高倍单环隔离与箱隔离在老年持续性心房颤动患者中的比较。

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q2 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Yanbin Song, Xiaofang Liang, Sheliang Xue, Bo Xu, Jianqiang Xiao, Wenhua Li
{"title":"高倍单环隔离与箱隔离在老年持续性心房颤动患者中的比较。","authors":"Yanbin Song, Xiaofang Liang, Sheliang Xue, Bo Xu, Jianqiang Xiao, Wenhua Li","doi":"10.1186/s12877-025-05981-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study evaluated the superiority of single-ring isolation (SRI) over box isolation using high power in elderly patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (PeAF).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively studied elderly patients with PeAF who underwent primary catheter ablation. The patients were divided into the SRI group and the posterior box isolation (BOXI) group. Basic characteristics, procedural variables, complications and atrial arrhythmia recurrence rates were collected.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-five pairs of patients in the two groups were matched by 1:1 PSM. Compared with that in the BOXI group, the total procedure time in the SRI group was not significantly different (P = 0.340). However, there were significant reductions in the total ablation time, ring ablation lesions and number of lesions on the posterior wall in patients who underwent SRI compared to those who underwent BOXI (all P < 0.001). The cardiac troponin level in the SRI group was significantly lower (P = 0.023). There were significantly fewer mismatched three-dimensional mapping models and mismatched models per patient due to pain-induced movement in the SRI group (all P < 0.05). The questionnaires revealed that the pain score was significantly lower in the SRI group than in the BOXI group (P < 0.001). In addition, significantly fewer patients with SRI than with BOXI experienced gastrointestinal symptoms after the procedure (15.56% vs. 37.78%, P = 0.017). K‒M analysis revealed no significant difference in atrial arrhythmia-free survival at 12 months between the SRI and BOXI patients (P > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>High-power SRI is safe and feasible and may be superior to the BOXI for experience of elderly patients with PeAF.</p>","PeriodicalId":9056,"journal":{"name":"BMC Geriatrics","volume":"25 1","pages":"344"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12082901/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of high-power single-ring isolation and box isolation in elderly patients with persistent atrial fibrillation.\",\"authors\":\"Yanbin Song, Xiaofang Liang, Sheliang Xue, Bo Xu, Jianqiang Xiao, Wenhua Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12877-025-05981-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study evaluated the superiority of single-ring isolation (SRI) over box isolation using high power in elderly patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (PeAF).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively studied elderly patients with PeAF who underwent primary catheter ablation. The patients were divided into the SRI group and the posterior box isolation (BOXI) group. Basic characteristics, procedural variables, complications and atrial arrhythmia recurrence rates were collected.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-five pairs of patients in the two groups were matched by 1:1 PSM. Compared with that in the BOXI group, the total procedure time in the SRI group was not significantly different (P = 0.340). However, there were significant reductions in the total ablation time, ring ablation lesions and number of lesions on the posterior wall in patients who underwent SRI compared to those who underwent BOXI (all P < 0.001). The cardiac troponin level in the SRI group was significantly lower (P = 0.023). There were significantly fewer mismatched three-dimensional mapping models and mismatched models per patient due to pain-induced movement in the SRI group (all P < 0.05). The questionnaires revealed that the pain score was significantly lower in the SRI group than in the BOXI group (P < 0.001). In addition, significantly fewer patients with SRI than with BOXI experienced gastrointestinal symptoms after the procedure (15.56% vs. 37.78%, P = 0.017). K‒M analysis revealed no significant difference in atrial arrhythmia-free survival at 12 months between the SRI and BOXI patients (P > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>High-power SRI is safe and feasible and may be superior to the BOXI for experience of elderly patients with PeAF.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9056,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Geriatrics\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"344\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12082901/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Geriatrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-025-05981-y\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Geriatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-025-05981-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:本研究评价了单环隔离(SRI)在老年持续性心房颤动(PeAF)患者中的优越性。方法:我们回顾性研究经导管消融治疗的老年PeAF患者。患者分为SRI组和后盒隔离(BOXI)组。收集基本特征、手术变量、并发症及房性心律失常复发率。结果:两组45对患者按1:1 PSM配对。与BOXI组比较,SRI组总手术时间差异无统计学意义(P = 0.340)。然而,与BOXI相比,SRI患者的总消融时间、环形消融病变和后壁病变数量均显著减少(均P < 0.05)。结论:大功率SRI是安全可行的,在治疗老年PeAF患者方面可能优于BOXI。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of high-power single-ring isolation and box isolation in elderly patients with persistent atrial fibrillation.

Background: This study evaluated the superiority of single-ring isolation (SRI) over box isolation using high power in elderly patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (PeAF).

Methods: We retrospectively studied elderly patients with PeAF who underwent primary catheter ablation. The patients were divided into the SRI group and the posterior box isolation (BOXI) group. Basic characteristics, procedural variables, complications and atrial arrhythmia recurrence rates were collected.

Results: Forty-five pairs of patients in the two groups were matched by 1:1 PSM. Compared with that in the BOXI group, the total procedure time in the SRI group was not significantly different (P = 0.340). However, there were significant reductions in the total ablation time, ring ablation lesions and number of lesions on the posterior wall in patients who underwent SRI compared to those who underwent BOXI (all P < 0.001). The cardiac troponin level in the SRI group was significantly lower (P = 0.023). There were significantly fewer mismatched three-dimensional mapping models and mismatched models per patient due to pain-induced movement in the SRI group (all P < 0.05). The questionnaires revealed that the pain score was significantly lower in the SRI group than in the BOXI group (P < 0.001). In addition, significantly fewer patients with SRI than with BOXI experienced gastrointestinal symptoms after the procedure (15.56% vs. 37.78%, P = 0.017). K‒M analysis revealed no significant difference in atrial arrhythmia-free survival at 12 months between the SRI and BOXI patients (P > 0.05).

Conclusions: High-power SRI is safe and feasible and may be superior to the BOXI for experience of elderly patients with PeAF.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Geriatrics
BMC Geriatrics GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
7.30%
发文量
873
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Geriatrics is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in all aspects of the health and healthcare of older people, including the effects of healthcare systems and policies. The journal also welcomes research focused on the aging process, including cellular, genetic, and physiological processes and cognitive modifications.
×
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