Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology · 2024
Lesion monitoring parameters as predictors of atrial arrhythmia recurrence after catheter ablation in persistent AF: A DECAAF II sub-analysis.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Mekhael Mario, Feng Han, Younes Hadi, Chouman Nour, Assaf Ala, Lim Chanho, Huang Chao, Donnellan Eoin, Rao Swati, Marrouche Nassir, Kreidieh Omar
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The formation of transmural lesions is necessary for the ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation (prAF). Ablation index (AI) and generator impedance drop (ID) predict lesion size but their correlation with long-term outcomes in prAF is not known. Furthermore, we proposed a new parameter, efficacy ratio (ER) calculated as ID/AI, to gain indirect insight into the role of factors affecting ID but not considered by AI.
METHODS: We included ablations performed during the DECAAF II trial if they had uploaded lesion-by-lesion summary data and were performed with radiofrequency catheters on the CARTO system. Average patient-level parameters were calculated from all generated Vizitags.
RESULTS: A total of 427 ablations met inclusion criteria and 166 utilized AI. Analyzed as continuous variables, ID and ER predicted long-term arrhythmia-free survival but not AI. The ideal cut-off for ID was ID ≥ 10.4 ohms and had a C-index of 0.55. It predicted reduced risk of arrhythmia: hazard ratio 0.56 [0.36-0.88], p = .013 (arrhythmia-free survival of 67% vs. 52%). Similarly, an ER of 1.7 ohms/100AI had a C-index of 0.58 and predicted reduced arrhythmia recurrence: HR 0.39 [0.22-0.69], p = .001. ER < 1.7 ohms/100AI was related to just 32% arrhythmia-free survival. ER improved prognostication as compared to ID alone and identified a subset of low ID patients with even worse outcomes.
CONCLUSION: Average ID was predictive of improved outcomes following ablation of prAF. The ratio of ID/AI (ER) was postulated as a measure to summarize the overall impact of factors not considered in the AI formula and provided improved prognostication.
METHODS: We included ablations performed during the DECAAF II trial if they had uploaded lesion-by-lesion summary data and were performed with radiofrequency catheters on the CARTO system. Average patient-level parameters were calculated from all generated Vizitags.
RESULTS: A total of 427 ablations met inclusion criteria and 166 utilized AI. Analyzed as continuous variables, ID and ER predicted long-term arrhythmia-free survival but not AI. The ideal cut-off for ID was ID ≥ 10.4 ohms and had a C-index of 0.55. It predicted reduced risk of arrhythmia: hazard ratio 0.56 [0.36-0.88], p = .013 (arrhythmia-free survival of 67% vs. 52%). Similarly, an ER of 1.7 ohms/100AI had a C-index of 0.58 and predicted reduced arrhythmia recurrence: HR 0.39 [0.22-0.69], p = .001. ER < 1.7 ohms/100AI was related to just 32% arrhythmia-free survival. ER improved prognostication as compared to ID alone and identified a subset of low ID patients with even worse outcomes.
CONCLUSION: Average ID was predictive of improved outcomes following ablation of prAF. The ratio of ID/AI (ER) was postulated as a measure to summarize the overall impact of factors not considered in the AI formula and provided improved prognostication.