Ueng K C, Chen S A, Chiang C E, Cheng C C, Wu T J, Tai C T, Lee S H, Chiou C W, Chen C Y, Wen Z C, Chang M S
Department of Medicine, National Yang-Ming University, School of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Angiology. 1996 Nov;47(11):1061-71. doi: 10.1177/000331979604701106.
Although pacing technique has demonstrated that the most common site of conduction block in a manifest accessory pathway (AP) was between the AP and the ventricle, most of the block sites have been found to be between the atrium and AP after successful radiofrequency ablation. Furthermore, the block site in a concealed AP after successful radiofrequency catheter ablation has not been reported in the literature, and comparisons between a manifest and concealed AP have not been performed. This study included 219 consecutive patients undergoing successful radiofrequency catheter ablation of a single AP. AP potential was recorded at the successful target site in 76 of 92 (82.6%) patients with manifest APs, and in 99 of 127 (77.9%) patients with concealed APs. All the left-sided APs (including left posteroseptal APs) were ablated by a ventricular approach, and right-sided APs (including anteromidseptal and right posteroseptal APs) were ablated by an atrial approach. The site of conduction block was determined by analyzing and comparing the local electrograms recorded before and after radiofrequency ablation at successful ablation sites. Conduction block of manifest APs was between the atrial-AP (A-AP) in 69 patients (75%) and between the AP-ventricle (AP-V) interface in 7 patients (7.6%), whereas the conduction block of concealed APs occurred between the AP-V in 90 patients (70.9%) and between the A-AP interface in 9 patients (7.1%). Neither the preablation electrogram nor electrophysiologic characteristics of APs predicted the site of conduction block. Furthermore, neither the location of the APs nor the position of the ablation catheter affected the block site. It was concluded that the most common site of conduction block during successful radiofrequency catheter ablation of a manifest and concealed AP was between the A-AP and AP-V interface, respectively, and the impedance mismatch theory explained only part of the findings.
尽管起搏技术已证明,显性旁路(AP)中最常见的传导阻滞部位位于AP与心室之间,但在成功进行射频消融后,大多数阻滞部位被发现位于心房与AP之间。此外,文献中尚未报道成功进行射频导管消融后隐匿性AP的阻滞部位,也未对显性和隐匿性AP进行比较。本研究纳入了219例连续成功进行单条AP射频导管消融的患者。在92例显性AP患者中的76例(82.6%)以及127例隐匿性AP患者中的99例(77.9%)的成功靶点部位记录到了AP电位。所有左侧AP(包括左后间隔AP)均通过心室途径进行消融,右侧AP(包括前中隔和右后间隔AP)通过心房途径进行消融。通过分析和比较成功消融部位射频消融前后记录的局部电图来确定传导阻滞部位。显性AP的传导阻滞发生在心房-AP(A-AP)之间的有69例患者(75%),在AP-心室(AP-V)界面之间的有7例患者(7.6%),而隐匿性AP的传导阻滞发生在AP-V之间的有90例患者(70.9%),在A-AP界面之间的有9例患者(7.1%)。AP的消融前电图或电生理特征均无法预测传导阻滞部位。此外,AP的位置和消融导管的位置均不影响阻滞部位。得出的结论是,在成功进行显性和隐匿性AP射频导管消融过程中,最常见的传导阻滞部位分别位于A-AP和AP-V界面之间,阻抗失配理论仅解释了部分研究结果。