Suppr超能文献

单纯肺静脉隔离与碎裂电位消融和线性消融治疗持续性心房颤动的比较:EARNEST-PVI 试验。

Pulmonary vein isolation alone vs. more extensive ablation with defragmentation and linear ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation: the EARNEST-PVI trial.

机构信息

Cardiovascular Center, Sakurabashi-Watanabe Hospital, 2-4-32 Umeda, Kita-ku, Osaka 530-0001, Japan.

Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan.

出版信息

Europace. 2021 Apr 6;23(4):565-574. doi: 10.1093/europace/euaa293.

Abstract

AIMS

Previous studies could not demonstrate any benefit of more intensive ablation in addition to pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) including complex fractionated atrial electrogram (CFAE) and linear ablation for recurrence in the initial catheter ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). This study aimed to establish the non-inferiority of PVI alone to PVI plus these additional ablation strategies.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients with persistent AF who underwent an initial catheter ablation (n = 512, long-standing persistent AF; 128 cases) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either PVI alone (PVI-alone group) or PVI plus CFAE and/or linear ablation (PVI-plus group). After excluding 15 cases who did not receive procedures, we analysed 249 and 248 patients, respectively. The primary endpoint was recurrence of AF, atrial flutter, and/or atrial tachycardia, and the non-inferior margin was set at a hazard ratio of 1.43. In the PVI-plus group, 85.1% of patients had linear ablation and 15.3% CFAE ablation. After 12 months, freedom from the primary endpoint occurred in 71.3% of patients in the PVI-alone group and in 78.3% in the PVI-plus group [hazard ratio = 1.56 (95% confidence interval: 1.10-2.24), non-inferior P = 0.3062]. The procedure-related complication rates were 2.0% in the PVI-alone group and 3.6% in the PVI-plus group (P = 0.199).

CONCLUSION

This randomized trial did not establish the non-inferiority of PVI alone to PVI plus linear ablation or CFAE ablation in patients with persistent AF, but implied that the PVI plus strategy was promising to improve the clinical efficacy (NCT03514693).

摘要

目的

先前的研究未能证明除肺静脉隔离(PVI)以外的更强化消融(包括复杂碎裂心房电图(CFAE)和线性消融)对持续性心房颤动(AF)初始导管消融后的复发有任何益处。本研究旨在确定 PVI 单独与 PVI 加这些附加消融策略相比是否不劣效。

方法和结果

接受初始导管消融的持续性 AF 患者(n=512,长程持续性 AF,128 例)按 1:1 的比例随机分为 PVI 单独组(PVI-单独组)或 PVI 加 CFAE 和/或线性消融组(PVI-加组)。排除未接受手术的 15 例后,分别分析了 249 例和 248 例患者。主要终点是 AF、心房扑动和/或房性心动过速的复发,非劣效性边界设定为危险比 1.43。在 PVI-加组中,85.1%的患者进行了线性消融,15.3%的患者进行了 CFAE 消融。在 12 个月时,PVI-单独组中有 71.3%的患者无主要终点事件,PVI-加组中有 78.3%的患者无主要终点事件[危险比=1.56(95%置信区间:1.10-2.24),非劣效 P=0.3062]。PVI-单独组的手术相关并发症发生率为 2.0%,PVI-加组为 3.6%(P=0.199)。

结论

本随机试验未证明在持续性 AF 患者中 PVI 单独与 PVI 加线性消融或 CFAE 消融相比不劣效,但暗示 PVI 加策略有改善临床疗效的潜力(NCT03514693)。

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