Department of Cardiology, Yonsei University Health System, 250 Seungsanno, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 120-752, Republic of Korea.
Heart. 2012 Mar;98(6):480-4. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2011-301107. Epub 2012 Jan 27.
Circumferential pulmonary vein isolation (CPVI) has been considered the cornerstone of radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) for atrial fibrillation (AF). However, it is unclear whether linear ablation in addition to CPVI improves clinical outcome.
Prospective randomised study to compare the efficacy of CPVI and CPVI with additional linear ablation in patients with paroxysmal AF (PAF).
University hospital.
This study enrolled 156 patients (male 76.3%, 55.8±11.5 years old (mean±SD)) who underwent RFCA for PAF.
CPVI (n=52), CPVI+roof line (CPVI+RL; n=52) and CPVI+RL+posterior inferior line (CPVI+PostBox; n=52).
Procedure time, ablation time and clinical outcome.
(1) The CPVI group showed shorter total procedure time (180.4±39.5 min vs 189.6±29.0 min and 201.7±51.7 min, respectively (mean±SD); p=0.035) and ablation time (4085.5±1384.1 s vs 5253.5±1010.9 s and 5495.0±1316.0 s, respectively; p<0.001) than the CPVI+RL and CPVI+PostBox groups. (2) During 15.6±5.0 months of follow-up, the recurrence rates 3 months after RFCA were 11.5% in CPVI, 21.2% in CPVI+RL and 19.2% in CPVI+PostBox (p=0.440). (3) The achievement rate of CPVI was 100.0%, and bidirectional block rate was 80.8% in CPVI+RL and 59.6% in CPVI+PostBox. The clinical recurrence rates with or without achieving bidirectional block were not significantly different from each other (p=0.386).
In patients with PAF, linear ablation in addition to CPVI did not improve clinical outcome, regardless of bidirectional block achievement, while it prolonged the total procedure and ablation time.
环肺静脉电隔离(CPVI)已被认为是房颤(AF)射频导管消融(RFCA)的基石。然而,CPVI 加线性消融是否能改善临床结局尚不清楚。
前瞻性随机研究比较阵发性房颤(PAF)患者 CPVI 与 CPVI 加额外线性消融的疗效。
大学医院。
这项研究纳入了 156 名患者(男性占 76.3%,55.8±11.5 岁),他们因 PAF 接受了 RFCA。
CPVI(n=52)、CPVI+房顶线(CPVI+RL;n=52)和 CPVI+房顶线+后下壁线(CPVI+PostBox;n=52)。
手术时间、消融时间和临床结果。
(1)CPVI 组的总手术时间(180.4±39.5 min 比 189.6±29.0 min 和 201.7±51.7 min,p=0.035)和消融时间(4085.5±1384.1 s 比 5253.5±1010.9 s 和 5495.0±1316.0 s,p<0.001)均短于 CPVI+RL 和 CPVI+PostBox 组。(2)在 15.6±5.0 个月的随访中,RFCA 后 3 个月的复发率分别为 CPVI 组 11.5%、CPVI+RL 组 21.2%和 CPVI+PostBox 组 19.2%(p=0.440)。(3)CPVI 的成功率为 100.0%,CPVI+RL 的双向阻滞率为 80.8%,CPVI+PostBox 的双向阻滞率为 59.6%。有或没有达到双向阻滞的临床复发率之间没有显著差异(p=0.386)。
在 PAF 患者中,CPVI 加线性消融并不能改善临床结局,无论是否达到双向阻滞,都会延长总手术和消融时间。