MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1007/s10840-006-6085-5

Медицинская библиотека · Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2006

A new and simple method for distinguishing complete from incomplete block through the cavotricuspid isthmus.

Laurent Gabriel, Bourcier Alexandra, Bertaux Géraldine, Fromentin Stéphane, Fraison Michel, Gonzalez Stéphanie, Saint Pierre François, Wolf Jean Eric

СтатьяПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

A complete line of block (CLOB) in the cavotricuspid isthmus (CTI) is the endpoint of typical atrial flutter ablation. Before CTI block is obtained, a progressive CTI conduction delay due to an incomplete line of block (InLOB) can be difficult to distinguish from CLOB. The purpose of this study was to assess a new simple approach based on the changes in atrio-ventricular (AV) conduction delays during septal and lateral right atrial pacing, to distinguish a CLOB from an InLOB during typical atrial flutter (AFL) ablation.

METHODS AND

RESULTS

Forty patients who presented an InLOB before a CLOB, and a stable (AV) conduction delay at 600 ms cycle length pacing (when in sinus rhythm), during AFL ablation were included in this study. A 24-pole mapping catheter was positioned so that 2 adjacent dipoles bracketed the targeted CTI line of block (LOB), with proximal dipoles lateral to the LOB and distal dipoles in the coronary sinus. Two pacing sites were lateral (position L1 and L2) and one was septal (position S) to the LOB, with locations L1 and S closest to the LOB. During L1, L2 and S site pacing, the delay between the pacing artefact and the peak of the R wave in a surface ECG (lead II) was measured. We measured the following conduction delays (mean +/- SD in ms), during InLOB versus CLOB: (L1 to R) 320.5 +/- 68.0 versus 367.0 +/- 62.0, p = 0.001; (L2 to R) 333.0 +/- 59.0 versus 338.0 +/- 62.0, p = 0.663, (S to R) 259.4 +/- 51.5 versus 247.1 +/- 55.5, p = 0.987. We calculated the following data during an InLOB versus a CLOB: (L1R-L2R) -12.3 +/- 7 versus 20.2 +/- 12.7, p = 0.001; (L1R-SR) 51.1 +/- 21.5 versus 120.1 +/- 16.6, p < 0.05. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values for CLOB with (L1R-SR > 94 ms) and with (L1R-L2R > 0 ms) were respectively; 100%, 98%, 98% and 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

This study establishes that lateral versus septal right atrial pacing sites combined with the measure of AV conduction delay on a surface ECG can be useful to distinguish a CLOB from an InLOB during AFL ablation.

Для цитирования: Laurent Gabriel, Bourcier Alexandra, Bertaux Géraldine, Fromentin Stéphane, Fraison Michel, Gonzalez Stéphanie, Saint Pierre François, Wolf Jean Eric. A new and simple method for distinguishing complete from incomplete block through the cavotricuspid isthmus.. Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing. 2006. DOI: 10.1007/s10840-006-6085-5.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.