Rodkiewicz Dariusz, Koźluk Edward, Krauz Kamil, Momot Karol, Piątkowska Agnieszka, Buksińska-Lisik Małgorzata, Krzemiński Krzysztof, Mamcarz Artur
3rd Department of Internal Diseases and Cardiology, Międzylesie Specialist Hospital in Warsaw, Medical University of Warsaw, Warszawa, Poland.
Department of Experimental and Clinical Physiology, Medical University of Warsaw, Warszawa, Poland.
Kardiol Pol. 2025;83(7-8):832-839. doi: 10.33963/v.phj.106114. Epub 2025 May 14.
Catheter ablation (CA) with guidance using fluoroscopy and electroanatomic mapping (EAM) is the standard and most effective treatment for atrioventricular accessory pathways (AP). However, data on fluoroscopy-free CA with AP remains limited.
This study evaluated the feasibility of performing CA without fluoroscopy guidance, using only EAM, in patients with right-sided AP.
We retrospectively included 100 consecutive patients with pre-excitation in ECG who underwent CA for right-sided AP. All procedures were performed using EAM. The primary outcome was the feasibility of performing the AP CA without the use of fluoroscopy. Secondary outcomes included the acute and long-term success rate, complications, and procedure time.
In 74 patients, the procedure was completed without fluoroscopy (ZF-EAM group), while 26 patients required fluoroscopy during the procedure (F-EAM group). Acute procedural success was achieved in 91% of patients overall, with a higher rate in the ZF-EAM group (72 of 74; 97%) compared to the F-EAM group (19 of 26; 73%) (P <0.001). After follow-up, long-term recurrence was observed in 6 of 72 patients (8.3%) in the ZF-EAM group and none of the 19 patients (0%) in the F-EAM group (P = 0.34). The procedure duration was shorter in the ZF-EAM group (median 1.3 hours [0.9-1.8]) compared to the F-EAM group (median 1.8 hours [1.3-2.6]; P = 0.007). No major complications occurred in either group.
CA of right-sided AP, guided entirely by EAM without the use of fluoroscopy, is feasible in most cases. This approach was associated with high efficacy and safety, and it may reduce procedure times.
使用荧光透视和电解剖标测(EAM)引导的导管消融(CA)是房室旁道(AP)的标准且最有效的治疗方法。然而,关于无荧光透视引导下AP的CA数据仍然有限。
本研究评估了仅使用EAM在无荧光透视引导下对右侧AP患者进行CA的可行性。
我们回顾性纳入了100例心电图有预激表现且因右侧AP接受CA的连续患者。所有手术均使用EAM进行。主要结局是不使用荧光透视进行AP CA的可行性。次要结局包括急性和长期成功率、并发症及手术时间。
74例患者在无荧光透视的情况下完成手术(ZF-EAM组),而26例患者在手术过程中需要荧光透视(F-EAM组)。总体而言,91%的患者手术取得急性成功,ZF-EAM组(74例中的72例;97%)的成功率高于F-EAM组(26例中的19例;73%)(P<0.001)。随访后,ZF-EAM组72例患者中有6例(8.3%)出现长期复发,F-EAM组19例患者中无一例(0%)复发(P = 0.34)。ZF-EAM组的手术持续时间短于F-EAM组(中位数1.3小时[0.9 - 1.8]),而F-EAM组为中位数1.8小时[1.3 - 2.6];P = 0.007)。两组均未发生重大并发症。
在大多数情况下,完全由EAM引导且不使用荧光透视对右侧AP进行CA是可行的。这种方法具有高疗效和安全性,并且可能缩短手术时间。