Suppr超能文献

多导管冷冻疗法与射频消融治疗长期持续性心房颤动的比较:一项随机临床试验。

Multi-catheter cryotherapy compared with radiofrequency ablation in long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation: a randomized clinical trial.

机构信息

Cardiology Clinical Academic Group, St. George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, St. George's University of London, Blackshaw Road, London SW17 0QT, UK.

出版信息

Europace. 2021 Mar 8;23(3):370-379. doi: 10.1093/europace/euaa289.

Abstract

AIMS

Restoring sinus rhythm (SR) by ablation alone is an endpoint used in radiofrequency (RF) ablation for long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) but not with cryotherapy. The simultaneous use of two cryotherapy catheters can improve ablation efficiency; we compared this with RF ablation in chronic persistent AF aiming for termination to SR by ablation alone.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Consecutive patients undergoing their first ablation for persistent AF of >6 months duration were screened. A total of 100 participants were randomized 1:1 to multi-catheter cryotherapy or RF. For cryotherapy, a 28-mm Arctic Front Advance was used in tandem with focal cryoablation catheters. Open-irrigated, non-force sensing catheters were used in the RF group with a 3D mapping system. Pulmonary vein (PV) isolation and non-PV triggers were targeted. Participants were followed up at 6 and 12 months, then yearly. Acute PVI was achieved in all cases. More patients in the multi-catheter cryotherapy group were restored to SR by ablation alone, with a shorter procedure duration. Sinus rhythm continued to the last available follow-up in 16/49 patients (33%) in the multi-catheter at 3.0 ± 1.6 years post-ablation and in 12/50 patients (24%) in the RF group at 4.0 ± 1.2 years post-ablation. The yearly rate of arrhythmia recurrence was similar.

CONCLUSION

Multi-catheter cryotherapy can restore SR by ablation alone in more cases and more quickly than RF ablation. Long-term success is difficult to achieve by either methods and is similar with both.

摘要

目的

在射频(RF)消融治疗慢性持续性心房颤动(AF)时,恢复窦性心律(SR)是一个终点,但在冷冻消融中并非如此。同时使用两根冷冻消融导管可以提高消融效率;我们比较了这两种方法在旨在通过消融单独终止 SR 的慢性持续性 AF 中的应用。

方法和结果

连续筛选出患有 >6 个月持续性 AF 的首次消融的患者。共有 100 名患者被随机 1:1 分为多导管冷冻治疗或 RF 组。对于冷冻治疗,使用 28-mm Arctic Front Advance 与焦点冷冻消融导管串联。RF 组使用开放式灌流、非力感导管和 3D 标测系统。肺静脉(PV)隔离和非-PV 触发是治疗靶点。参与者在 6 个月和 12 个月时进行随访,然后每年随访一次。所有患者均实现了急性 PV 隔离。在多导管冷冻治疗组中,更多的患者通过单独消融恢复为 SR,且手术时间更短。在消融后 3.0±1.6 年,多导管组 16/49 例(33%)患者窦性心律持续至最后一次可随访,RF 组 12/50 例(24%)患者窦性心律持续至最后一次可随访。两种方法的心律失常复发率相似。

结论

多导管冷冻消融在更多病例中比 RF 消融更快地单独通过消融恢复 SR。两种方法都很难实现长期成功,且成功率相似。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验