Lee Wei-Chieh, Fang Hsiu-Yu, Chen Huang-Chung, Chen Yung-Lung, Tsai Tzu-Hsien, Pan Kuo-Li, Lin Yu-Sheng, Chen Mien-Cheng
Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Institute of Clinical Medicine, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan.
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2019 Nov;42(11):1421-1428. doi: 10.1111/pace.13799. Epub 2019 Sep 23.
Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is an effective procedure for atrial fibrillation (AF). The role of additional cavotricuspid isthmus (CTI) block ablation remains controversial in AF patients without atrial flutter (AFL). Therefore, this study aimed to explore the clinical outcome of additional CTI block ablation in patients without AFL.
Between January 2013 and December 2017, a total of 139 patients who did not have documented AFL and who underwent catheter ablation for AF were recruited. Fifty-seven patients were classified in additional CTI block ablation group and 82 patients were classified in without CTI group. The incidence of early-onset and late-onset atrial arrhythmia recurrence was compared between the two groups.
The additional CTI group had a higher prevalence of persistent or long-standing AF and larger left atrial volume. The additional CTI group had a higher incidence of late-onset atrial arrhythmia recurrence (38.6% vs 12.2%; P < .001). When compared to without CTI group, additional CTI therapy did not have a better outcome in terms of freedom of atrial arrhythmia in subgroup analysis. The incidence of early-onset and late-onset atrial arrhythmia recurrence did not differ between additional CTI group and without CTI group in paroxysmal AF patients and nonparoxysmal AF patients after propensity scoring matching.
CTI block ablation in addition to PVI for AF patients without a history of AFL or inducible AFL during ablation may not improve the clinical outcome of AF ablation in the patients with larger LA volume, nonparoxysmal AF, or post-PVI inducible AF.
肺静脉隔离术(PVI)是治疗心房颤动(AF)的一种有效方法。对于没有心房扑动(AFL)的AF患者,额外进行三尖瓣峡部(CTI)阻滞消融的作用仍存在争议。因此,本研究旨在探讨在没有AFL的患者中额外进行CTI阻滞消融的临床结果。
在2013年1月至2017年12月期间,共招募了139例没有记录到AFL且接受AF导管消融的患者。57例患者被分类为额外CTI阻滞消融组,82例患者被分类为无CTI组。比较两组早期和晚期房性心律失常复发的发生率。
额外CTI组持续性或长期AF的患病率更高,左心房容积更大。额外CTI组晚期房性心律失常复发的发生率更高(38.6%对12.2%;P<0.001)。在亚组分析中,与无CTI组相比,额外CTI治疗在房性心律失常自由度方面没有更好的结果。在倾向评分匹配后,阵发性AF患者和非阵发性AF患者的额外CTI组与无CTI组之间早期和晚期房性心律失常复发的发生率没有差异。
对于没有AFL病史或在消融期间不能诱发AFL的AF患者,在PVI基础上进行CTI阻滞消融可能无法改善左心房容积较大、非阵发性AF或PVI后可诱发AF患者的AF消融临床结果。