International journal of cardiology · 2016
A clinical study on the electrophysiological characteristics of patients without recurrence after ablation of persistent 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.
Wu Shao-Hui, Qin Mu, Jiang Wei-Feng, Wang Yuan-Long, Xu Kai, Zhang Dao-Liang, Zhang Xiao-Dong, Liu Xu
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The electrophysiological characteristics of patients without recurrence after ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) have not been systematically determined. This study compared the electrophysiological characteristics in patients with and without recurrence of AF after persistent AF ablation.
METHODS: Forty-five patients without recurrence of AF after persistent AF ablation were enrolled to assess electrophysiological characteristics including pulmonary vein (PV) reconnection, the mitral isthmus (MI) line and the roof line reconduction. Ninety-five patients with recurrence of AF after ablation were used as the control group.
RESULTS: Among patients without recurrence, recovery of PV conduction was observed in 37 of 45 (82.2%) patients: 3/45 (6.7%) reconnection in 4 veins, 7/45 (15.6%) in 3 veins, 11/45 (24.4%) in 2 veins, and 16/45 (35.6%) in 1 vein. No significant differences were seen in the proportion of patients with PV reconnection compared to patients with recurrence (p>0.05). Among patients without recurrence, the MI line reconduction was observed in 3/45 (6.7%) patients; the roof line conduction was observed in 5/45 (11.1%) patients. In comparison, patients with clinical recurrence of AF had recovery of the MI line conduction in 27/95 (28.4%) and recovery of the roof line conduction in 26/95 (27.4%). Significant differences were seen between these two groups (6.7% vs 28.4%, p=0.004; 11.1% vs 27.4%, p=0.031).
CONCLUSION: Although a high incidence of PV reconnection was similarly observed in patients with and without recurrence of AF, a lower incidence of lines reconduction was observed in patients without recurrence of AF.
METHODS: Forty-five patients without recurrence of AF after persistent AF ablation were enrolled to assess electrophysiological characteristics including pulmonary vein (PV) reconnection, the mitral isthmus (MI) line and the roof line reconduction. Ninety-five patients with recurrence of AF after ablation were used as the control group.
RESULTS: Among patients without recurrence, recovery of PV conduction was observed in 37 of 45 (82.2%) patients: 3/45 (6.7%) reconnection in 4 veins, 7/45 (15.6%) in 3 veins, 11/45 (24.4%) in 2 veins, and 16/45 (35.6%) in 1 vein. No significant differences were seen in the proportion of patients with PV reconnection compared to patients with recurrence (p>0.05). Among patients without recurrence, the MI line reconduction was observed in 3/45 (6.7%) patients; the roof line conduction was observed in 5/45 (11.1%) patients. In comparison, patients with clinical recurrence of AF had recovery of the MI line conduction in 27/95 (28.4%) and recovery of the roof line conduction in 26/95 (27.4%). Significant differences were seen between these two groups (6.7% vs 28.4%, p=0.004; 11.1% vs 27.4%, p=0.031).
CONCLUSION: Although a high incidence of PV reconnection was similarly observed in patients with and without recurrence of AF, a lower incidence of lines reconduction was observed in patients without recurrence of AF.