Takahashi A, Shah D C, Jaïs P, Hocini M, Clementy J, Haïssaguerre M
Electrophysiologie Cardiaque, Hôpital Cardiologique du Haut-Lévêque, Bordeaux-Pessac, France.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999 Jun;33(7):1996-2002. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(99)00117-5.
The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate preexisting partial isthmus block in the context of an electrophysiologically directed linear ablation strategy for typical atrial flutter (AF).
Double potentials (DPs) separated by an isoelectric interval have been recognized as markers of local block. However, the presence and significance of DPs in the cavotricuspid isthmus during AF before ablation have not been evaluated.
Thirty consecutive patients with AF (counterclockwise: 24, clockwise: 6) were studied during AF. Sequential withdrawal mapping was performed in the cavotricuspid isthmus from the tricuspid valve (TV) to the inferior vena cava (IVC) edge with electrograms coinciding with the center of the surface electrocardiographic plateau during counterclockwise AF or with the initial downslope of the positive flutter wave during clockwise AF. Atrial electrograms along this line were categorized as double, single or fractionated potentials (SPs or FPs). After demarcation of the zone of contiguous DPs, radiofrequency (RF) catheter ablation was performed during AF only at sites with SPs or FPs (other than DPs) on the mapped line. If isthmus conduction still persisted after AF termination, additional RF applications were delivered using the same electrophysiologic strategy of avoiding DPs with an isoelectric interval during low lateral right atrial pacing for filling in the gap of residual conduction.
Before ablation, no DPs were recorded in the isthmus in 19 patients (63%); DPs were recorded only at the IVC edge in five patients, and only at the TV edge in one patient. A contiguous line of DPs extending through more than half the isthmus to the IVC edge was documented in five patients (17%: group DP). In group DP, AF was terminated with 1.4+/-0.5 applications (vs. 5.8+/-3.5 in the remaining patients: p < 0.01). Complete isthmus block was achieved with a total of 3.4+/-0.5 applications (vs. 12+/-6 in the remaining patients: p < 0.01).
Seventeen percent of patients undergoing ablation of AF have preexisting partial isthmus block indicated by a large contiguous zone of DPs separated by an isoelectric interval. Electrophysiologically directed linear ablation avoiding confluent DPs can prevent unnecessary applications for effective cure of AF.
本研究旨在前瞻性评估在典型心房扑动(AF)的电生理指导下线性消融策略背景下预先存在的峡部部分阻滞情况。
被等电间期分隔的双电位(DPs)已被视为局部阻滞的标志。然而,消融前房颤期间腔静脉峡部DPs的存在及其意义尚未得到评估。
对30例连续的房颤患者(逆时针:24例,顺时针:6例)在房颤期间进行研究。在腔静脉峡部从三尖瓣(TV)至下腔静脉(IVC)边缘进行顺序回撤标测,逆时针房颤时电图与体表心电图平台期中心一致,顺时针房颤时与正向扑动波的初始下降支一致。沿此线的心房电图分为双电位、单电位或碎裂电位(SPs或FPs)。在划定连续DPs区域后,仅在房颤期间对标测线上有SPs或FPs(而非DPs)的部位进行射频(RF)导管消融。如果房颤终止后峡部传导仍持续存在,则在低位右房起搏期间采用相同的避免等电间期DPs的电生理策略进行额外的RF应用,以填补残余传导间隙。
消融前,19例患者(63%)峡部未记录到DPs;5例患者仅在下腔静脉边缘记录到DPs,1例患者仅在三尖瓣边缘记录到DPs。5例患者(17%:DP组)记录到一条连续的DPs线,延伸穿过峡部一半以上至下腔静脉边缘。在DP组,房颤通过1.4±0.5次应用终止(其余患者为5.8±3.5次:p<0.01)。总共通过3.4±0.5次应用实现完全峡部阻滞(其余患者为12±6次:p<0.01)。
17%接受房颤消融的患者存在预先存在的部分峡部阻滞,表现为被等电间期分隔的大片连续DPs区域。电生理指导下的线性消融避免融合的DPs可防止为有效治愈房颤进行不必要的应用。