Suppr超能文献

验证一种新的基于时间到肺静脉隔离的冷冻消融剂量算法:来自 Cryo-DOSING 研究(基于评估起效时间和肺静脉隔离指导的冷冻球囊消融剂量)的结果。

Verification of a novel atrial fibrillation cryoablation dosing algorithm guided by time-to-pulmonary vein isolation: Results from the Cryo-DOSING Study (Cryoballoon-ablation DOSING Based on the Assessment of Time-to-Effect and Pulmonary Vein Isolation Guidance).

机构信息

Mercy General Hospital and Dignity Health Heart and Vascular Institute, Sacramento, California.

Florida Heart Rhythm Specialists, PLLC, Plantation, Florida.

出版信息

Heart Rhythm. 2017 Sep;14(9):1319-1325. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2017.06.020. Epub 2017 Jun 15.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

There are no recommendations on the optimal dosing for cryoablation of atrial fibrillation (Cryo-AF).

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to develop and prospectively test a Cryo-AF dosing protocol guided exclusively by time-to-pulmonary vein (PV) isolation (TT-PVI) in patients undergoing a first-time Cryo-AF.

METHODS

In this multicenter study, we examined the acute/long-term safety/efficacy of Cryo-AF using the proposed dosing algorithm (Cryo-AF; n = 355) against a conventional, nonstandardized approach (Cryo-AF; n = 400) in a nonrandomized fashion.

RESULTS

Acute PV isolation was achieved in 98.9% of patients in Cryo-AF (TT-PVI = 48 ± 16 seconds) vs 97.2% in Cryo-AF (P = .18). Cryo-AF was associated with shorter (149 ± 34 seconds vs 226 ± 46 seconds; P <.001) and fewer (1.7 ± 0.8 vs 2.9 ± 0.8; P <.001) cryoapplications, reduced overall ablation (16 ± 5 minutes vs 40 ± 14 minutes; P <.001), fluoroscopy time (13 ± 6 minutes vs 29 ± 13 minutes; P <.001), left atrial dwell time (51 ± 14 minutes vs 118 ± 25 minutes; P <.001), and total procedure time (84 ± 23 minutes vs 145 ± 49 minutes; P <.001) but similar nadir balloon temperature (-47°C ± 8°C vs -48°C ± 6°C; P = .41) and total thaw time (43 ± 27 seconds vs 45 ± 19 seconds; P = .09) as compared to Cryo-AF. Adverse events (2.0% vs 2.7%; P = .48), including persistent phrenic nerve palsy (0.6% vs 1.2%; P = .33) and 12-month freedom from all atrial arrhythmias (82.5% vs 78.3%; P = .14), were similar between Cryo-AF and Cryo-AF. However, Cryo-AF was specifically associated with fewer atypical atrial flutters/tachycardias during long-term follow-up (8.5% vs 13.5%; P = .02) as well as fewer late PV reconnections at redo procedures (5.0% vs 18.5%; P <.001).

CONCLUSION

A novel Cryo-AF dosing algorithm guided by TT-PVI can help individualize the ablation strategy and yield improved procedural endpoints and efficiency as compared to a conventional, nonstandardized approach.

摘要

背景

目前尚无关于房颤冷冻消融(Cryo-AF)最佳剂量的推荐。

目的

本研究旨在开发并前瞻性测试一种仅根据肺静脉(PV)隔离时间(TT-PVI)指导的房颤冷冻消融(Cryo-AF)剂量方案,该方案适用于首次接受房颤冷冻消融的患者。

方法

在这项多中心研究中,我们采用提出的剂量算法(Cryo-AF;n=355)对房颤冷冻消融(Cryo-AF;n=400)进行了非随机比较,以急性/长期安全性/疗效为评估指标。

结果

Cryo-AF 组中 98.9%的患者实现了急性 PV 隔离(TT-PVI=48±16 秒),而 Cryo-AF 组为 97.2%(P=0.18)。Cryo-AF 组与 Cryo-AF 组相比,冷冻消融时间更短(149±34 秒 vs 226±46 秒;P<0.001),冷冻消融应用次数更少(1.7±0.8 次 vs 2.9±0.8 次;P<0.001),总消融时间(16±5 分钟 vs 40±14 分钟;P<0.001),透视时间(13±6 分钟 vs 29±13 分钟;P<.001),左心房停留时间(51±14 分钟 vs 118±25 分钟;P<.001),总手术时间(84±23 分钟 vs 145±49 分钟;P<.001)更短,但最低球囊温度(-47°C±8°C vs -48°C±6°C;P=0.41)和总解冻时间(43±27 秒 vs 45±19 秒;P=0.09)相似。与 Cryo-AF 相比,不良事件(2.0% vs 2.7%;P=0.48),包括持续性膈神经麻痹(0.6% vs 1.2%;P=0.33)和 12 个月时所有房性心律失常的无复发率(82.5% vs 78.3%;P=0.14)相似。然而,Cryo-AF 与 Cryo-AF 相比,在长期随访中,特发性房性心动过速/房扑的发生率更低(8.5% vs 13.5%;P=0.02),在重复手术中,PV 再连接的发生率更低(5.0% vs 18.5%;P<.001)。

结论

与传统的非标准化方法相比,一种新的房颤冷冻消融剂量方案,由 TT-PVI 指导,可帮助个体化消融策略,并产生更好的手术终点和效率。

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