Zhang Baowei, Zhen Ya, Tao Aibin, Zhang Guohui
Department of Cardiology, The affiliated People's Hospital of Jiangsu University, 8 Dianli Road, Zhenjiang, Jiangsu, 212002, China.
J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2014 Apr;39(3):233-40. doi: 10.1007/s10840-013-9865-8. Epub 2014 Feb 20.
Several clinical trials showed inconsistent results of the effect of isolating all versus arrhythmogenic pulmonary veins (PVs) on long-term control of atrial fibrillation (AF). We hypothesized that isolation of arrhythmogenic veins had a comparable success rate to the empiric isolation of all PVs.
PUBMED, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials and nonrandomized, observational studies. The efficacy and adverse events of isolating all versus arrhythmogenic PVs were presented as risk ratio (RR) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs), and weighted mean differences and 95 % CIs were calculated to compare the procedure time and fluoroscopic time between the isolation all PVs and arrhythmogenic PVs.
Six trials with 658 patients were included in the analysis. Isolation of arrhythmogenic PVs was as efficacious as empiric isolation of all PVs in achieving long-term AF control (RR, 0.96; 95 % CI, 0.87-1.05; p = 0.36). Isolation of arrhythmogenic PVs group had shorter procedure time, fluoroscopic time and fewer adverse events than the isolation of all PVs group.
The present analysis suggests that isolation of arrhythmogenic veins had a comparable long-term success rate, shorter procedure time, fluoroscopic time, and fewer adverse events than the empiric isolation of all PVs.
多项临床试验显示,隔离所有肺静脉与隔离致心律失常性肺静脉(PVs)对心房颤动(AF)长期控制的效果结果不一致。我们假设,隔离致心律失常性静脉与经验性隔离所有PVs的成功率相当。
检索PUBMED、EMBASE和Cochrane图书馆,查找随机对照试验以及非随机观察性研究。将隔离所有PVs与隔离致心律失常性PVs的疗效和不良事件表示为风险比(RR)及95%置信区间(CIs),并计算加权平均差及95% CIs,以比较隔离所有PVs与隔离致心律失常性PVs之间的手术时间和透视时间。
分析纳入了6项试验共658例患者。在实现AF长期控制方面,隔离致心律失常性PVs与经验性隔离所有PVs同样有效(RR,0.96;95% CI,0.87 - 1.05;p = 0.36)。隔离致心律失常性PVs组的手术时间、透视时间更短,不良事件也少于隔离所有PVs组。
目前的分析表明,与经验性隔离所有PVs相比,隔离致心律失常性静脉具有相当的长期成功率、更短的手术时间和透视时间,且不良事件更少。