Department of Cardiovascular Diseases (A.C., K.P.C., D.G., S.M.E., J.C.P.-D., S.D.P., C.J.M.), Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL.
Department of Internal Medicine (P.F., G.U.), Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL.
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2022 Jul;15(7):e010546. doi: 10.1161/CIRCEP.121.010546. Epub 2022 Jun 28.
Patients with D-transposition of the great arteries and atrial switch have a high incidence of atrial arrhythmias. We sought to analyze the arrhythmia substrate, ablation strategies, and outcomes for catheter ablation in this population.
An in-depth analysis of all clinical and procedural data in patients with D-transposition of the great arteries, atrial baffles, and atrial arrhythmia ablation was performed.
A cohort of 32 patients (72% male, mean age 38±7 years) underwent ablation for non-AV nodal reentrant tachycardia atrial arrhythmias, and 4 patients underwent AV nodal reentrant tachycardia ablation. Cavotricuspid isthmus flutter (CTI-flutter) was the most common arrhythmia, encountered in 75% of patients, followed by scar-related intraatrial reentrant tachycardia (non-CTI intraatrial reentrant tachycardia, 53%) and focal atrial tachycardia (focal atrial tachycardia, 6%). Among the 32 patients, 26 underwent 31 procedures at our institution. For patients with prior outside intervention, the index ablation at our institution revealed CTI-dependent flutter in 3/5 cases. However, redo ablation after an index ablation with demonstrated bidirectional CTI block revealed different/new arrhythmia substrates (80% non-CTI intraatrial reentrant tachycardia, 40% focal atrial tachycardia). Achieving bidirectional block across the CTI often required ablating on both sides of the baffle (retroaortic access, 81%; using a baffle leak, 11.5%; or transbaffle puncture, 7.7%). Combined approaches were necessary in 19% to reach the critical tissue. Acute procedural success was 81%, and recurrence was documented in 58% of patients. Despite recurrence, clinical arrhythmia burden was significantly reduced post-ablation (<0.001), with rare episodes, amenable to antiarrhythmic therapy. Redo ablation was required in 5 (19%) patients and uncovered new arrhythmia substrates. AV nodal reentrant tachycardia ablation also required transbaffle approaches in 3/4 patients.
CTI-dependent flutter was the most common arrhythmia in patients with Dextro-Transposition of the Great Arteries and atrial switch. Transbaffle approaches were often necessary, and, provided that bidirectional CTI block was achieved at the index ablation, late recurrence was due to different arrhythmia mechanisms. Despite recurrence, ablation was associated with significant clinical improvement.
大动脉转位和心房调转术后的患者心房性心律失常发生率较高。我们旨在分析此类患者接受心导管消融术的心律失常基质、消融策略和结果。
对所有患有大动脉转位、心房分流器和心房心律失常消融的患者的临床和程序数据进行深入分析。
32 名患者(72%为男性,平均年龄 38±7 岁)接受了非房室结折返性心动过速心房性心律失常消融,4 名患者接受了房室结折返性心动过速消融。三尖瓣峡部扑动(CTI-扑动)是最常见的心律失常,见于 75%的患者,其次是与瘢痕相关的房内折返性心动过速(非 CTI 房内折返性心动过速,53%)和局灶性房性心动过速(局灶性房性心动过速,6%)。在 32 名患者中,有 26 名在我们的机构进行了 31 次手术。对于有既往外部介入的患者,我们机构的首次消融显示 5 例中有 3 例存在 CTI 依赖性扑动。然而,在首次消融显示双向 CTI 阻滞的情况下进行再次消融,发现了不同/新的心律失常基质(80%为非 CTI 房内折返性心动过速,40%为局灶性房性心动过速)。要在 CTI 两侧实现双向阻滞,通常需要消融(主动脉后入路,81%;使用分流器漏,11.5%;或经分流器穿刺,7.7%)。为了达到关键组织,需要联合方法的占 19%。急性手术成功率为 81%,58%的患者记录到复发。尽管复发,但消融后临床心律失常负担显著降低(<0.001),发作次数很少,易于抗心律失常治疗。5 名(19%)患者需要再次消融,并发现新的心律失常基质。房室结折返性心动过速消融也需要 4 例经分流器入路。
CTI 依赖性扑动是大动脉转位和心房调转术后患者最常见的心律失常。通常需要经分流器入路,而且,如果在首次消融时实现了双向 CTI 阻滞,那么晚期复发是由于不同的心律失常机制引起的。尽管复发,但消融术与显著的临床改善相关。