Minami Kentaro, Nakamura Kohki, Maeno Eiko, Iida Keitaro, Saito Ikuta, Masuyama Taiki, Kitagawa Yoshiyuki, Nakajima Toshiaki, Nakatani Yosuke, Naito Shigeto, Toyoda Shigeru, Chovanec Milan, Petrů Jan, Škoda Jan, Kumagai Koji, Neužil Petr
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Dokkyo Medical University, Mibu 321-0293, Tochigi, Japan.
Gunma Prefectural Cardiovascular Center, Maebashi 371-0004, Gunma, Japan.
J Clin Med. 2023 Feb 23;12(5):1783. doi: 10.3390/jcm12051783.
Although pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is an established procedure for atrial fibrillation (AF), non-PV foci play a crucial role in AF recurrence. Persistent left superior vena cava (PLSVC) has been reported as critical non-PV foci. However, the effectiveness of provocation of AF triggers from PLSVC remains unclear. This study was designed to validate the usefulness of provoking AF triggers from PLSVC.
This multicenter retrospective study included 37 patients with AF and PLSVC. To provoke triggers, AF was cardioverted, and re-initiation of AF was monitored under high-dose isoproterenol infusion. The patients were divided into two groups: those whose PLSVC had arrhythmogenic triggers initiating AF (Group A) and those whose PLSVC did not have triggers (Group B). Group A underwent isolation of PLSVC after PVI. Group B received PVI only.
Group A had 14 patients, whereas Group B had 23 patients. After a 3-year follow-up, no difference in the success rate for maintaining sinus rhythm was observed between the two groups. Group A was significantly younger and had lower CHADS2-VASc scores than Group B.
The provocation of arrhythmogenic triggers from PLSVC was effective for the ablation strategy. PLSVC electrical isolation would not be necessary if arrhythmogenic triggers are not provoked.
尽管肺静脉隔离(PVI)是治疗心房颤动(AF)的既定方法,但非肺静脉病灶在房颤复发中起关键作用。据报道,持续左上腔静脉(PLSVC)是重要的非肺静脉病灶。然而,从PLSVC诱发房颤触发因素的有效性仍不清楚。本研究旨在验证从PLSVC诱发房颤触发因素的有用性。
这项多中心回顾性研究纳入了37例患有房颤和PLSVC的患者。为了诱发触发因素,将房颤复律,并在高剂量异丙肾上腺素输注下监测房颤的重新发作。患者分为两组:PLSVC有引发房颤的致心律失常触发因素的患者(A组)和PLSVC没有触发因素的患者(B组)。A组在PVI后进行PLSVC隔离。B组仅接受PVI。
A组有14例患者,而B组有23例患者。经过3年的随访,两组之间在维持窦性心律的成功率方面没有观察到差异。A组比B组明显年轻,CHADS2-VASc评分更低。
从PLSVC诱发致心律失常触发因素对消融策略有效。如果未诱发致心律失常触发因素,则无需进行PLSVC电隔离。