Nührich Jana Mareike, Steven Daniel, Berner Imke, Rostock Thomas, Hoffmann Boris, Servatius Helge, Sultan Arian, Lüker Jakob, Treszl András, Wegscheider Karl, Willems Stephan
Department of Electrophysiology, University Heart Center, University Hospital Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Department of Electrophysiology, University Heart Center, University Hospital Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Heart Rhythm. 2014 Sep;11(9):1536-42. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2014.06.002. Epub 2014 Jun 4.
Single procedure success rates of pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) are still unsatisfactory. In patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (AF), ablation of complex fractionated atrial electrograms (CFAEs) after PVI results in improved outcomes.
We aimed to investigate if PAF-patients with intraprocedurally sustained AF after PVI might benefit from additional CFAE ablation.
A total of 1134 consecutive patients underwent a first catheter ablation procedure of PAF between June 2008 and December 2012. In most patients, AF was either not inducible or terminated during PVI. In 68 patients (6%), AF sustained after successful PVI. These patients were randomized to either cardioversion (PVI-alone group; n = 33) or additional CFAE ablation (PVI+CFAE group; n = 35) and followed up every 1-3 months and serial Holter recordings were also obtained. The primary end point was the recurrence of AF/atrial tachycardia (AT) after a blanking period of 3 months.
Procedure duration (127 ± 6 minutes vs 174 ± 10 minutes), radiofrequency application time (44 ± 3 minutes vs 74 ± 5 minutes), and fluoroscopy time (26 ± 2 minutes vs 41 ± 3 minutes) were longer in the PVI+CFAE group (all P < .001). In 30 of 35 patients (86%) in the PVI+CFAE group, ablation terminated AF. There was no significant group difference with respect to freedom from AF/AT (22 of 33 [67%] vs 22 of 35 [63%]; P = .66). Subsequently, 10 of 11 patients in the PVI-alone group (91%) and 11 of 13 patients in PVI+CFAE group (85%) underwent repeat ablation (P = 1.00). Overall, 29 of 33 [88%] vs 30 of 35 [86%] patients (P = 1.00) were free from AF/AT after 1.4 ± 0.1 vs 1.4 ± 0.2 (P = .87) procedures.
Patients with sustained AF after PVI in a PAF cohort are rare. Regarding AF/AT recurrence, these patients did not benefit from further CFAE ablation compared to PVI alone, but are exposed to longer procedure duration, fluoroscopy time, and radiofrequency application time.
阵发性心房颤动(PAF)患者肺静脉隔离(PVI)的单次手术成功率仍不尽人意。在持续性心房颤动(AF)患者中,PVI后消融碎裂心房电图(CFAE)可改善治疗结果。
我们旨在研究PVI后术中出现持续性AF的PAF患者是否能从额外的CFAE消融中获益。
2008年6月至2012年12月期间,共有1134例连续患者接受了首次PAF导管消融手术。大多数患者在PVI期间AF不能被诱发或终止。68例患者(6%)在成功的PVI后AF仍持续。这些患者被随机分为复律组(单纯PVI组;n = 33)或额外CFAE消融组(PVI + CFAE组;n = 35),每1 - 3个月进行随访,并进行连续动态心电图记录。主要终点是3个月空白期后AF/房性心动过速(AT)的复发情况。
PVI + CFAE组的手术时间(127±6分钟 vs 174 ± 10分钟)、射频应用时间(44 ± 3分钟 vs 74 ± 5分钟)和透视时间(26 ± 2分钟 vs 41 ± 3分钟)更长(均P <.001)。PVI + CFAE组35例患者中的30例(86%)消融终止了AF。在AF/AT复发方面,两组无显著差异(33例中的22例[67%] vs 35例中的22例[63%];P = 0.66)。随后,单纯PVI组11例患者中的10例(91%)和PVI + CFAE组13例患者中的11例(85%)接受了再次消融(P = 1.00)。总体而言,33例中的29例[88%] vs 35例中的30例[86%]患者在1.4 ± 0.1次 vs 1.4 ± 0.2次(P = 0.87)手术后无AF/AT发作。
PAF队列中PVI后出现持续性AF的患者很少见。关于AF/AT复发,与单纯PVI相比,这些患者未从进一步的CFAE消融中获益,但手术时间、透视时间和射频应用时间更长。