Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology · 2011
Steerable versus nonsteerable sheath technology in atrial fibrillation ablation: a prospective, randomized study.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка 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.
Piorkowski Christopher, Eitel Charlotte, Rolf Sascha, Bode Kerstin, Sommer Philipp, Gaspar Thomas, Kircher Simon, Wetzel Ulrike, Parwani Abdul Shokor, Boldt Leif-Hendrik, Mende Meinhard, Bollmann Andreas, Husser Daniela, Dagres Nikolaos, Esato Masahiro, Arya Arash, Haverkamp Wilhelm, Hindricks Gerhard
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Steerable sheath technology is designed to facilitate catheter access, stability, and tissue contact in target sites of atrial fibrillation (AF) catheter ablation. We hypothesized that rhythm control after interventional AF treatment is more successful using a steerable as compared with a nonsteerable sheath access.
METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred thirty patients with paroxysmal or persistent drug-refractory AF undergoing their first ablation procedure were prospectively included in a randomized fashion in 2 centers. Ablation was performed by 10 operators with different levels of clinical experience. Treatment outcome was measured with serial 7-day Holter ECGs and additional symptom-based arrhythmia documentation. Single procedure success (freedom from AF and/or atrial macroreentrant tachycardia) was significantly higher in patients ablated with a steerable sheath (78% versus 55% after 3 months, P=0.005; 76% versus 53% after 6 months, P=0.008). Rate of pulmonary vein isolation, procedure duration, and radiofrequency application time did not differ significantly, whereas fluoroscopy time was lower in the steerable sheath group (33±14 minutes versus 45±17 minutes, P<0.001). Complication rates showed no significant difference (3.2% versus 5%, P=0.608). On multivariable analysis, steerable sheath usage remained the only powerful predictor for rhythm outcome after 6 months of follow-up (hazard ratio, 2.837 [1.197 to 6.723]).
CONCLUSIONS: AF catheter ablation using a manually controlled, steerable sheath for catheter navigation resulted in a significantly higher clinical success rate, with comparable complication rates and with a reduction in periprocedural fluoroscopy time.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00469638.
METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred thirty patients with paroxysmal or persistent drug-refractory AF undergoing their first ablation procedure were prospectively included in a randomized fashion in 2 centers. Ablation was performed by 10 operators with different levels of clinical experience. Treatment outcome was measured with serial 7-day Holter ECGs and additional symptom-based arrhythmia documentation. Single procedure success (freedom from AF and/or atrial macroreentrant tachycardia) was significantly higher in patients ablated with a steerable sheath (78% versus 55% after 3 months, P=0.005; 76% versus 53% after 6 months, P=0.008). Rate of pulmonary vein isolation, procedure duration, and radiofrequency application time did not differ significantly, whereas fluoroscopy time was lower in the steerable sheath group (33±14 minutes versus 45±17 minutes, P<0.001). Complication rates showed no significant difference (3.2% versus 5%, P=0.608). On multivariable analysis, steerable sheath usage remained the only powerful predictor for rhythm outcome after 6 months of follow-up (hazard ratio, 2.837 [1.197 to 6.723]).
CONCLUSIONS: AF catheter ablation using a manually controlled, steerable sheath for catheter navigation resulted in a significantly higher clinical success rate, with comparable complication rates and with a reduction in periprocedural fluoroscopy time.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00469638.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AgedAnti-Arrhythmia AgentsAtrial FibrillationCatheter AblationCathetersChi-Square DistributionElectrocardiography, AmbulatoryEquipment DesignFemaleFluoroscopyGermanyHumansLinear ModelsLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRadiography, InterventionalRecurrenceRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsTime FactorsTreatment Outcome