Suppr超能文献

普通心房扑动的射频导管消融:电生理引导下局灶性消融技术与线性消融技术的比较

Radiofrequency catheter ablation of common atrial flutter: comparison of electrophysiologically guided focal ablation technique and linear ablation technique.

作者信息

Chen S A, Chiang C E, Wu T J, Tai C T, Lee S H, Cheng C C, Chiou C W, Ueng K C, Wen Z C, Chang M S

机构信息

Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Veterans General Hospital-Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China.

出版信息

J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996 Mar 15;27(4):860-8. doi: 10.1016/0735-1097(95)00565-x.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to study electrophysiologic characteristics and compare the electrophysiologically guided focal ablation technique and linear ablation technique in patients with common atrial flutter in a prospective randomized fashion. Background. Catheter ablation of the common atrial flutter circuit can be performed with different techniques. To date, these two techniques have not been compared prospectively in a randomized study.

METHODS

Sixty patients with drug-refractory common atrial flutter were randomly assigned to undergo radiofrequency catheter ablation performed with the electrophysiologically guided focal ablation (Group I) or linear ablation technique (Group II). In Group I, radiofrequency energy was delivered to the site characterized by concealed entrainment with a short stimulus-P wave interval (<40 ms) and a postpacing interval equal to the atrial flutter cycle length. In Group II, continuous migratory application of radiofrequency energy was used to create two linear lesions in or around the inferior vena cava-tricuspid ring isthmus. Serial 24-h ambulatory electrocardiographic (Holter) and follow-up electrophysiologic studies were performed to assess recurrence of tachycardia and possible atrial arrhythmogenic effects.

RESULTS

Successful elimination of the flutter circuit was achieved in 28 of 30 patients in Group I and 29 of 30 patients in Group II. More atrial premature beats and episodes of short run atrial tachyarrhythmias in the early period (within 2 weeks) after ablation were found in Group II. Recurrence rate (2 of 28 vs. 3 of 29) and incidence of new sustained atrial tachyarrhythmias (3 of 28 vs. 3 of 29) was similar in the two groups. Occurrence of recurrent atrial flutter and new sustained atrial tachyarrhythmias was related to associated cardiovascular disease and atrial enlargement in both groups. However, in Group II, the procedure time (104 +/- 17 vs. 181 +/- 29 min, p<0.01) were significantly shorter than those in Group I.

CONCLUSIONS

Radiofrequency ablation of the common atrial flutter circuit was safe and effective with either the electrophysiologically guided focal ablation or linear ablation technique. However, the linear ablation technique was time-saving.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在以前瞻性随机方式研究普通型心房扑动患者的电生理特征,并比较电生理指导下的局灶性消融技术和线性消融技术。背景。普通型心房扑动环的导管消融可采用不同技术。迄今为止,这两种技术尚未在随机研究中进行前瞻性比较。

方法

60例药物难治性普通型心房扑动患者被随机分配接受电生理指导下的局灶性消融(I组)或线性消融技术(II组)的射频导管消融。在I组中,将射频能量传递至以隐匿性拖带为特征的部位,刺激 - P波间期短(<40毫秒)且起搏后间期等于心房扑动周期长度。在II组中,采用连续移动应用射频能量在腔静脉 - 三尖瓣环峡部或其周围创建两条线性病变。进行连续24小时动态心电图(Holter)和随访电生理研究,以评估心动过速复发情况及可能的心房致心律失常作用。

结果

I组30例患者中有28例成功消除扑动环,II组30例患者中有29例成功消除扑动环。II组在消融后早期(2周内)发现更多房性早搏和短阵房性心动过速发作。两组的复发率(28例中的2例 vs. 29例中的3例)和新的持续性房性心动过速发生率(28例中的3例 vs. 29例中的3例)相似。两组中复发性心房扑动和新的持续性房性心动过速的发生均与相关心血管疾病和心房扩大有关。然而,II组的手术时间(104±17 vs. 181±29分钟,p<0.01)明显短于I组。

结论

电生理指导下的局灶性消融或线性消融技术对普通型心房扑动环进行射频消融均安全有效。然而,线性消融技术更节省时间。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验