Andrew Chou, Krit Jongnarangsin, Miki Yokokawa, Michael Ghannam, Jackson J Liang, Hakan Oral, Fred Morady, Aman Chugh
{"title":"左心房后部隔离与持续性心房颤动患者房性心动过速发生率较低有关。","authors":"Andrew Chou, Krit Jongnarangsin, Miki Yokokawa, Michael Ghannam, Jackson J Liang, Hakan Oral, Fred Morady, Aman Chugh","doi":"10.1007/s10840-024-01769-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patients may develop atrial tachycardia (AT) after left atrial (LA) ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation (AF).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The population consisted of 101 consecutive patients (age = 64.3 ± 8.7 years, 70 males (69%), LA = 4.6 ± 0.8 cm, ejection fraction = 48.5 ± 16%) undergoing their initial procedure for persistent AF. After pulmonary vein isolation, patients either underwent posterior LA isolation (n = 50; study group) or linear ablation at the LA roof with verification of conduction block (n = 51; control group).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A repeat procedure was performed in 17 (34%) and 28 (55%) patients in the study and control groups, respectively (p = 0.02). Patients in the study group were less likely to develop AT (9/50 [18%] vs. 18/51 [35%]; p = 0.02), roof-dependent (1/50 [2%] vs. 8/51 [16%]; p = 0.008), and multi-loop AT (6/50 [12%] vs. 14/51 [27%]; p = 0.03) as compared to controls. Among various factors, only posterior LA isolation was associated with a lower likelihood of AT recurrence and roof tachycardia at redo procedure (OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.1 to 1.00, p = 0.05, and OR, 0.1, 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.96; p < 0.05, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In patients with persistent AF, posterior LA isolation is associated with a lower risk of a redo procedure, roof-dependent macro-reentry, and post-ablation AT in general as compared to controls who only received roof ablation. Posterior LA isolation also obviates the need for pacing maneuvers, and may be a more definitive endpoint than linear ablation at the LA roof.</p>","PeriodicalId":16202,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Posterior left atrial isolation is associated with a lower incidence of atrial tachycardia in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation.\",\"authors\":\"Andrew Chou, Krit Jongnarangsin, Miki Yokokawa, Michael Ghannam, Jackson J Liang, Hakan Oral, Fred Morady, Aman Chugh\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10840-024-01769-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patients may develop atrial tachycardia (AT) after left atrial (LA) ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation (AF).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The population consisted of 101 consecutive patients (age = 64.3 ± 8.7 years, 70 males (69%), LA = 4.6 ± 0.8 cm, ejection fraction = 48.5 ± 16%) undergoing their initial procedure for persistent AF. After pulmonary vein isolation, patients either underwent posterior LA isolation (n = 50; study group) or linear ablation at the LA roof with verification of conduction block (n = 51; control group).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A repeat procedure was performed in 17 (34%) and 28 (55%) patients in the study and control groups, respectively (p = 0.02). Patients in the study group were less likely to develop AT (9/50 [18%] vs. 18/51 [35%]; p = 0.02), roof-dependent (1/50 [2%] vs. 8/51 [16%]; p = 0.008), and multi-loop AT (6/50 [12%] vs. 14/51 [27%]; p = 0.03) as compared to controls. Among various factors, only posterior LA isolation was associated with a lower likelihood of AT recurrence and roof tachycardia at redo procedure (OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.1 to 1.00, p = 0.05, and OR, 0.1, 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.96; p < 0.05, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In patients with persistent AF, posterior LA isolation is associated with a lower risk of a redo procedure, roof-dependent macro-reentry, and post-ablation AT in general as compared to controls who only received roof ablation. Posterior LA isolation also obviates the need for pacing maneuvers, and may be a more definitive endpoint than linear ablation at the LA roof.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16202,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-024-01769-z\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/2/27 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-024-01769-z","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:持续性房颤(AF)的左心房(LA)消融术后,患者可能出现房性心动过速(AT):研究对象包括101名连续患者(年龄=64.3±8.7岁,70名男性(69%),LA=4.6±0.8厘米,射血分数=48.5±16%),他们都是首次接受持续性房颤手术。肺静脉隔绝术后,患者要么接受LA后部隔绝术(n = 50;研究组),要么接受LA顶部线性消融术,并验证传导阻滞(n = 51;对照组):研究组和对照组分别有 17 例(34%)和 28 例(55%)患者进行了重复手术(P = 0.02)。与对照组相比,研究组患者发生 AT(9/50 [18%] vs. 18/51 [35%];p = 0.02)、屋顶依赖(1/50 [2%] vs. 8/51 [16%];p = 0.008)和多环 AT(6/50 [12%] vs. 14/51 [27%];p = 0.03)的几率较低。在各种因素中,只有后LA隔离与AT复发和重做手术时屋顶心动过速的可能性较低有关(OR,0.37;95% CI,0.1~1.00,p = 0.05,和OR,0.1,95% CI,0.01~0.96;p 结论:后LA隔离与AT复发和屋顶心动过速的可能性较低有关:在持续性房颤患者中,与仅接受房顶消融术的对照组相比,后LA隔绝术与较低的重做手术风险、房顶依赖性大再发风险和消融术后AT相关。LA 后隔绝术还避免了起搏操作的需要,与 LA 室顶线性消融术相比,它可能是一个更明确的终点。
Posterior left atrial isolation is associated with a lower incidence of atrial tachycardia in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation.
Background: Patients may develop atrial tachycardia (AT) after left atrial (LA) ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation (AF).
Methods: The population consisted of 101 consecutive patients (age = 64.3 ± 8.7 years, 70 males (69%), LA = 4.6 ± 0.8 cm, ejection fraction = 48.5 ± 16%) undergoing their initial procedure for persistent AF. After pulmonary vein isolation, patients either underwent posterior LA isolation (n = 50; study group) or linear ablation at the LA roof with verification of conduction block (n = 51; control group).
Results: A repeat procedure was performed in 17 (34%) and 28 (55%) patients in the study and control groups, respectively (p = 0.02). Patients in the study group were less likely to develop AT (9/50 [18%] vs. 18/51 [35%]; p = 0.02), roof-dependent (1/50 [2%] vs. 8/51 [16%]; p = 0.008), and multi-loop AT (6/50 [12%] vs. 14/51 [27%]; p = 0.03) as compared to controls. Among various factors, only posterior LA isolation was associated with a lower likelihood of AT recurrence and roof tachycardia at redo procedure (OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.1 to 1.00, p = 0.05, and OR, 0.1, 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.96; p < 0.05, respectively).
Conclusions: In patients with persistent AF, posterior LA isolation is associated with a lower risk of a redo procedure, roof-dependent macro-reentry, and post-ablation AT in general as compared to controls who only received roof ablation. Posterior LA isolation also obviates the need for pacing maneuvers, and may be a more definitive endpoint than linear ablation at the LA roof.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology is an international publication devoted to fostering research in and development of interventional techniques and therapies for the management of cardiac arrhythmias. It is designed primarily to present original research studies and scholarly scientific reviews of basic and applied science and clinical research in this field. The Journal will adopt a multidisciplinary approach to link physical, experimental, and clinical sciences as applied to the development of and practice in interventional electrophysiology. The Journal will examine techniques ranging from molecular, chemical and pharmacologic therapies to device and ablation technology. Accordingly, original research in clinical, epidemiologic and basic science arenas will be considered for publication. Applied engineering or physical science studies pertaining to interventional electrophysiology will be encouraged. The Journal is committed to providing comprehensive and detailed treatment of major interventional therapies and innovative techniques in a structured and clinically relevant manner. It is directed at clinical practitioners and investigators in the rapidly growing field of interventional electrophysiology. The editorial staff and board reflect this bias and include noted international experts in this area with a wealth of expertise in basic and clinical investigation. Peer review of all submissions, conflict of interest guidelines and periodic editorial board review of all Journal policies have been established.