Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2020
Presence of a left common pulmonary vein and pulmonary vein anatomical characteristics as predictors of outcome following cryoballoon ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Bose Abhishek, Chevli Parag A, Berberian Gregory, Januszkiewicz Jerzy, Ahmad Ghasan, Hashmath Zeba, Mishra Ajay K, Laidlaw Douglas
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Pulmonary vein (PV) isolation using cryoballoon ablation (CBA) is a common therapy for patients with drug-refractory paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). However, initial CBA is successful in only 70-80% of patients. The role of an atypical left common PV (LCPV) and PV anatomical indices on CBA outcomes remains unclear.
METHODS: We followed 80 patients (age 60.7 ± 9.7, 31 % women) with PAF undergoing CBA for 1-year post-procedure for the development of recurrent atrial arrhythmias (AA). Recurrence was assessed by documented AA on EKG or any form of long-term cardiac rhythm monitoring. The presence of an LCPV and individual PV diameters were evaluated using cardiac CT. Based on the maximum and minimum PV ostial diameters, the eccentricity index (EI), ovality index (OI), and PV ostial area (PVA) were calculated for all the veins. A multivariable Cox-proportional hazard model assessed whether the presence of an LCPV or PV anatomic indices (EI, OI, and PVA) predicted recurrence of AA following CBA.
RESULTS: After 1-year follow-up, 19 (23.7%) participants developed recurrence of AA. On multivariable regression, the presence of an LCPV did not predict the recurrence of AA (p = 0.38). Among the PV anatomical indices, on univariate analysis, only the area of the left inferior PV showed a trend towards predicting recurrence, though this result was not significant on multivariate analysis (p = 0.09).
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with PAF, neither the presence of an LCPV nor individual PV anatomical indices predicted recurrence of AA following CBA.
METHODS: We followed 80 patients (age 60.7 ± 9.7, 31 % women) with PAF undergoing CBA for 1-year post-procedure for the development of recurrent atrial arrhythmias (AA). Recurrence was assessed by documented AA on EKG or any form of long-term cardiac rhythm monitoring. The presence of an LCPV and individual PV diameters were evaluated using cardiac CT. Based on the maximum and minimum PV ostial diameters, the eccentricity index (EI), ovality index (OI), and PV ostial area (PVA) were calculated for all the veins. A multivariable Cox-proportional hazard model assessed whether the presence of an LCPV or PV anatomic indices (EI, OI, and PVA) predicted recurrence of AA following CBA.
RESULTS: After 1-year follow-up, 19 (23.7%) participants developed recurrence of AA. On multivariable regression, the presence of an LCPV did not predict the recurrence of AA (p = 0.38). Among the PV anatomical indices, on univariate analysis, only the area of the left inferior PV showed a trend towards predicting recurrence, though this result was not significant on multivariate analysis (p = 0.09).
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with PAF, neither the presence of an LCPV nor individual PV anatomical indices predicted recurrence of AA following CBA.