OBJECTIVES: This study examined the mechanisms of ventricular tachycardia (VT) and the outcomes of VT ablation in patients using a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) as a temporary treatment for the cardiac transplant. BACKGROUND: An increasingly common complication of continuous-flow LVADs is VT, which is common with end-stage heart failure. METHODS: This study is an analysis of prospective and retrospective data on cardiac transplant candidates undergoing LVAD surgery at Hermann Hospital over five years, 2016- 2023. An electronic review of medical records was performed, including testing, images, and past medical history. The authors confirm that they have adhered to the journal’s ethical guidelines, as specified on the journal’s author guidelines page, and have obtained the necessary approvals from the appropriate ethical review committee. RESULTS: A total of 10 VT accidents were reported among 7 VAD cases. 42 % (3) of the patients had VT within 30 days of VAD implantation, 14 % (1) BBRVT, and 28 % (2) VT from inflow cannula, while 57 % (4) had more than one ablation and 57 % (4) survived one year. LVAD intervention improved the quality of life and survival in over 50% of patients (4/7). CONCLUSIONS: This single-center study of VT ablation in destination LVADs showed that freedom from recurrent VT and implantable defibrillator shocks were associated with improved 1-year survival. Most VTs were monomorphic, cannula adjacent (2/10), and one bundle branch recurrent VT out of ten. Mortality and thrombosis remain a problem for this challenging population.

Performing afib ablation combined with the placement of the Watchman device for LAA occlusion has been evaluated before, with results showing evidence of safety and ability to perform (6). This can save time and materials allowing patients to have two procedures simultaneously, preventing repeating exposure to possible risks that come with

Performing afib ablation combined with the placement of the Watchman device for LAA occlusion has been evaluated before, with results showing evidence of safety and ability to perform (6). This can save time and materials allowing patients to have two procedures simultaneously, preventing repeating exposure to possible risks that come with general anesthesia and transseptal puncture, and decreasing the total length of hospital stay (7-8). In this case, especially we proceeded with the combined procedure due to difficulty in obtaining access associated with total interruption of IVC and the obligation to use alternative non-conventional ways as the transhepatic access that may lead to higher risk upon repeating.