Division of Cardiology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois.
Division of Cardiology, UCLA Cardiac Arrhythmia Center, Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2020 Jul;31(7):1608-1615. doi: 10.1111/jce.14546. Epub 2020 Jun 4.
Although balloon-based techniques, such as the laser balloon (LB) ablation have simplified pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), procedural fluoroscopy usage remains higher in comparison to radiofrequency PVI approaches due to limited 3-dimensional mapping system integration.
In this prospective study, 50 consecutive patients were randomly assigned in alternating fashion to a low fluoroscopy group (LFG; n = 25) or conventional fluoroscopy group (CFG; n = 25) and underwent de novo PVI procedures using visually guided LB technique.
There was no statistical difference in baseline characteristics or cross-overs between treatment groups. Acute PVI was accomplished in all patients. Mean follow up was 318 ± 69 days. Clinical recurrence of atrial fibrillation after PVI was similar between groups (CFG: 19% vs LFG: 15%; P = .72). Total fluoroscopy time was significantly lower in the LFG than the CFG (1.7 ± 1.4 vs 16.9 ± 5.9 minutes; P < .001) despite similar total procedure duration (143 ± 22 vs 148 ± 22 minutes; P = .42) and mean LA dwell time (63 ± 15 vs 59 ± 10 minutes; P = .28). Mean dose area product was significantly lower in the LFG (181 ± 125 vs 1980 ± 750 μGym ; P < .001). Fluoroscopy usage after transseptal access was substantially lower in the LFG (0.63 ± 0.43 vs 11.70 ± 4.32 minutes; P < .001). Complications rates were similar between both groups (4% vs 2%; P = .57).
This study demonstrates that LB PVI can be safely achieved using a novel low fluoroscopy protocol while also substantially reducing fluoroscopy usage and radiation exposure in comparison to conventional approaches for LB ablation.
虽然基于球囊的技术(如激光球囊消融术)简化了肺静脉隔离(PVI),但由于 3 维映射系统的整合有限,与射频 PVI 方法相比,其程序透视使用率仍然更高。
在这项前瞻性研究中,50 例连续患者被交替随机分配至低透视组(LFG;n=25)或常规透视组(CFG;n=25),并使用视觉引导的 LB 技术进行新的 PVI 程序。
两组间在基线特征或交叉方面无统计学差异。所有患者均成功实现急性 PVI。平均随访时间为 318±69 天。PVI 后心房颤动的临床复发率在两组间相似(CFG:19% vs LFG:15%;P=0.72)。尽管总手术时间相似(LFG:143±22 分钟 vs CFG:148±22 分钟;P=0.42),但 LFG 的透视时间明显低于 CFG(LFG:1.7±1.4 分钟 vs CFG:16.9±5.9 分钟;P<0.001)。平均左心房停留时间也相似(LFG:63±15 分钟 vs CFG:59±10 分钟;P=0.28)。LFG 的剂量面积乘积明显较低(LFG:181±125μGym vs CFG:1980±750μGym ;P<0.001)。LFG 中的经房间隔穿刺后透视使用量显著降低(LFG:0.63±0.43 分钟 vs CFG:11.70±4.32 分钟;P<0.001)。两组间并发症发生率相似(4% vs 2%;P=0.57)。
本研究表明,LB PVI 可使用新的低透视方案安全地实现,同时与 LB 消融的常规方法相比,还可显著减少透视使用和辐射暴露。