Comparison of Radiation Doses for Catheter Ablation Procedures for Atrial Fibrillation with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Cases

Background: Catheter ablation procedures for atrial fibrillation (AF) may frequently require long fluoroscopic times. We sought to undertake a review of radiation safety practice in our Cardiac Electrophysiology Laboratory and implement changes to minimize fluoroscopic doses. We also sought to compare the results with radiation doses for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) cases performed in our hospital. Methods: Fluoroscopic times and doses for AF ablation procedures performed by a single operator on a Philips Integris H3000 image-intensifier were analysed for 11-month period. Results were compared with all PCI procedures performed over a similar period by multiple operators on a Philips Integris Allura FD system. Comprehensive review of radiation practice in the Electrophysiology laboratory identified the potential to reduce pulse frame rates and doses, and to narrow the field of interest without impacting the performance of the procedure. These changes were implemented and results analysed after a further 11 months. Results: In the pre-intervention period 50 AF catheter ablations had a mean fluoroscopic time of 86.4 min and mean fluoroscopic dose 68.4 Gy/cm2. Post-intervention 75 procedures had a mean fluorosocopic time of 68.9 min (p < 0.0001) and mean dose of 14.3 Gy/cm2 (p < 0.0001) 128 PCI procedures had a mean combined fluoroscopic and image acquisition time of 10.0 min and mean total dose 38.8 Gy/cm2. Conclusions: Catheter ablation procedures for AF may require lengthy use of fluoroscopy but simple modifications to radiation practice can result in marked reductions in radiation dose that compare favourably with PCI case doses

The inferior whorl for detecting diabetic peripheral neuropathy using corneal confocal microscopy

PURPOSE: In vivo corneal confocal microscopy (CCM) is increasingly used as a surrogate endpoint in studies of diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN). However, it is not clear whether imaging the central cornea provides optimal diagnostic utility for DPN. Therefore, we compared nerve morphology in the central cornea and the inferior whorl, a more distal and densely innervated area located inferior and nasal to the central cornea. METHODS: A total of 53 subjects with type 1/type 2 diabetes and 15 age-matched control subjects underwent detailed assessment of neuropathic symptoms (NPS), deficits (neuropathy disability score [NDS]), quantitative sensory testing (vibration perception threshold [VPT], cold and warm threshold [CT/WT], and cold- and heat-induced pain [CIP/HIP]), and electrophysiology (sural and peroneal nerve conduction velocity [SSNCV/PMNCV], and sural and peroneal nerve amplitude [SSNA/PMNA]) to diagnose patients with (DPN+) and without (DPN-) neuropathy. Corneal nerve fiber density (CNFD) and length (CNFL) in the central cornea, and inferior whorl length (IWL) were quantified. RESULTS: Comparing control subjects to DPN- and DPN+ patients, there was a significant increase in NDS (0 vs. 2.6 ± 2.3 vs. 3.3 ± 2.7, P < 0.01), VPT (V; 5.4 ± 3.0 vs. 10.6 ± 10.3 vs. 17.7 ± 11.8, P < 0.01), WT (°C; 37.7 ± 3.5 vs. 39.1 ± 5.1 vs. 41.7 ± 4.7, P < 0.05), and a significant decrease in SSNCV (m/s; 50.2 ± 5.4 vs. 48.4 ± 5.0 vs. 39.5 ± 10.6, P < 0.05), CNFD (fibers/mm2; 37.8 ± 4.9 vs. 29.7 ± 7.7 vs. 27.1 ± 9.9, P < 0.01), CNFL (mm/mm2; 27.5 ± 3.6 vs. 24.4 ± 7.8 vs. 20.7 ± 7.1, P < 0.01), and IWL (mm/mm2; 35.1 ± 6.5 vs. 26.2 ± 10.5 vs. 23.6 ± 11.4, P < 0.05). For the diagnosis of DPN, CNFD, CNFL, and IWL achieved an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.75, 0.74, and 0.70, respectively, and a combination of IWL-CNFD achieved an AUC of 0.76. CONCLUSIONS: The parameters of CNFD, CNFL, and IWL have a comparable ability to diagnose patients with DPN. However, IWL detects an abnormality even in patients without DPN. Combining IWL with CNFD may improve the diagnostic performance of CCM.

Early and late electrophysiological effects of distractor frequency in picture naming: Reconciling input and output accounts

The “distractor-frequency effect” refers to the finding that high-frequency (HF) distractor words slow picture naming less than low-frequency distractors in the picture–word interference paradigm. Rival input and output accounts of this effect have been proposed. The former attributes the effect to attentional selection mechanisms operating during distractor recognition, whereas the latter attributes it to monitoring/decision mechanisms operating on distractor and target responses in an articulatory buffer. Using high-density (128-channel) EEG, we tested hypotheses from these rival accounts. In addition to conducting stimulus- and response-locked whole-brain corrected analyses, we investigated the correct-related negativity, an ERP observed on correct trials at fronto-central electrodes proposed to reflect the involvement of domain general monitoring. The wholebrain ERP analysis revealed a significant effect of distractor frequency at inferior right frontal and temporal sites between 100 and 300-msec post-stimulus onset, during which lexical access is thought to occur. Response-locked, region of interest (ROI) analyses of fronto-central electrodes revealed a correct-related negativity starting 121 msec before and peaking 125 msec after vocal onset on the grand averages. Slope analysis of this component revealed a significant difference between HF and lowfrequency distractor words, with the former associated with a steeper slope on the time windowspanning from100 msec before to 100 msec after vocal onset. The finding of ERP effects in time windows and components corresponding to both lexical processing and monitoring suggests the distractor frequency effect is most likely associated with more than one physiological mechanism.