Ollitrault Pierre, Chaumont Corentin, Font Jonaz, Manninger Martin, Conti Sergio, Matusik Paweł T, Mulder Bart A, Ferchaud Virginie, Pellissier Arnaud, Al Khoury Mayane, Milliez Paul, Champ-Rigot Laure, Anselme Frédéric
Electrophysiology Unit, Department of Cardiology, Regional University Hospital, Avenue de la Côte de Nacre, 14000 Caen, France.
Department of Cardiology, Rouen University Medical Center, Rue de Germont, 76031 Rouen, France.
Europace. 2024 Jul 2;26(7). doi: 10.1093/europace/euae160.
Superior vena cava (SVC) isolation during atrial fibrillation catheter ablation is limited by the risk of collateral damage to the sinus node and/or the phrenic nerve. Due to its tissue-specificity, we hypothesized the feasibility and safety of pulsed-field ablation (PFA)-based SVC isolation.
One hundred and five consecutive patients undergoing PFA-based AF catheter ablation were prospectively included. After pulmonary vein isolation (±posterior wall isolation and electrical cardioversion), SVC isolation was performed using a standardized workflow. Acute SVC isolation was achieved in 105/105 (100%) patients after 6 ± 1 applications. Transient phrenic nerve stunning occurred in 67/105 (64%) patients but without phrenic nerve palsy at the end of the procedure and at hospital discharge. Transient high-degree sinus node dysfunction occurred in 5/105 (4.7%) patients, with no recurrence at the end of the procedure and until discharge. At the 3-month follow-up visit, no complication occurred.
SVC isolation using a pentaspline PFA catheter is feasible and safe.
房颤导管消融术中上腔静脉（SVC）隔离受窦房结和/或膈神经 collateral damage 风险的限制。由于其组织特异性，我们假设基于脉冲场消融（PFA）的SVC隔离的可行性和安全性。
前瞻性纳入105例连续接受基于PFA的房颤导管消融的患者。在肺静脉隔离（±后壁隔离和电复律）后，使用标准化工作流程进行SVC隔离。105例患者中105例（100%）在6±1次应用后实现急性SVC隔离。67/105（64%）例患者出现短暂膈神经麻痹，但在手术结束时和出院时无膈神经麻痹。5/105（4.7%）例患者出现短暂高度窦房结功能障碍，手术结束时及出院前均未复发。在3个月随访时，未发生并发症。
使用五棱形PFA导管进行SVC隔离是可行且安全的。
原文中“collateral damage”未准确翻译，可能是“附带损伤”之类意思，这里按字面保留了。
