Callans David J, Gerstenfeld Edward P, Dixit Sanjay, Zado Erica, Vanderhoff Mark, Ren Jian-Fang, Marchlinski Francis E
Electrophysiology Section, Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104, USA.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2004 Sep;15(9):1050-5. doi: 10.1046/j.1540-8167.2004.04052.x.
Pulmonary vein (PV) isolation is effective in the treatment of most patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Some advocate the addition of linear ablation techniques to improve efficacy; however, previous studies suggest recurrent PV conduction is responsible for AF recurrence. The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of repeat PV isolation in patients with recurrent AF after an initial ablation procedure and to determine if any patient characteristics predict failure of repeat PV isolation procedures.
Seventy-four patients with two or more AF ablation procedures using selective PV isolation were included. PV isolation was guided with multielectrode ring catheter recordings, electroanatomic mapping, and intracardiac electrocardiography. Radiofrequency energy was delivered using a 4-mm-tip catheter (maximum 40 W, 52 degrees C); cooled-tip ablation was performed in 10 patients. Linear ablation was not performed. Antiarrhythmic drugs were continued for at least 6 weeks after ablation; AF episodes during this period were censored. Reconnection of one or more segments of previously ablated PVs was observed in 97% of patients; reconnected PVs served as the trigger for AF in 77%. Repeat PV isolation resulted in AF control (cure or 90% reduction in AF episodes) in 64 patients (86%) over a follow-up period of 9.1 +/- 6.7 months. "High-risk" characteristics such as left atrial enlargement, persistent AF, or mitral regurgitation did not predict failure of repeat PV isolation procedures.
Recurrent AF following selective PV isolation is overwhelmingly associated with PV electrical reconnection. Repeat PV isolation without linear ablation provides effective treatment for recurrent AF in patients in whom an initial PV isolation procedure failed, independent of clinical characteristics.
肺静脉隔离术对大多数房颤(AF)患者的治疗有效。一些人主张增加线性消融技术以提高疗效;然而,先前的研究表明肺静脉传导恢复是房颤复发的原因。本研究的目的是确定在初次消融术后房颤复发患者中重复肺静脉隔离术的有效性,并确定是否有任何患者特征可预测重复肺静脉隔离术的失败。
纳入74例接受过两次或更多次使用选择性肺静脉隔离的房颤消融术的患者。肺静脉隔离术通过多电极环导管记录、电解剖标测和心内心电图进行引导。使用4毫米尖端导管输送射频能量(最大40瓦,52摄氏度);10例患者进行了冷盐水灌注消融。未进行线性消融。消融术后抗心律失常药物持续使用至少6周;在此期间的房颤发作被剔除。97%的患者观察到先前消融的肺静脉的一个或多个节段重新连接;重新连接的肺静脉在77%的患者中作为房颤的触发因素。在9.1±6.7个月的随访期内,重复肺静脉隔离术使64例患者(86%)的房颤得到控制(治愈或房颤发作减少90%)。“高危”特征如左心房扩大、持续性房颤或二尖瓣反流并不能预测重复肺静脉隔离术的失败。
选择性肺静脉隔离术后房颤复发绝大多数与肺静脉电重新连接有关。对于初次肺静脉隔离术失败的患者,不进行线性消融的重复肺静脉隔离术可有效治疗房颤复发,且与临床特征无关。