 2019;321(13):1261-74. doi:10.1001/jama.2019.0693.

19. Ibáñez Criado JL, Quesada A, Cózar R, et al. Spanish Catheter Ablation Registry. 18th Official Report of the Spanish Society of Cardiology Working Group on Electrophysiology and Arrhythmias (2018). Rev Esp Cardiol. 2019;72(12):1031-42. doi:10.1016/j.rec.2019.08.005.

20. Bertaglia E, Zoppo F, Tondo C, et al. Early complications of pulmonary vein catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: A multicenter prospective registry on procedural safety. Hear Rhythm. 2007;4(10):1265-71. doi:10.1016/j.hrthm.2007.06.016.

21. Samuel M, Abrahamowicz M, Joza J, et al. Population-level evaluation of complications after catheter ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2019;30(12):2678-85. doi:10.1111/jce.14202.

22. Spragg DD, Dalal D, Cheema A, et al. Complications of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: Incidence and predictors. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2008;19(6):627-31. doi:10.1111/j.1540-8167.2008.01181.x.

23. Deshmukh A, Patel NJ, Pant S, et al. In-hospital complications associated with catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation in the United States between 2000 and 2010: Analysis of 93 801 procedures. Circulation. 2013;128(19):2104-12. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.113.003862.

24. De Greef Y, Ströker E, Schwagten B, et al. Complications of pulmonary vein isolation in atrial fibrillation: Predictors and comparison between four different ablation techniques: Results from the MIddelheim PVI-registry. Europace. 2018;20(8):127986. doi:10.1093/europace/eux233.

25. Ha ACT, Wijeysundera HC, Birnie DH, et al. Real-world outcomes, complications, and cost of catheter-based ablation for atrial fibrillation: An update. Curr Opin Cardiol. 2017;32(1):47-52. doi:10.1097/HCO.0000000000000348.

26. Yamagata K, Wichterle D, Roubíček T, et al. Ultrasound-guided versus conventional femoral venipuncture for catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: A multicentre randomized efficacy and safety trial (ULTRA-FAST trial). Europace. 2018;20(7):1107-14. doi:10.1093/europace/eux175.

27. Kupó P, Pap R, Sághy L, et al. Ultrasound guidance for femoral venous access in electrophysiology procedures — systematic review and meta-analysis. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2020;59(2):407-14. doi:10.1007/s10840-019-00683-z.

28. Calkins H, Hindricks G, Cappato R, Kim YH, et al. 2017 HRS/ EHRA/ECAS/APHRS/SOLAECE expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation: Executive summary. Europace. 2018;20(1):157-208. doi:10.1093/europace/eux275.

29. Arai H, Mizukami A, Hanyu Y, et al. Risk factors for venous bleeding complication at the femoral puncture site after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. J Arrhythmia. 2020;36(4):678-84. doi:10.1002/joa3.12378.

30. Page GG, Blakely WP, Ben-Eliyahu S. Evidence that postoperative pain is a mediator of the tumor-promoting effects of surgery in rats. Pain. 2001;90(1-2):191-9. doi:10.1016/S03043959(00)00403-6.

31. Bode K, Breithardt OA, Kreuzhuber M, et al. Patient discomfort following catheter ablation and rhythm device surgery. Europace. 2015;17(7):1129-35. doi:10.1093/europace/euu325.

32. Wongrakpanich S, Wongrakpanich A, Melhado K, et al. A comprehensive review of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use in the elderly. Aging Dis. 2018;9(1):143-50. doi:10.14336/AD.2017.0306.

33. Lehman AB, Ahmed AS, Patel PJ. Avoiding urinary catheterization in patients undergoing atrial fibrillation catheter ablation. J Atr Fibrillation. 2020;12(4):4-7. doi:10.4022/jafib.2221.

34. Kashefi C, Messer K, Barden R, et al. Incidence and Prevention of Iatrogenic Urethral Injuries. J Urol. 2008;179(6):2254-8. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2008.01.108.

35. Cluckey A, Perino AC, Fan J, et al. Urinary tract infection after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. PACE — Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2019;42(7):951-8. doi:10.1111/pace.13738.

36. Baldini G, Bagry H, Aprikian A Carli F. Postoperative Urinary Retention. Anesthesiology. 2009;110:1139-57. doi:10.1097/ALN.0b013e31819f7aea.

37. Mohanty S, Trivedi C, Beheiry S, et al. Venous access-site closure with vascular closure device vs. manual compression in patients undergoing catheter ablation or left atrial appendage occlusion under uninterrupted anticoagulation: A multicentre experience on efficacy and complications. Europace. 2019;21(7):1048-54. doi:10.1093/europace/euz004.

38. Richter RP, Law MA, Borasino S, et al. Distal Superficial Femoral Vein Cannulation for Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter Placement in Infants with Cardiac Disease. Congenit Heart Dis. 2016;11(6):733-40. doi:10.1177/11297298211011867.

39. Wan Y, Chu Y, Qiu Y, et al. The feasibility and safety of PICCs accessed via the superficial femoral vein in patients with superior vena cava syndrome. J Vasc Access. 2018;19(1):34-9. doi:10.5301/jva.5000810.

40. Zhao L, Cao X, Wang Y. Cannulation of the superficial femoral vein at mid-thigh when catheterization of the superior vena cava system is contraindicated. J Vasc Access. 2020;21(4):524-8. doi:10.1177/1129729819896473.