University Heart Center Lübeck, Medical Clinic II (Cardiology/Angiology/Intensive Care Medicine), University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein.
Department of Cardiology - Electrophysiology, University Heart Center Hamburg, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf.
Circ J. 2018 Oct 25;82(11):2722-2727. doi: 10.1253/circj.CJ-18-0361. Epub 2018 Sep 8.
Key determinants for lesion formation in catheter ablation are contact force, radiofrequency (RF) power and time. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical applicability of ablation index (AI), a novel non-linear formula based on these components, and to compare AI with the conventional linear force-time interval (FTI) in pulmonary vein isolation (PVI).
Target AI ranges were defined for anatomical segments of the ipsilateral pulmonary veins. The operator was blinded to AI during PVI for the initial 11 patients (group A), and was unblinded for the remaining 23 patients (group B). We assessed (1) the clinical value of AI to avoid excessively high and low values with an operator blinded vs. non-blinded to AI; and (2) the relation of AI and FTI in predefined ranges. In group A, 235/564 lesions (41.7%) were in the predefined target range as compared with 1,171/1,412 lesions (82.9%) in group B (P<0.001). A given AI may correspond to a wide range of FTI, as reflected by a quartile coefficient of dispersion for AI of 0.11 vs. a quartile coefficient of dispersion for FTI of 0.36.
Incorporating RF current power, the non-linear AI provides more comprehensive information during PVI compared with FTI. Given that the FTI for a given AI varies widely, the value of FTI in clinical practice is questionable.
导管消融中病灶形成的关键决定因素是接触力、射频(RF)功率和时间。本研究旨在评估基于这些因素的新型非线性公式消融指数(AI)的临床适用性,并将其与肺静脉隔离(PVI)中的传统线性力-时间间隔(FTI)进行比较。
为肺静脉同侧的解剖节段定义了目标 AI 范围。在最初的 11 名患者(A 组)中,操作者在 PVI 期间对 AI 进行盲法处理,而在其余 23 名患者(B 组)中则对 AI 进行非盲法处理。我们评估了(1)AI 避免过高和过低值的临床价值,以及操作者对 AI 进行盲法和非盲法处理时;(2)AI 和 FTI 在预设范围内的关系。在 A 组中,与 B 组的 1,171/1,412 个病灶(82.9%)相比,235/564 个病灶(41.7%)位于预设目标范围内(P<0.001)。给定的 AI 可能对应于广泛的 FTI 范围,这反映在 AI 的四分位系数离散度为 0.11,而 FTI 的四分位系数离散度为 0.36。
与 FTI 相比,纳入 RF 电流功率的非线性 AI 在 PVI 期间提供了更全面的信息。鉴于给定 AI 的 FTI 变化很大,FTI 在临床实践中的价值值得怀疑。