Suppr超能文献

比较灌注式射频导管消融与冷冻球囊联合导管消融治疗持续性心房颤动的安全性和有效性。

Comparing Safety and Efficacy of Irrigated Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation Versus Combined Cryoballoon and Catheter Ablation for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation.

作者信息

Kosmidou Ioanna, Sumayin Kyari, Deering Thomas, Wickliffe Andrew, Kanitpudi Sricharan, Prater Stephen, Dan Dan

机构信息

Piedmont Heart Institute, Atlanta, GA.

出版信息

J Atr Fibrillation. 2013 Oct 31;6(3):924. doi: 10.4022/jafib.924. eCollection 2013 Oct-Nov.

Abstract

Catheter and cryoballoon ablation are established treatments for atrial fibrillation. Frequently, substrate modification of the left atrium is performed in patients with persistent AF or evidence of left atrial adverse remodeling. We compared one year outcomes of AF ablation with substrate modification utilizing radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFA) compared to a combination of cryoballoon ablation with radiofrequency catheter ablation (HAFA). Ablation for persistent AF was performed using stand-alone catheter ablation (RFA group, n=31) or cryoballoon for pulmonary vein isolation with RFA catheter ablation for substrate modification (HAFA group, n=21) and procedural and clinical outcomes were analyzed. Pulmonary vein isolation and LA substrate modification including creation of left atrial ablation lines and/or CFAEs was performed in all patients. Patients were followed for up to one year. A three- month blinding window was applied for analysis. Clinical characteristics were similar between groups. Total procedure (244.15±64.7 vs 235.5±54.6, p=0.6) and fluoroscopy time (37±15.4 vs 29.5±15.7, p=0.96) were not different between the HAFA and RFA groups, respectively. Periprocedural complications were similar among groups. AF free survival was not significantly different between Combined cryoballoon and catheter ablation for LA substrate modification (HAFA) has similar safety and efficacy compared to stand-alone catheter ablation for persistent AF. Recurrent atrial flutter is more frequently observed after cryoballoon ablation for persistent AF.

摘要

导管消融和冷冻球囊消融是已确立的房颤治疗方法。对于持续性房颤或存在左心房不良重塑证据的患者,常进行左心房基质改良。我们比较了利用射频导管消融(RFA)进行基质改良的房颤消融与冷冻球囊消融联合射频导管消融(HAFA)的一年结局。对持续性房颤进行消融时,采用单纯导管消融(RFA组,n = 31)或冷冻球囊进行肺静脉隔离并联合RFA导管消融进行基质改良(HAFA组,n = 21),并分析手术及临床结局。所有患者均进行肺静脉隔离和左心房基质改良,包括创建左心房消融线和/或碎裂电位。对患者随访长达一年。分析时采用三个月的盲法观察期。两组间临床特征相似。HAFA组和RFA组的总手术时间(244.15±64.7 vs 235.5±54.6,p = 0.6)和透视时间(37±15.4 vs 29.5±15.7,p = 0.96)分别无差异。围手术期并发症在各组间相似。与单纯导管消融治疗持续性房颤相比,联合冷冻球囊和导管消融进行左心房基质改良(HAFA)具有相似的安全性和有效性。冷冻球囊消融治疗持续性房颤后更常观察到复发性房扑。

相似文献

2

本文引用的文献

3
Cryoballoon ablation for atrial fibrillation.冷冻球囊消融治疗心房颤动
Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J. 2012 Mar;12(2):39-53. doi: 10.1016/s0972-6292(16)30479-x. Epub 2012 Apr 30.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验