Sonoda Koichiro, Hyakutake Shunpei, Furukawa Kentaro, Otsuka Kaishi, Takei Asumi, Maemura Koji
Department of Cardiology, Sasebo City General Hospital, Sasebo, Japan.
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Nagasaki, Japan.
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2024 Dec;47(12):1632-1636. doi: 10.1111/pace.15073. Epub 2024 Sep 16.
The importance of treating non-pulmonary vein (PV) foci is increasing with improvements in the durability of PV isolation. We describe two cases wherein non-PV foci were induced by mechanical irritation and conventional induction in the same area, which was impossible to induce after ablation, suggesting a relationship between mechanical irritation and induction of non-PV foci. In a recurrent case of non-PV foci, atrial fibrillation (AF) was induced only by mechanical irritation. No recurrence has been observed since the ablation of the area. Thus, treatment of the AF induction site with mechanical irritation could be considered an effective therapy for non-PV foci.
随着肺静脉(PV)隔离耐久性的提高,治疗非肺静脉病灶的重要性日益增加。我们描述了两例非肺静脉病灶由同一区域的机械刺激和传统诱发方法诱发的病例,而在消融后该区域无法诱发,这表明机械刺激与非肺静脉病灶的诱发之间存在关联。在一例非肺静脉病灶复发的病例中,仅通过机械刺激诱发了心房颤动(AF)。自该区域消融后未观察到复发。因此,用机械刺激治疗房颤诱发部位可被视为治疗非肺静脉病灶的有效疗法。