Suppr超能文献

解剖学与生理学指导下的持续性心房颤动消融术

Anatomy Versus Physiology-Guided Ablation for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation.

作者信息

Deshmukh Abhishek, Zhong Li, Slusser Joshua, Xiao Peilin, Zhang Pei, Hodge David, Hocini Mélèze, McLeod Christopher, Bradley David, Munger Thomas, Packer Douglas, Cha Yong-Mei

机构信息

Department of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.

Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.

出版信息

J Atr Fibrillation. 2020 Apr 30;12(6):2280. doi: 10.4022/jafib.2280. eCollection 2020 Apr-May.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary vein isolation remains the cornerstone of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. However, due to high recurrence rates, especially in patients with persistent AF, PV antral isolation, complemented by linear ablation, autonomic modulation, and ablation of complex fractionated electrograms, have been attempted to increase the odds of success. However, the optimum approach for a complementary strategy in addition to PVI for persistent AF is unknown.

METHODS

We performed a prospective randomized trial by assigning 92 patients with persistent AF in 1:1 ratio to pulmonary-vein isolation plus ablation of electrograms showing complex fractionated activity (45 patients), or pulmonary-vein isolation plus additional linear ablation across the left atrial roof and mitral valve isthmus (47 patients). The duration of follow-up was five years. The primary endpoint was freedom from any documented recurrence of atrial fibrillation after a single ablation procedure.

RESULTS

At a 12-month follow-up, 9 (23%) patients had AF recurrence in the linear ablation and 8 (21%) patients in the CFAE groups. At a mean follow-up duration of 59±36 months, 48.3% of patients in the linear ablation group and 44.6% of patients in the CFAE group were free from AF (p=0.403). There were no significant differences between the two groups for independent predictors of freedom from AF. The overall procedure time and radiation exposure were higher in the PVI+linear ablation group. There were five adverse events noted, two in the linear group (pericardial effusion not requiring drain) and 3 in the CFAE group (1 pseudoaneurysm, one effusion requiring pericardiocentesis and one effusion nor requiring drain).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with persistent atrial fibrillation, we found no difference in maintenance of sinus rhythm in either linear ablation or ablation of complex fractionated electrograms was performed in addition to pulmonary vein isolation in short- and long-term follow-up.

摘要

背景

肺静脉隔离仍是房颤(AF)消融的基石。然而,由于复发率高,尤其是在持续性房颤患者中,已尝试采用肺静脉前庭隔离,并辅以线性消融、自主神经调节和碎裂电位消融,以提高成功几率。然而,除肺静脉隔离外,用于持续性房颤的补充策略的最佳方法尚不清楚。

方法

我们进行了一项前瞻性随机试验,将92例持续性房颤患者按1:1比例分配至肺静脉隔离加碎裂电位消融组(45例患者)或肺静脉隔离加经左心房顶部和二尖瓣峡部的额外线性消融组(47例患者)。随访时间为五年。主要终点是单次消融术后无房颤复发的记录。

结果

在12个月的随访中,线性消融组有9例(23%)患者房颤复发,碎裂电位消融组有8例(21%)患者复发。在平均随访时间59±36个月时,线性消融组48.3%的患者和碎裂电位消融组44.6%的患者无房颤(p = 0.403)。两组在无房颤的独立预测因素方面无显著差异。肺静脉隔离加线性消融组的总手术时间和辐射暴露更高。记录到5例不良事件,线性消融组2例(心包积液,无需引流),碎裂电位消融组3例(1例假性动脉瘤、1例需要心包穿刺引流的积液和1例无需引流的心包积液)。

结论

在持续性房颤患者中,我们发现在短期和长期随访中,除肺静脉隔离外,进行线性消融或碎裂电位消融在维持窦性心律方面无差异。

相似文献

1
Anatomy Versus Physiology-Guided Ablation for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation.解剖学与生理学指导下的持续性心房颤动消融术
J Atr Fibrillation. 2020 Apr 30;12(6):2280. doi: 10.4022/jafib.2280. eCollection 2020 Apr-May.

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验