Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology · 2022
The high-density grid catheter: A safe adjunctive tool in pediatric and complex congenital heart disease patients.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Newlon Claire, Asaki S Yukiko, Pilcher Thomas A, Ou Zhining, Etheridge Susan P, Niu Mary C
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The safety and utility of the Advisor™ High-Density Grid mapping catheter (HDGC) in children and congenital heart disease (CHD) patients are not well described.
METHODS: A single-center retrospective cohort study of pediatric and CHD patients undergoing electrophysiology study and ablation to determine the effect of HDGC use on outcomes including complications, fluoroscopy use, procedure duration, acute ablation success, and arrhythmia recurrence.
RESULTS: HDGC was used in 74/261 (28.3%) cases. HDGC subjects differed by median age (17 vs. 13 years; p < 0.001), weight (68 vs. 50 kg; p < 0.001), and prevalence of significant CHD (42% vs. 3%; p < 0.001). Arrhythmia substrates were dissimilar: HGDC cases had higher frequencies of intra-atrial re-entrant tachycardia (25.7% vs. 0.5%), atrial flutter (8.1% vs. 1.1%), ectopic atrial tachycardia (13.5% vs. 3.7%), and premature ventricular contractions (9.5% vs. 0.5%), and lower incidences of atrioventricular re-entrant tachycardia (16.2% vs. 46.1%). Complications were rare (n = 5, 1.9%) with no significant difference between groups (p = 1.00). Procedure duration-but not fluoroscopy exposure-was significantly longer in HDGC cases (median 256 vs. 216 min, p < 0.001). Acute success was lower (93.2% vs. 99.4%; p = 0.01) and recurrences higher (13.2% vs. 3.8%; p = 0.016) in HDGC compared to non-HDGC cases.
CONCLUSION: HDGC use in children and CHD patients is safe and not associated with higher complication rates. The lower acute success and higher recurrence rates in HDGC cases likely reflect a bias toward HDGC use in more complex arrhythmia substrates rather than less favorable ablation outcomes.
METHODS: A single-center retrospective cohort study of pediatric and CHD patients undergoing electrophysiology study and ablation to determine the effect of HDGC use on outcomes including complications, fluoroscopy use, procedure duration, acute ablation success, and arrhythmia recurrence.
RESULTS: HDGC was used in 74/261 (28.3%) cases. HDGC subjects differed by median age (17 vs. 13 years; p < 0.001), weight (68 vs. 50 kg; p < 0.001), and prevalence of significant CHD (42% vs. 3%; p < 0.001). Arrhythmia substrates were dissimilar: HGDC cases had higher frequencies of intra-atrial re-entrant tachycardia (25.7% vs. 0.5%), atrial flutter (8.1% vs. 1.1%), ectopic atrial tachycardia (13.5% vs. 3.7%), and premature ventricular contractions (9.5% vs. 0.5%), and lower incidences of atrioventricular re-entrant tachycardia (16.2% vs. 46.1%). Complications were rare (n = 5, 1.9%) with no significant difference between groups (p = 1.00). Procedure duration-but not fluoroscopy exposure-was significantly longer in HDGC cases (median 256 vs. 216 min, p < 0.001). Acute success was lower (93.2% vs. 99.4%; p = 0.01) and recurrences higher (13.2% vs. 3.8%; p = 0.016) in HDGC compared to non-HDGC cases.
CONCLUSION: HDGC use in children and CHD patients is safe and not associated with higher complication rates. The lower acute success and higher recurrence rates in HDGC cases likely reflect a bias toward HDGC use in more complex arrhythmia substrates rather than less favorable ablation outcomes.