Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2020
Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation recurrence after redo procedure-ablation modality impact.
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.
Zeljkovic Ivan, Knecht Sven, Spies Florian, Reichlin Tobias, Osswald Stefan, Kühne Michael, Sticherling Christian
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation recurrence (AFR) is common after pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), and the rate does not differ between radiofrequency (RF) and cryoballoon (CB) ablation. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of the ablation modality used at the index PVI on the outcome after redo PVI in patients with paroxysmal AF.
METHODS: In this prospective, single-center, non-randomized study, consecutive patients with paroxysmal AF who have undergone the index PVI with either RF ablation (RF group) or 2nd-generation CB (CB group) were included. The primary endpoint was freedom from recurrence of atrial arrhythmia lasting > 30 s.
RESULTS: A total of 105 patients undergoing redo PVI for paroxysmal AF were included (median age 61 years; 24% female; left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 57 ± 8%; left atrial volume index (LAVI) 34 ± 11 mm). Index PVI was done either with focal RF (n = 81) or with CB (n = 24) and redo PVI only with focal RF. Total procedure time (139 vs. 113 min, p = 0.10) and RF delivery time (1017 vs. 870 s, p = 0.33) of the redo PVI were not significantly different. After a median follow-up of 371 (185-470) days, there were no differences between the RF and CB groups regarding the AFR rate after the second PVI (24 vs. 23%, p = 0.89). The Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no difference between the groups regarding AFR freedom time (p = 0.81). In multivariable logistic regression, only coronary artery disease was identified as an independent long-term predictor of AFR (OR 4.15, 95% CI 1.17-14.71, p = 0.027).
CONCLUSIONS: The ablation modality used at the index PVI has no impact on long-term outcome after redo PVI in patients with paroxysmal AF.
METHODS: In this prospective, single-center, non-randomized study, consecutive patients with paroxysmal AF who have undergone the index PVI with either RF ablation (RF group) or 2nd-generation CB (CB group) were included. The primary endpoint was freedom from recurrence of atrial arrhythmia lasting > 30 s.
RESULTS: A total of 105 patients undergoing redo PVI for paroxysmal AF were included (median age 61 years; 24% female; left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 57 ± 8%; left atrial volume index (LAVI) 34 ± 11 mm). Index PVI was done either with focal RF (n = 81) or with CB (n = 24) and redo PVI only with focal RF. Total procedure time (139 vs. 113 min, p = 0.10) and RF delivery time (1017 vs. 870 s, p = 0.33) of the redo PVI were not significantly different. After a median follow-up of 371 (185-470) days, there were no differences between the RF and CB groups regarding the AFR rate after the second PVI (24 vs. 23%, p = 0.89). The Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no difference between the groups regarding AFR freedom time (p = 0.81). In multivariable logistic regression, only coronary artery disease was identified as an independent long-term predictor of AFR (OR 4.15, 95% CI 1.17-14.71, p = 0.027).
CONCLUSIONS: The ablation modality used at the index PVI has no impact on long-term outcome after redo PVI in patients with paroxysmal AF.