Suppr超能文献

原发性射频消融治疗持续性特发性室性心动过速。

Primary radiofrequency ablation for incessant idiopathic ventricular tachycardia.

作者信息

Gupta Anoop K, Kumar A V Ganesh, Lokhandwala Yash Y, Vora Amit M, Maheshwari Alok, Thakur Ranjan K

机构信息

KEM Hospital, Mumbai, India.

出版信息

Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2002 Nov;25(11):1555-60. doi: 10.1046/j.1460-9592.2002.01555.x.

Abstract

Fascicular VT and RVOT tachycardia are sometimes difficult to induce by programmed electrical stimulation (PES), despite pharmacologic provocation. In such instances, catheter mapping is hampered and efficacy of catheter ablation is difficult to judge. The study included nine patients who presented with incessant idiopathic VT and were directly taken to the electrophysiological laboratory for RF ablation. During the same period, elective ablation was performed on 108 patients with idiopathic VT. The success rate, procedural and fluoroscopy times number of energies, and the peak temperature were evaluated and compared. Of the nine patients, seven had incessant fascicular VT and two had RVOT tachycardia. The mean VT cycle length was 356 +/- 32 ms and the earliest endocardial activation time during VT was 23.6 +/- 6 ms relative to surface QRS complexes. A fascicular potential was not seen in three of the seven patients with fascicular VT. The mean procedural time was 71 +/- 32 minutes and 144 +/- 40 minutes (P = 0.023) while the fluoroscopy time was 14.6 +/- 4.6 minutes and 30 +/- 16 minutes (P < 0.001), respectively, in the primary ablation and elective groups. The total number of RF energies delivered was 2.0 +/- 1.3 versus 7.4 +/- 5.6 (P = 0.07), respectively. The significantly increased procedural time during elective ablation was largely due to time spent in fascicular VT induction. All patients in the primary ablation group were successfully ablated and none had a recurrence. Primary ablation is a safe and effective option in patients with incessant idiopathic VT. Moreover, in fascicular VT, it is superior to elective ablation in terms of success, fluoroscopy and procedural times.

摘要

束支性室性心动过速(VT)和右室流出道(RVOT)心动过速有时即使在药物激发的情况下,通过程控电刺激(PES)也难以诱发。在这种情况下,导管标测会受到阻碍,导管消融的疗效也难以判断。该研究纳入了9例持续性特发性VT患者,他们直接被送往电生理实验室进行射频消融。同期,对108例特发性VT患者进行了择期消融。对成功率、手术时间、透视时间、能量次数以及最高温度进行了评估和比较。9例患者中,7例为持续性束支性VT,2例为RVOT心动过速。VT的平均周期长度为356±32毫秒,VT期间最早的心内膜激动时间相对于体表QRS波群为23.6±6毫秒。7例束支性VT患者中有3例未见到束支电位。在初次消融组和择期消融组中,平均手术时间分别为71±32分钟和144±40分钟(P = 0.023),而透视时间分别为14.6±4.6分钟和30±16分钟(P < 0.001)。传递的射频能量总数分别为2.0±1.3和7.4±5.6(P = 0.07)。择期消融期间手术时间显著增加主要是由于束支性VT诱发所花费的时间。初次消融组的所有患者均成功消融,且无复发。对于持续性特发性VT患者,初次消融是一种安全有效的选择。此外,对于束支性VT,在成功率、透视时间和手术时间方面,初次消融优于择期消融。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验