Suppr超能文献

消融指数指导的点对点消融与网格标注指导的拖拽式消融治疗肺静脉隔离:一项随机对照试验。

Ablation Index-guided point-by-point ablation versus Grid annotation-guided dragging for pulmonary vein isolation: A randomized controlled trial.

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2022 Jan;33(1):64-72. doi: 10.1111/jce.15294. Epub 2021 Nov 24.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Radiofrequency (RF) atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation using a catheter dragging technique may shorten procedural duration and improve durability of pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) by creating uninterrupted linear ablation lesions. We compared a novel AF ablation approach guided by Grid annotation allowing for "drag lesions" with a standard point-by-point ablation approach in a single-center randomized study.

METHODS

Eighty-eight paroxysmal or persistent AF patients were randomized 1:1 to undergo RF-PVI with either a catheter dragging ablation technique guided by Grid annotation or point-by-point ablation guided by Ablation Index (AI) annotation. In the Grid annotation arm, ablation was visualized using 1 mm³ grid points coloring red after meeting predefined stability and contact force criteria. In the AI annotation arm, ablation lesions were created in a point-by-point fashion with AI target values set at 380 and 500 for posterior/inferior and anterior/roof segments, respectively. Patients were followed up for 12 months after PVI using ECGs, 24-h Holter monitoring and a mobile-based one-lead ECG device.

RESULTS

Procedure time was not different between the two randomization arms (Grid annotation 71 ± 19 min, AI annotation 72 ± 26 min, p = .765). RF time was significantly longer in the Grid annotation arm compared with the AI annotation arm (49 ± 8 min vs. 37 ± 8 min, respectively, p < .001). Atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence was documented in 10 patients (23%) in the Grid annotation arm compared with 19 patients (42%) in the AI annotation arm with time to recurrence not reaching statistical significance (p = .074).

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that a Grid annotation-guided dragging approach provides an alternative to point-by-point RF-PVI using AI annotation.

摘要

简介

使用导管拖动技术进行射频(RF)心房颤动(AF)消融可以通过创建不间断的线性消融病灶来缩短手术时间并提高肺静脉隔离(PVI)的持久性。我们在一项单中心随机研究中比较了一种新的基于网格注释引导的 AF 消融方法,该方法允许进行“拖动病变”,与标准的逐点消融方法进行比较。

方法

88 例阵发性或持续性 AF 患者被随机分为 1:1 组,分别接受基于网格注释的导管拖动消融技术或基于消融指数(AI)注释的逐点消融治疗。在网格注释臂中,满足预定稳定性和接触力标准后,使用 1mm³网格点对消融进行可视化,网格点显示为红色。在 AI 注释臂中,以 380 和 500 的 AI 目标值分别为后/下和前/顶段创建逐点消融病灶。在 PVI 后,通过心电图、24 小时动态心电图监测和基于移动的单导联心电图设备对患者进行 12 个月的随访。

结果

两组随机分组的手术时间无差异(网格注释组 71±19 分钟,AI 注释组 72±26 分钟,p=0.765)。与 AI 注释臂相比,网格注释臂中的 RF 时间明显更长(分别为 49±8 分钟和 37±8 分钟,p<0.001)。在网格注释臂中记录到 10 例(23%)患者出现房性心动过速复发,而在 AI 注释臂中记录到 19 例(42%)患者出现房性心动过速复发,但复发时间未达到统计学意义(p=0.074)。

结论

这项研究表明,基于网格注释的拖动方法为使用 AI 注释的逐点 RF-PVI 提供了一种替代方法。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/73cf/9299027/eb7965cb2aa8/JCE-33-64-g002.jpg

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