Stuart Allen

Publications of Stuart Allen

• A hybrid form of cardiac resynchronisation therapy in patients with failing systemic right ventricles.

  Authors: Kevin Michael, John Paisey, Bongani Mayosi, Stephen Robinson, Stuart Allen, Nadia Sunni, Paul Roberts, John Morgan, Gruschen Veldtman

  Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing. 11/2008;

  INTRODUCTION: Late systemic right ventricular (RV) dysfunction after atrial redirection surgery is common. Patients may require cardiac transplantation in early adulthood. METHODS: We undertookINTRODUCTION: Late systemic right ventricular (RV) dysfunction after atrial redirection surgery is common. Patients may require cardiac transplantation in early adulthood. METHODS: We undertook cardiac resynchronisation (CRT)/defibrillator therapy in two patients as a bridge to transplantation. RESULTS: Two males (aged 24, 110 kg and 26 years, 106 kg); having undergone a Mustard procedure for dextro-transposition of the great arteries at 7 and 6 months of age respectively, presented with impaired systemic RV function and New York Heart Association III symptoms. Both patients had dual chamber pacemakers in-situ for sinus bradycardia. Upgrade to CRT was performed by conserving the existing endocardial leads and placement of epicardial electrodes. One demonstrated sustained improvement over a 24 month follow-up period. CONCLUSION: A hybrid CRT strategy is feasible in patients with failing systemic RVs and pre-existent endocardial dual chamber pacemakers. Appropriate patient selection criteria and optimum lead placement, however, still needs further evaluation in this population.

• Non-contact mapping guided cardiac resynchronization therapy for a failing systemic right ventricle.

  Authors: Kevin A Michael, Gruschen R Veldtman, John R Paisey, Stephen Robinson, Stuart Allen, Nadia S Sunni, Paul R Roberts, John M Morgan

  Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology. 11/2007; 9(10):880-3.

  AIMS: Progressive systemic right ventricular (sRV) dysfunction, atrial and ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death are well-recognized late sequelae of atrial redirection surgery in whichAIMS: Progressive systemic right ventricular (sRV) dysfunction, atrial and ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death are well-recognized late sequelae of atrial redirection surgery in which the right ventricle is left connected to the systemic circulation. Although cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) poses an attractive therapeutic option, little is known about indications, patient selection, and technical aspects of best lead placement. METHODS AND RESULTS: We undertook CRT in a 27-year-old female patient post-Mustard correction for d-transposition (d-TGA) with New York Heart Association (NYHA) grade III disability with QRS duration measuring 130 ms. There was also echocardiographic (TTE) evidence of severe sRV dysfunction. Non-contact mapping (NCM) was used to define sites of late activation within the sRV and the acute intra-arterial blood pressure (BP) response was assessed during implantation of a 4 french (F) lead onto the endocardial surface of the sRV. At 4 weeks post-implant sRV lateral wall motion had improved and the ejection fraction (EF) rose from 23 to 33%. The patient has been successfully anticoagulated and improved to NYHA II status after 6 months. CONCLUSION: The use of NCM proved safe and effective and provided a qualitative assessment of electrical viability of the sRV complimenting the measurement of mechanical function provided by TTE. The favourable clinical response in the above case justifies a prospective evaluation of this strategy.

• Cardiac defibrillation therapy for at risk patients with systemic right ventricular dysfunction secondary to atrial redirection surgery for dextro-transposition of the great arteries.

  Authors: Kevin A Michael, Gruschen R Veldtman, John R Paisey, Arthur M Yue, Stephen Robinson, Stuart Allen, Nadia S Sunni, Chris Kiesewetter, Tony Salmon, Paul R Roberts, John M Morgan

  Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology. 06/2007; 9(5):281-4.

  AIM: To review techniques of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) in patients after Mustard surgery for arterial transposition. METHODS AND RESULTS: Retrospective analysis of all MustardAIM: To review techniques of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) in patients after Mustard surgery for arterial transposition. METHODS AND RESULTS: Retrospective analysis of all Mustard patients receiving ICDs at our institution. Five patients (median age 24 years, range 19-35, 3 male) with systemic right ventricular dysfunction (sRV) dysfunction and New York Heart Association (NYHA) II and III, received ICDs. Implantation was performed transvenously in three patients, epicardial patches and subcutaneous arrays at surgery in two patients. Two patients required lead extraction and baffle stent angioplasty before ICD implantation. Defibrillation vectors incorporating the anterior sRV mass [i.e., sub-pulmonary left ventricle (pLV) to generator can, and between epicardial defibrillator patches], consistently achieved a minimum 10 joule(J) safety margin during defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing. Subcutaneous arrays and endocardial vectors that included a superior vena cava (SVC) electrode were less effective. One patient developed pulmonary oedema post-procedure. At a median 20 months, all patients were alive and in NYHA class II. Follow-up over 24 months documented multiple non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) in the group and one patient had recurrent VT with aborted device therapy. CONCLUSION: Defibrillator implantation in Mustard patients is challenging. Sub-optimal defibrillation should be anticipated and can be overcome using vectors which integrate the RV mass and high-energy devices. A staged procedure involving pre-implant interventions or separate DFT tests, where indicated, may be better tolerated by patients.

• Examination of a middle cardiac vein defibrillation coil as stand-alone anode, auxiliary anode, and bystander electrode in a transvenous defibrillation circuit.

  Authors: John R Paisey, Arthur M Yue, Frederick Bessoule, Stuart Allen, Paul R Roberts, John M Morgan

  Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE. 09/2004; 27(8):1089-93.

  In porcine studies anodes in the middle cardiac vein compare favorably with those in the RV. It has not been demonstrated whether the RV and middle cardiac vein or the middle cardiac vein aloneIn porcine studies anodes in the middle cardiac vein compare favorably with those in the RV. It has not been demonstrated whether the RV and middle cardiac vein or the middle cardiac vein alone anodes are superior when shocking to a conventional SVC and active housing cathode nor whether a bystander middle cardiac vein electrode exerts a passive electrode affect. Twelve pigs were anesthetized and had an active housing implanted in the left pectoral region and defibrillation coils placed at the RV apex and in the SVC. A custom-made defibrillation coil (Ela Medical) was advanced into the middle cardiac vein through a 9 Fr transvenous catheter. The DFT for three anodes (RV; RV and middle cardiac vein; middle cardiac vein) to the SVC and active housing was then assessed by a three reversal binary search, the order of testing was randomized. In seven animals DFT was assessed in the same way for the configuration of RV to SVC and active housing twice more, with and without a bystander middle cardiac vein coil electrode in place. The results were middle cardiac vein 7.5 +/- 1.7 J, RV and middle cardiac vein 7.3 +/- 1.7 J reduced DFT significantly compared to RV 13.8 +/- 4.2 J (both P < 0.000). There was no significant difference between the middle cardiac vein and the middle cardiac vein and RV (P = 0.67, 95% CI for difference -0.64-0.96). The DFT of RV to SVC and the active housing was the same with (13.2 +/- 4.0) and without (13.7 +/- 4.2) the middle cardiac vein bystander coil in place (P = 0.177, 95% CI for difference -0.33-1.33 J). Shocking to a SVC and active housing cathode, middle cardiac vein, and RV and middle cardiac vein anodes are equally effective in lowering DFT compared to the RV. The middle cardiac vein coil electrode does not exert a passive electrode affect on the RV to the SVC and active housing defibrillation.