Open AccessIschemic Stroke or Systemic Embolism After Transseptal Ablation of Arrhythmias in Patients With Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices
Author(s) -
Madhavan Malini,
Yao Xiaoxi,
Sangaralingham Lindsey R.,
Asirvatham Samuel J.,
Friedman Paul A.,
McLeod Christopher J.,
Sugrue Alan M.,
DeSimone Christopher V.,
Noseworthy Peter A.
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
journal of the american heart association
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.494
H-Index - 85
ISSN - 2047-9980
DOI - 10.1161/jaha.115.003163
Subject(s) - medicine , hazard ratio , stroke (engine) , atrial fibrillation , cardiology , embolism , incidence (geometry) , ablation , catheter ablation , proportional hazards model , clinical endpoint , surgery , confidence interval , randomized controlled trial , mechanical engineering , engineering , physics , optics
Background Incidental mobile thrombi are commonly found on endovascular leads of cardiac implantable electronic devices ( CIED s). Transseptal puncture for catheter ablation of arrhythmia poses a risk for paradoxical embolism. We examined risk of ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack ( TIA ), or systemic embolism after transseptal ablation in patients with and without CIED s. Methods and Results Using a national administrative claims database, 31 720 patients who underwent a transseptal catheter ablation between January 2004 and September 2014 were identified. Two propensity‐matched cohorts were created by matching demographic variables, administrative variables, Charlson Comorbidity Index, CHA 2 DS 2 ‐Vasc score, and year and indication for ablation (5533 and 11 300 patients with and without CIED s). Incidence rates and Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate risk of ischemic stroke, TIA , or systemic embolism for patients with and without CIED s. Impact of oral anticoagulation ( OAC ) use on the endpoint was examined. Over a mean follow‐up of 2.1 years, the incidence of the combined endpoint was 1.9 per 100 person‐years in patients with CIED s and 1.5 per 100 person‐years in patients without CIED s ( P =0.03). Among patients not on OAC , presence of a cardiac device was associated with an increased risk (hazard ratio [ HR ], 1.71 [1.24–2.35]; P <0.01), whereas there was no association noted among patients treated with OAC ( HR , 0.98 [0.75–1.28]). Conclusion CIED s are associated with an increased risk of stroke, TIA , or systemic embolism after transseptal ablation, but this risk is attenuated with postablation OAC use. Role of anticoagulation post‐transseptal ablation in patients with CIED warrants further investigation.