Mujović Nebojša, Marinković Milan, Lenarczyk Radoslaw, Tilz Roland, Potpara Tatjana S
Cardiology Clinic, Clinical Center of Serbia, Višegradska 26, Belgrade, Serbia.
School of Medicine, University of Belgrade, Dr Subotića 8, Belgrade, Serbia.
Adv Ther. 2017 Aug;34(8):1897-1917. doi: 10.1007/s12325-017-0590-z. Epub 2017 Jul 21.
Catheter ablation (CA) of atrial fibrillation (AF) is currently one of the most commonly performed electrophysiology procedures. Ablation of paroxysmal AF is based on the elimination of triggers by pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), while different strategies for additional AF substrate modification on top of PVI have been proposed for ablation of persistent AF. Nowadays, various technologies for AF ablation are available. The radiofrequency point-by-point ablation navigated by electro-anatomical mapping system and cryo-balloon technology are comparable in terms of the efficacy and safety of the PVI procedure. Long-term success of AF ablation including multiple procedures varies from 50 to 80%. Arrhythmia recurrences commonly occur, mostly due to PV reconnection. The recurrences are particularly common in patients with non-paroxysmal AF, dilated left atrium and the "early recurrence" of AF within the first 2-3 post-procedural months. In addition, this complex procedure can be accompanied by serious complications, such as cardiac tamponade, stroke, atrio-esophageal fistula and PV stenosis. Therefore, CA represents a second-line treatment option after a trial of antiarrhythmic drug(s). Good candidates for the procedure are relatively younger patients with symptomatic and frequent episodes of AF, with no significant structural heart disease and no significant left atrial enlargement. Randomized trials demonstrated the superiority of ablation compared to antiarrhythmic drugs in terms of improving the quality of life and symptoms in AF patients. However, nonrandomized studies reported additional clinical benefits from ablation over drug therapy in selected AF patients, such as the reduction of the mortality and stroke rates and the recovery of tachyarrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy. Future research should enable the creation of more durable ablative lesions and the selection of the optimal lesion set in each patient according to the degree of atrial remodeling. This could provide better long-term CA success and expand indications for the procedure, especially among the patients with non-paroxysmal AF.
心房颤动(AF)导管消融(CA)是目前最常用的电生理手术之一。阵发性房颤的消融基于通过肺静脉隔离(PVI)消除触发因素,而对于持续性房颤的消融,在PVI基础上提出了不同的附加房颤基质改良策略。如今,有多种用于房颤消融的技术。在PVI手术的有效性和安全性方面,由电解剖标测系统引导的射频逐点消融和冷冻球囊技术相当。包括多次手术在内的房颤消融长期成功率在50%至80%之间。心律失常复发很常见,主要是由于肺静脉重新连接。复发在非阵发性房颤、左心房扩大以及术后头2至3个月内房颤“早期复发”的患者中尤为常见。此外,这种复杂手术可能伴有严重并发症,如心脏压塞、中风、心房食管瘘和肺静脉狭窄。因此,CA是在试用抗心律失常药物后的二线治疗选择。该手术的良好候选者是相对年轻、有症状且房颤发作频繁、无明显结构性心脏病且无明显左心房扩大的患者。随机试验表明,与抗心律失常药物相比,消融在改善房颤患者生活质量和症状方面具有优势。然而,非随机研究报告称,在选定的房颤患者中,消融比药物治疗还有额外的临床益处,如降低死亡率和中风发生率以及使快速心律失常性心肌病恢复。未来的研究应能够创建更持久的消融灶,并根据心房重塑程度为每位患者选择最佳的病灶组合。这可以提供更好的CA长期成功率,并扩大该手术的适应症,特别是在非阵发性房颤患者中。