Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2023
Impact of anesthetic management on catheter ablation for premature ventricular complexes: insights during the COVID-19 outbreak.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kazawa Shuichiro, Sieira Juan, Bala Gezim, Miraglia Vincenzo, Al Housari Maysam, Strazdas Antanas, Monaco Cinzia, Pannone Luigi, Bisignani Antonio, Overeinder Ingrid, Almorad Alexandre, Raes Matthias, Weyns Matthias, Ghijselings Idris, Beckers Stefan, Brugada Pedro, Chierchia Gian-Battista, de Asmundis Carlo, Ströker Erwin
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The influence of divergent anesthesia types during ablation of premature ventricular complexes (PVCs) is not known. While previously performed under general anesthesia (GA) at our institution, these procedures were exclusively performed under local anesthesia (LA) ± minimal sedation during the COVID-19 outbreak for logistic reasons.
METHODS: One hundred and eight consecutive patients (82 GA versus 26 LA) undergoing PVC ablation at our center were evaluated. Intraprocedural PVC burden (over 3 min) pre-ablation was measured twice: (1) at the start (before GA induction) and (2) before catheter insertion (after GA induction). Upon cessation of ablation and after a waiting period of ≥ 15 min, acute ablation success (AAS) was defined as absence of PVCs until the end of the recording period.
RESULTS: Intraprocedural PVC burden was not significantly different between LA versus GA group: (1) 17.8 ± 3% vs 12.7 ± 2%, P = 0.17 and (2) 10.0 ± 3% vs 7.4 ± 1%, P = 0.43, respectively. Activation mapping-based ablation was performed significantly more in the LA vs GA group (77% vs 26% of patients, P < 0.001, respectively). AAS was significantly higher in LA vs GA group: 22/26 (85%) vs 41/82 (50%), respectively, P < 0.01. After multivariable analysis, LA was the only independent predictor for AAS (OR 13, 95% CI 1.57-107.4, P = 0.017).
CONCLUSION: Ablation of PVC under LA presented significantly higher AAS rate compared to GA. The procedure under GA might be complicated by PVC inhibition (after catheter insertion/during mapping) and PVC disinhibition post-extubation.
METHODS: One hundred and eight consecutive patients (82 GA versus 26 LA) undergoing PVC ablation at our center were evaluated. Intraprocedural PVC burden (over 3 min) pre-ablation was measured twice: (1) at the start (before GA induction) and (2) before catheter insertion (after GA induction). Upon cessation of ablation and after a waiting period of ≥ 15 min, acute ablation success (AAS) was defined as absence of PVCs until the end of the recording period.
RESULTS: Intraprocedural PVC burden was not significantly different between LA versus GA group: (1) 17.8 ± 3% vs 12.7 ± 2%, P = 0.17 and (2) 10.0 ± 3% vs 7.4 ± 1%, P = 0.43, respectively. Activation mapping-based ablation was performed significantly more in the LA vs GA group (77% vs 26% of patients, P < 0.001, respectively). AAS was significantly higher in LA vs GA group: 22/26 (85%) vs 41/82 (50%), respectively, P < 0.01. After multivariable analysis, LA was the only independent predictor for AAS (OR 13, 95% CI 1.57-107.4, P = 0.017).
CONCLUSION: Ablation of PVC under LA presented significantly higher AAS rate compared to GA. The procedure under GA might be complicated by PVC inhibition (after catheter insertion/during mapping) and PVC disinhibition post-extubation.