Does organized atrial tachycardia after a pulmonary vein isolation-only procedure portend better outcome of repeat ablation compared to recurrent atrial fibrillation?

IF 2.2 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Tamás János Riesz MD, Gábor Bencsik MD, PhD, László Sághy MD, PhD, Róbert Pap MD, PhD
{"title":"Does organized atrial tachycardia after a pulmonary vein isolation-only procedure portend better outcome of repeat ablation compared to recurrent atrial fibrillation?","authors":"Tamás János Riesz MD,&nbsp;Gábor Bencsik MD, PhD,&nbsp;László Sághy MD, PhD,&nbsp;Róbert Pap MD, PhD","doi":"10.1002/joa3.70049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Better outcome has been suggested for repeat procedures after atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation, when recurrence presented as organized atrial tachycardia (OAT) compared to recurrent AF. However, this contradicts the finding of more advanced atrial remodeling in patients with OAT recurrence and may be related to iatrogenesis by substrate modification during the index procedure. Therefore, we examined the prognostic significance of the type of recurrent arrhythmia after pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) without additional substrate modification.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We included 185 patients (88 female, 64 ± 9 years) undergoing repeat ablation after index PVI for recurrent OAT (24%) or AF (76%). The recurrence rate, arrhythmia-free survival time, and the type of further recurrences were recorded.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>There was no difference in the rate and mean time of arrhythmia-free survival between patients with OAT versus AF recurrence after the first (49% vs. 52%, <i>p</i> = .72 and 51.08 ± 6.66 vs. 53.37 ± 4.75 months, <i>p</i> = .54, respectively) and last (60% vs. 58%, <i>p</i> = .80 and 63.2 ± 7.04 vs. 61.2 ± 5.32 months, <i>p</i> = .23, respectively) redo procedure. AF occurred in the majority of subsequently recurring patients in both groups. No significant difference was found in the outcome of redo procedures between patients with typical flutter and atypical OAT, but a higher rate of successful rhythm control was observed in those with paroxysmal, as compared to persistent AF recurrence.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>After a PVI-only index procedure, recurrent OAT is not associated with a better outcome of redo procedures compared to recurrent AF. After repeat ablations, both groups experience AF as the dominant further recurrence.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15174,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Arrhythmia","volume":"41 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/joa3.70049","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Arrhythmia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/joa3.70049","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Better outcome has been suggested for repeat procedures after atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation, when recurrence presented as organized atrial tachycardia (OAT) compared to recurrent AF. However, this contradicts the finding of more advanced atrial remodeling in patients with OAT recurrence and may be related to iatrogenesis by substrate modification during the index procedure. Therefore, we examined the prognostic significance of the type of recurrent arrhythmia after pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) without additional substrate modification.

Methods

We included 185 patients (88 female, 64 ± 9 years) undergoing repeat ablation after index PVI for recurrent OAT (24%) or AF (76%). The recurrence rate, arrhythmia-free survival time, and the type of further recurrences were recorded.

Results

There was no difference in the rate and mean time of arrhythmia-free survival between patients with OAT versus AF recurrence after the first (49% vs. 52%, p = .72 and 51.08 ± 6.66 vs. 53.37 ± 4.75 months, p = .54, respectively) and last (60% vs. 58%, p = .80 and 63.2 ± 7.04 vs. 61.2 ± 5.32 months, p = .23, respectively) redo procedure. AF occurred in the majority of subsequently recurring patients in both groups. No significant difference was found in the outcome of redo procedures between patients with typical flutter and atypical OAT, but a higher rate of successful rhythm control was observed in those with paroxysmal, as compared to persistent AF recurrence.

Conclusion

After a PVI-only index procedure, recurrent OAT is not associated with a better outcome of redo procedures compared to recurrent AF. After repeat ablations, both groups experience AF as the dominant further recurrence.

Abstract Image

与复发性心房颤动相比,单纯肺静脉隔离手术后有组织性房性心动过速预示着重复消融更好的结果吗?
背景 有研究表明,与复发性房颤相比,房颤消融术后复发为有组织房性心动过速(OAT)时,重复手术的疗效更好。然而,这与 OAT 复发患者心房重塑程度更高的发现相矛盾,可能与指数手术过程中基质改变的先天性因素有关。因此,我们研究了肺静脉隔离术(PVI)后复发心律失常类型的预后意义,而无需额外的基质改造。 方法 我们纳入了 185 名因复发性 OAT(24%)或房颤(76%)而接受指数 PVI 后重复消融术的患者(88 名女性,64 ± 9 岁)。记录了复发率、无心律失常生存时间和进一步复发的类型。 结果 首次(49% 对 52%,p = .72;51.08 ± 6.66 个月对 53.37 ± 4.75 个月,p = .54)和最后一次(60% 对 58%,p = .80;63.2 ± 7.04 个月对 61.2 ± 5.32 个月,p = .23)重做手术后,OAT 和房颤复发患者的复发率和平均无心律失常存活时间没有差异。两组患者中大多数随后复发的患者都发生了房颤。典型扑动和非典型 OAT 患者的重做手术结果无明显差异,但阵发性房颤复发患者的节律控制成功率高于持续性房颤复发患者。 结论 仅进行 PVI 指征手术后,与复发性房颤相比,复发性 OAT 与更好的重做手术结果无关。在重复消融术后,两组患者的主要复发因素都是房颤。
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
Journal of Arrhythmia
Journal of Arrhythmia CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
10.00%
发文量
127
审稿时长
45 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