Aryana Arash, Gearoid O'Neill P, Gregory David, Scotti Dennis, Bailey Sean, Brunton Scott, Chang Michael, d'Avila André
Regional Cardiology Associates, Sacramento, California; Mercy Heart & Vascular Institute, Sacramento, California.
Regional Cardiology Associates, Sacramento, California; Mercy Heart & Vascular Institute, Sacramento, California.
Heart Rhythm. 2014 Jul;11(7):1122-30. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2014.04.018. Epub 2014 Apr 13.
Hemodynamic support using percutaneous left ventricular assist devices (pLVADs) during catheter mapping and ablation of unstable ventricular tachycardia (VT) can provide effective end-organ perfusion. However, its effect on procedural and clinical outcomes remains unclear.
To retrospectively evaluate the procedural and clinical outcomes after the catheter ablation of unstable VT with and without pLVAD support.
Sixty-eight consecutive unstable, scar-mediated endocardial and/or epicardial VT ablation procedures performed in 63 patients were evaluated. During VT mapping and ablation, hemodynamic support was provided by intravenous inotropes with a pLVAD (n = 34) or without a pLVAD (control; n = 34).
Baseline patient characteristics were similar. VT was sustained longer with a pLVAD (27.4 ± 18.7 minutes) than without a pLVAD (5.3 ± 3.6 minutes) (P < .001). A higher number of VTs were terminated during ablation with a pLVAD (1.2 ± 0.9 per procedure) than without a pLVAD (0.4 ± 0.6 per procedure) (P < .001). Total radiofrequency ablation time was shorter with a pLVAD (53 ± 30 minutes) than without a pLVAD (68 ± 33 minutes) (P = .022), but with similar procedural success rates (71% for both pLVAD and control groups; P = 1.000). Although during 19 ± 12 months of follow-up VT recurrence did not differ between pLVAD (26%) and control (41%) groups (P = .305), the composite end point of 30-day rehospitalization, redo-VT ablation, recurrent implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapies, and 3-month mortality was lower with a pLVAD (12%) than without a pLVAD (35%) (P = .043).
In this nonrandomized retrospective study, catheter ablation of unstable VT supported by a pLVAD was associated with shorter ablation times and reduced hospital length of stay. While pLVAD support did not affect VT recurrence, it was associated with a lower composite end point of 30-day rehospitalization, redo-VT ablation, recurrent implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapies, and 3-month mortality.
在不稳定室性心动过速(VT)的导管标测和消融过程中,使用经皮左心室辅助装置(pLVAD)进行血流动力学支持可提供有效的终末器官灌注。然而,其对手术和临床结局的影响仍不清楚。
回顾性评估在有和没有pLVAD支持的情况下,不稳定VT导管消融后的手术和临床结局。
对63例患者连续进行的68例不稳定、瘢痕介导的心内膜和/或心外膜VT消融手术进行了评估。在VT标测和消融过程中,通过静脉使用血管活性药物并联合pLVAD(n = 34)或不使用pLVAD(对照组;n = 34)提供血流动力学支持。
基线患者特征相似。使用pLVAD时VT持续时间(27.4±18.7分钟)比不使用pLVAD时(5.3±3.6分钟)更长(P <.001)。使用pLVAD消融期间终止的VT数量(每次手术1.2±0.9个)比不使用pLVAD时(每次手术0.4±0.6个)更多(P <.001)。使用pLVAD时总的射频消融时间(53±30分钟)比不使用pLVAD时(68±33分钟)更短(P =.022),但手术成功率相似(pLVAD组和对照组均为71%;P = 1.000)。尽管在19±12个月的随访期间,pLVAD组(26%)和对照组(41%)的VT复发率无差异(P =.305),但pLVAD组(12%)的30天再住院、再次VT消融、复发性植入式心律转复除颤器治疗和3个月死亡率的复合终点低于不使用pLVAD组(35%)(P =.043)。
在这项非随机回顾性研究中,pLVAD支持下的不稳定VT导管消融与更短的消融时间和缩短的住院时间相关。虽然pLVAD支持不影响VT复发,但它与30天再住院、再次VT消融、复发性植入式心律转复除颤器治疗和3个月死亡率的较低复合终点相关。