Higuchi Satoshi, Sohara Hiroshi, Nakamura Yoshinori, Ihara Minoru, Yamaguchi Yoshio, Shoda Morio, Hagiwara Nobuhisa, Satake Shutaro
The Heart Rhythm Center, Hayama Heart Center, 1898-1 Shimoyamaguchi, Hayama-cho, Miura-gun, Kanagawa 240-0116, Japan.
Department of Cardiology, Tokyo Women׳s Medical University, 8-1, Kawada-cho, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 162-8666, Japan.
J Arrhythm. 2016 Jun;32(3):198-203. doi: 10.1016/j.joa.2016.02.002. Epub 2016 Mar 15.
Catheter ablation of non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (non-PAF) is a therapeutic challenge especially in elderly patients. This study describes the feasibility of a posterior left atrium isolation as a substrate modification in addition to pulmonary vein isolation, the so-called Box isolation, for elderly patients with non-PAF.
Two hundred twenty-nine consecutive patients who underwent Box isolations for drug-refractory non-PAF were divided into two groups according to their age; younger group comprising 175 patients aged <75 years and elderly group comprising 54 patients aged ≥75 years.
During 23.7±12.0 months of follow-up, the arrhythmia-free rates after one procedure were 53.1% in younger group versus 48.1% in elderly group (p=0.50). Following the second procedure, all patients had electrical conduction recoveries along the initial Box lesion. However, a complete Box re-isolation was highly established in both age groups (87.1% vs. 92.9%, respectively; p=1.00). Recurrence of macro-reentrant atrial tachycardia was mainly associated with the gaps through the initial Box lesion in both age groups (25.8% vs. 21.4%, p=1.00), but typical cavo-tricuspid isthmus (CTI) dependent atrial flutter was significantly observed in the elderly patients' group only (all events were observed within 6 months after the initial procedure; 3.2% vs. 28.6%, p=0.009). After two procedures, the arrhythmia-free rates increased to 73.1% in younger group versus 66.7% in elderly group (p=0.38). The occurrence rate of procedural-related complications did not differ between the two age groups, and there were no life-threatening complications even in elderly patients.
Box isolation of non-PAF is effective and safe even in elderly patients. A prophylactic CTI ablation combined with Box isolation might be feasible to improve the long-term outcome.
非阵发性心房颤动(非PAF)的导管消融是一项治疗挑战,尤其在老年患者中。本研究描述了对于非PAF老年患者,除肺静脉隔离外,进行左心房后壁隔离作为基质改良(即所谓的“Box隔离”)的可行性。
连续229例因药物难治性非PAF接受Box隔离的患者根据年龄分为两组;较年轻组包括175例年龄<75岁的患者,老年组包括54例年龄≥75岁的患者。
在23.7±12.0个月的随访期间,初次手术后无心律失常发生率在较年轻组为53.1%,老年组为48.1%(p = 0.50)。第二次手术后,所有患者沿最初的Box损伤处均有电传导恢复。然而,在两个年龄组中均高度确立了完全的Box再次隔离(分别为87.1%和92.9%;p = 1.00)。两个年龄组中,大折返性房性心动过速的复发主要与最初Box损伤处的间隙有关(25.8%对21.4%,p = 1.00),但仅在老年患者组中显著观察到典型的腔静脉-三尖瓣峡部(CTI)依赖性房扑(所有事件均在初次手术后6个月内观察到;3.2%对28.6%,p = 0.009)。两次手术后,无心律失常发生率在较年轻组升至73.1%,老年组为66.7%(p = 0.38)。两个年龄组之间手术相关并发症的发生率无差异,即使在老年患者中也没有危及生命的并发症。
非PAF的Box隔离即使在老年患者中也是有效且安全的。预防性CTI消融联合Box隔离可能对改善长期结局是可行的。