Journal of the American Heart Association · 2017
Does Additional Electrogram-Guided Ablation After Linear Ablation Reduce Recurrence After Catheter Ablation for Longstanding Persistent Atrial Fibrillation? A Prospective Randomized Study.
СтатьяРандомизированное 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.
Kim Tae-Hoon, Uhm Jae-Sun, Kim Jong-Youn, Joung Boyoung, Lee Moon-Hyoung, Pak Hui-Nam
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Although circumferential pulmonary vein isolation (CPVI) catheter ablation may not be sufficient for long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (L-PeAF), it is not clear which ablation strategy is beneficial in addition to CPVI. We sought to investigate whether additional complex fractionated atrial electrogram (CFAE)-guided ablation improves clinical outcomes in L-PeAF patients who exhibit continuous atrial fibrillation (AF) after CPVI and linear ablation (Line).
METHODS AND RESULTS: This study enrolled 137 L-PeAF patients (71.4% male, 61.6±10.9 years old) who underwent radiofrequency catheter ablation. We conducted CPVI+Line based on the Dallas lesion set (posterior box+anterior line) after baseline CFAE mapping in all patients. If AF was defragmented (terminated or changed to atrial tachycardia), the procedure was stopped (AF-Defrag group, n=29). If AF was maintained after CPVI+Line, we mapped the CFAE again and randomly assigned the patient to the CPVI+Line group (n=54) or the additional CFAE ablation group (CPVI+Line+CFAE group, n=54). L-PeAF was defragmented during CPVI+Line in 21.2% of patients (29/137, AF-Defrag group). The mean CFAE cycle length was prolonged (P<0.001), and CFAE area (CFAE cycle length <120 milliseconds) was reduced (P<0.001) after CPVI+Line in the remaining patients. Procedure time was longer in the CPVI+Line+CFAE group than the CPVI+Line group (P=0.023), but procedure-related complication rates did not vary. During 22.3±13.2 months of follow-up, the clinical recurrence rates were 17.2% in the AF-Defrag group, 18.5% in the CPVI+Line group, and 32.1% in the CPVI+Line+CFAE group (log rank, P=0.166).
CONCLUSIONS: Although CPVI+Line reduces and localizes CFAE area, additional CFAE ablation after CPVI+Line does not improve the clinical outcomes of catheter ablation in patients with L-PeAF.
METHODS AND RESULTS: This study enrolled 137 L-PeAF patients (71.4% male, 61.6±10.9 years old) who underwent radiofrequency catheter ablation. We conducted CPVI+Line based on the Dallas lesion set (posterior box+anterior line) after baseline CFAE mapping in all patients. If AF was defragmented (terminated or changed to atrial tachycardia), the procedure was stopped (AF-Defrag group, n=29). If AF was maintained after CPVI+Line, we mapped the CFAE again and randomly assigned the patient to the CPVI+Line group (n=54) or the additional CFAE ablation group (CPVI+Line+CFAE group, n=54). L-PeAF was defragmented during CPVI+Line in 21.2% of patients (29/137, AF-Defrag group). The mean CFAE cycle length was prolonged (P<0.001), and CFAE area (CFAE cycle length <120 milliseconds) was reduced (P<0.001) after CPVI+Line in the remaining patients. Procedure time was longer in the CPVI+Line+CFAE group than the CPVI+Line group (P=0.023), but procedure-related complication rates did not vary. During 22.3±13.2 months of follow-up, the clinical recurrence rates were 17.2% in the AF-Defrag group, 18.5% in the CPVI+Line group, and 32.1% in the CPVI+Line+CFAE group (log rank, P=0.166).
CONCLUSIONS: Although CPVI+Line reduces and localizes CFAE area, additional CFAE ablation after CPVI+Line does not improve the clinical outcomes of catheter ablation in patients with L-PeAF.