Duke Clinical Research Institute (Z.L., D.N.H., R.A.M., J.P.P.), Duke University Medical Center.
Division of Cardiology (Z.L., J.P.P.), Duke University Medical Center.
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2020 Sep;13(9):e007944. doi: 10.1161/CIRCEP.119.007944. Epub 2020 Jul 23.
Catheter ablation is an increasingly used treatment for symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF). However, there are limited prospective, nationwide data on patient selection and procedural characteristics. This study describes patient characteristics, techniques, treatment patterns, and safety outcomes of patients undergoing AF ablation.
A total of 3139 patients undergoing AF ablation between 2016 and 2018 in the Get With The Guidelines-Atrial Fibrillation registry from 24 US centers were included. Patient demographics, medical history, procedural details, and complications were abstracted. Differences between paroxysmal and patients with persistent AF were compared using Pearson χ and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests.
Patients undergoing AF ablation were predominantly male (63.9%) and White (93.2%) with a median age of 65. Hypertension was the most common comorbidity (67.6%), and patients with persistent AF had more comorbidities than patients with paroxysmal AF. Drug refractory, paroxysmal AF was the most common ablation indication (class I, 53.6%) followed by drug refractory, persistent AF (class I, 41.8%). Radiofrequency ablation with contact force sensing was the most common ablation modality (70.5%); 23.7% of patients underwent cryoballoon ablation. Pulmonary vein isolation was performed in 94.6% of de novo ablations; the most common adjunctive lesions included left atrial roof or posterior/inferior lines, and cavotricuspid isthmus ablation. Complications were uncommon (5.1%) and were life-threatening in 0.7% of cases.
More than 98% of AF ablations among participating sites are performed for class I or class IIA indications. Contact force-guided radiofrequency ablation is the dominant technique and pulmonary vein isolation the principal lesion set. In-hospital complications are uncommon and rarely life-threatening.
导管消融术是治疗有症状的心房颤动(房颤)的一种越来越常用的治疗方法。然而,关于患者选择和程序特征的前瞻性全国性数据有限。本研究描述了在 24 个美国中心的指南指导下的房颤注册研究(Get With The Guidelines-Atrial Fibrillation registry)中接受房颤消融的患者的特征、技术、治疗模式和安全性结局。
共纳入 2016 年至 2018 年期间在 24 个美国中心的指南指导下的房颤注册研究中接受房颤消融的 3139 名患者。提取患者人口统计学、病史、程序细节和并发症。使用 Pearson χ 和 Wilcoxon 秩和检验比较阵发性和持续性房颤患者之间的差异。
接受房颤消融的患者主要为男性(63.9%)和白人(93.2%),中位年龄为 65 岁。最常见的合并症是高血压(67.6%),持续性房颤患者比阵发性房颤患者有更多的合并症。药物难治性、阵发性房颤是最常见的消融适应证(I 类,53.6%),其次是药物难治性、持续性房颤(I 类,41.8%)。射频消融联合接触力感应是最常见的消融方式(70.5%);23.7%的患者接受冷冻球囊消融。94.6%的新消融术进行了肺静脉隔离;最常见的附加病变包括左心房顶或后/下线和三尖瓣峡部消融。并发症少见(5.1%),有 0.7%的病例危及生命。
参与中心进行的房颤消融术 98%以上是为 I 类或 IIA 类适应证。接触力引导的射频消融是主要技术,肺静脉隔离是主要的病变部位。住院期间并发症少见,很少危及生命。