Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2015
Recurrence of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation after pulmonary vein isolation: is repeat pulmonary vein isolation enough? A prospective, randomized trial.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное 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.
Fichtner Stephanie, Sparn Korbinian, Reents Tilko, Ammar Sonia, Semmler Verena, Dillier Roger, Buiatti Alexandra, Kathan Susanne, Hessling Gabriele, Deisenhofer Isabel
Аннотация
AIMS: In patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (pAF), pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) has become an accepted treatment option with single procedure success rates of 60-80%. A repeat ablation is performed in ∼30% of patients because of arrhythmia recurrence. The strategy for this repeat procedure is not defined.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with pAF recurrence after PVI were prospectively randomized and underwent a second ablation procedure with either PVI of all reconnected veins or PVI with an additional left atrial anterior line. Follow-up in our arrhythmia clinic was every 3 months up to 12 months including 7 day Holter monitoring. A total of 77 patients (mean age 63 ± 9 years, 69% males) were included in the analysis. A repeat PVI was performed in 41 patients, PVI + anterior line in 36 patients. After a follow-up of 12 months, 26 of 41 (63%) patients after repeat PVI and 18 of 36 (50%) patients with PVI + anterior line were in stable sinus rhythm off antiarrhythmic medication (P = 0.26). In most patients (12 of 15 patients with PVI and 14 of 18 patients with PVI + anterior line) with an arrhythmia recurrence after the second procedure, the recurring arrhythmia was paroxysmal AF. In 2 of 15 patients of the PVI group and in 4 of 18 patients of the PVI + anterior line group atypical flutter was the reoccurring arrhythmia (P = NS).
CONCLUSION: In this prospective randomized trial, patients with a recurrence of paroxysmal AF had no better outcome after repeat PVI + one left atrial line compared with patients with repeat PVI only.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with pAF recurrence after PVI were prospectively randomized and underwent a second ablation procedure with either PVI of all reconnected veins or PVI with an additional left atrial anterior line. Follow-up in our arrhythmia clinic was every 3 months up to 12 months including 7 day Holter monitoring. A total of 77 patients (mean age 63 ± 9 years, 69% males) were included in the analysis. A repeat PVI was performed in 41 patients, PVI + anterior line in 36 patients. After a follow-up of 12 months, 26 of 41 (63%) patients after repeat PVI and 18 of 36 (50%) patients with PVI + anterior line were in stable sinus rhythm off antiarrhythmic medication (P = 0.26). In most patients (12 of 15 patients with PVI and 14 of 18 patients with PVI + anterior line) with an arrhythmia recurrence after the second procedure, the recurring arrhythmia was paroxysmal AF. In 2 of 15 patients of the PVI group and in 4 of 18 patients of the PVI + anterior line group atypical flutter was the reoccurring arrhythmia (P = NS).
CONCLUSION: In this prospective randomized trial, patients with a recurrence of paroxysmal AF had no better outcome after repeat PVI + one left atrial line compared with patients with repeat PVI only.