Bulava Alan, Haniš Jiří, Sitek David, Ošmera Ondřej, Karpianus Dan, Snorek Michal, Rehoušková Kateřina, Toušek František, Pešl Ladislav
Heart and Vascular Centre, České Budějovice Hospital, České Budějovice, Czech Republic.
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2010 Sep;33(9):1039-46. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.2010.02807.x.
Catheter ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation is widely used for patients with drug-refractory paroxysms of arrhythmia. Recently, novel technologies have been introduced to the market that aim to simplify and shorten the procedure.
To compare the clinical outcome of pulmonary vein (PV) isolation using a multipolar circular ablation catheter (PVAC group), with point-by-point PV isolation using an irrigated-tip ablation catheter and the CARTO mapping system (CARTO group; CARTO, Biosense Webster, Diamond Bar, CA, USA).
Patients with documented PAF were randomized to undergo PV isolation using PVAC or CARTO. Atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrences were documented by serial 7-day Holter monitoring.
One hundred and two patients (mean age 58 ± 11 years, 68 men) were included in the study. The patients had comparable baseline clinical characteristics, including left atrial dimensions and left ventricular ejection fraction, in both study arms (PVAC: n = 51 and CARTO: n = 51). Total procedural and fluoroscopic times were significantly shorter in the PVAC group (107 ± 31 minutes vs 208 ± 46 minutes, P < 0.0001 and 16 ± 5 minutes vs 28 ± 8 minutes, P < 0.0001, respectively). The AF recurrence was documented in 23% and 29% of patients in the PVAC and CARTO groups, respectively (P = 0.8), during the mean follow-up of 200 ± 13 days. No serious complications were noted in both study groups.
Clinical success rates of PV isolation are similar when using multipolar circular PV ablation catheter and point-by-point ablation with a three-dimensional (3D) navigation system in patients with PAF, and results in shorter procedural and fluoroscopic times with a comparable safety profile.
导管消融术用于治疗药物难治性阵发性心律失常患者,在阵发性心房颤动治疗中广泛应用。近来,一些旨在简化和缩短手术过程的新技术已投放市场。
比较使用多极环形消融导管进行肺静脉隔离的临床效果(肺静脉消融导管组),与使用灌注式消融导管及CARTO标测系统逐点进行肺静脉隔离的效果(CARTO组;CARTO,美国加利福尼亚州钻石吧市Biosense Webster公司)。
记录有阵发性房颤的患者被随机分配接受使用肺静脉消融导管或CARTO进行肺静脉隔离。通过连续7天的动态心电图监测记录房颤复发情况。
102例患者(平均年龄58±11岁,男性68例)纳入研究。两个研究组(肺静脉消融导管组:n = 51;CARTO组:n = 51)患者的基线临床特征具有可比性,包括左心房大小和左心室射血分数。肺静脉消融导管组的总手术时间和透视时间明显更短(分别为107±31分钟对208±46分钟,P < 0.0001;16±5分钟对28±8分钟,P < 0.0001)。在平均200±13天的随访期间,肺静脉消融导管组和CARTO组分别有23%和29%的患者记录到房颤复发(P = 0.8)。两个研究组均未发现严重并发症。
对于阵发性房颤患者,使用多极环形肺静脉消融导管和使用三维(3D)导航系统逐点消融进行肺静脉隔离的临床成功率相似,且手术时间和透视时间更短,安全性相当。