Abstract 17166: Comparison Between Use of Vasoactive Medications in Patients Undergoing PVC and VT Ablation

Abstract

Background: Societal guidelines have set prerequisites regarding procedures conducted in the EP lab. Despite metrics for management of EP cases, no clear guidelines exist for use of hemodynamic drugs to support complex ablations, particularly in setting of structural heart disease. Objectives: We sought to understand the variety and range of vasoactive medication use in patients undergoing PVC/VT ablation. Methods: Patients undergoing PVC or VT ablation, from January 2015 to December 2016, at our institution were analyzed. Demographics, echocardiography, and procedural details, including vasoactive medication use, were analyzed. Results: Sequential patients undergoing PVC or VT ablation (70 in each arm) were studied. Those undergoing PVC ablation (56 +/- 14 years, 30% female) had an average EF of 58% in comparison to 44% (p<0.01 for EF difference) in VT ablation patients (60 +/- 13 years, 20% female); more VT patients (62%) were under general anesthesia. Pressors were administered in 86% of cases with the significant majority (63%) consisting of alpha-agonists (phenylephrine, ephedrine, epinephrine). Importantly, 48% of cases required continuous drip initiation (Figure). Regardless of case type or abnormal EF, drip initiation with or administration of multiple bolus doses of alpha-agonists was much more frequent compared to inotropes (Figure). In a subset of patients with EF ≤ 35%, 96% received vasoactive medications with 73% receiving a continuous drip or multiple bolus doses of phenylephrine. Conclusions: Vasoactive medication use during ventricular EP cases is common. Regardless of baseline EF, a propensity for use of alpha-agonists exists that may affect the treatment of patients with abnormal LV function. More studies are needed to assess the impact of pressor use on patient safety and procedural endpoints in the EP lab. Figure: