Remote magnetic-guided catheter ablation versus manual ablation in patients with repaired congenital heart disease and atrial tachyarrhythmias: propensity-matched observational study of long-term results

Q4 Medicine
A. B. Romanov, A. G. Filippenko, V. V. Shabanov, V. V. Beloborodov, V. A. Boboshko, S. E. Khrushchev, P. S. Ruzankin
{"title":"Remote magnetic-guided catheter ablation versus manual ablation in patients with repaired congenital heart disease and atrial tachyarrhythmias: propensity-matched observational study of long-term results","authors":"A. B. Romanov, A. G. Filippenko, V. V. Shabanov, V. V. Beloborodov, V. A. Boboshko, S. E. Khrushchev, P. S. Ruzankin","doi":"10.35336/va-1214","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim. To compare the long-term outcomes of the catheter ablation (CA) using remote magnetic-guided navigation (RMN) and manual radiofrequency CA (MAN) in patients with congenital heart defect (CHD) and incisional atrial tachyarrhythmias (AT). Methods. In this retrospective study cohort, 67 patients were included with CHD and AT. CHD were classified based on complexity (simple, moderate, and complex) according to ACC/AHA guidelines 2008. Fifty-seven (85%) patients underwent at least one surgical procedure for CHD correction before CA. The patients were divided into the two groups regarding CA approach: the MAN group (n=42) and the RMN group (n=25). The primary endpoitnts was long-term freedom from any AT, including atrial fibrillation. Key secondary endpoints included perioperative and late complications. To compare freedom from any AT between the groups, 1:3 propensity score matching was applied, and 63 patients were matched. The matching was exact on CHD complexity. The weighted matched observations were assessed with univariate Cox regression with any AT as the outcome. Results. The median follow-up period was 20 months. In the matched MAN and RMN groups, 92.3% and 83.3% patients, respectively, had incisional АТ (p=0.27), the other patients having additionally AF. The mean fluoroscopy time was statistically significant lower in the RMN group compared with MAN (р=0.009) with longer procedural duration in the RMN group (p<0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in perioperative and late complications. The freedom from any AT 36 months after CA was 78.9% in the matched RMN group and 47.2% in the matched MAN group. The comparison of freedom from any AT between the groups yielded p=0.040, hazard ration 0.32 [95% confidence interval 0.11; 0.95]. Conclusion. RMN CA was superior over manual CA with respect to long-term freedom from AT in patients with CHD with similar safety profile.","PeriodicalId":52704,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik aritmologii","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vestnik aritmologii","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35336/va-1214","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim. To compare the long-term outcomes of the catheter ablation (CA) using remote magnetic-guided navigation (RMN) and manual radiofrequency CA (MAN) in patients with congenital heart defect (CHD) and incisional atrial tachyarrhythmias (AT). Methods. In this retrospective study cohort, 67 patients were included with CHD and AT. CHD were classified based on complexity (simple, moderate, and complex) according to ACC/AHA guidelines 2008. Fifty-seven (85%) patients underwent at least one surgical procedure for CHD correction before CA. The patients were divided into the two groups regarding CA approach: the MAN group (n=42) and the RMN group (n=25). The primary endpoitnts was long-term freedom from any AT, including atrial fibrillation. Key secondary endpoints included perioperative and late complications. To compare freedom from any AT between the groups, 1:3 propensity score matching was applied, and 63 patients were matched. The matching was exact on CHD complexity. The weighted matched observations were assessed with univariate Cox regression with any AT as the outcome. Results. The median follow-up period was 20 months. In the matched MAN and RMN groups, 92.3% and 83.3% patients, respectively, had incisional АТ (p=0.27), the other patients having additionally AF. The mean fluoroscopy time was statistically significant lower in the RMN group compared with MAN (р=0.009) with longer procedural duration in the RMN group (p<0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in perioperative and late complications. The freedom from any AT 36 months after CA was 78.9% in the matched RMN group and 47.2% in the matched MAN group. The comparison of freedom from any AT between the groups yielded p=0.040, hazard ration 0.32 [95% confidence interval 0.11; 0.95]. Conclusion. RMN CA was superior over manual CA with respect to long-term freedom from AT in patients with CHD with similar safety profile.
远程磁导导管消融与人工消融在修复先天性心脏病和房性心动过速患者中的应用:长期结果的倾向匹配观察研究
的目标。比较远程磁导导航(RMN)导管消融(CA)与手动射频消融(MAN)治疗先天性心脏缺损(CHD)和切口性房性心动过速(AT)患者的长期疗效。方法。在本回顾性研究队列中,纳入了67例冠心病和AT患者。根据2008年ACC/AHA指南对冠心病的复杂程度(简单、中度和复杂)进行分类。57例(85%)患者在CA前至少接受过一次手术矫正冠心病。患者被分为两组:MAN组(n=42)和RMN组(n=25)。主要终点是长期无任何AT,包括房颤。主要次要终点包括围手术期和晚期并发症。为了比较各组之间的AT自由度,采用1:3倾向评分匹配,并匹配了63例患者。在冠心病复杂性上的匹配是精确的。以任何AT为结果,用单变量Cox回归评估加权匹配观察结果。结果。中位随访期为20个月。在匹配的MAN组和RMN组中,分别有92.3%和83.3%的患者有切口АТ (p=0.27),其他患者有AF。RMN组的平均x线检查时间比MAN组低(p= 0.009), RMN组的手术时间更长(p= 0.001)。两组围手术期及晚期并发症发生率无统计学差异。CA后36个月,RMN配对组的AT自由率为78.9%,MAN配对组为47.2%。各组间AT自由度比较p=0.040,风险比0.32[95%可信区间0.11;0.95]。结论。在安全性相似的冠心病患者中,RMN CA在长期免于AT方面优于手动CA。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Vestnik aritmologii
Vestnik aritmologii Medicine-Pharmacology (medical)
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信