We have located links that may give you full text access.
CLINICAL TRIAL
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Efficacy and safety of targeted focal ablation versus PV isolation assisted by magnetic electroanatomic mapping.
Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology 2003 April
INTRODUCTION: Pulmonary vein (PV) triggers initiate atrial fibrillation (AF). The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of focal PV ablation versus targeted PV electrical isolation aided by multipolar catheter recordings in the coronary sinus (CS) and right atrium and magnetic electroanatomic mapping (MEAM) for drug-refractory AF.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Multipolar recordings identified PVs with triggers based on PV ostial pace map match for spontaneous and provoked triggers. PV triggers were provoked by isoproterenol, adenosine, and AF induction followed by cardioversion. MEAM defined PV ostial anatomy and assisted in localization of AF trigger and ablation lesions. All focal PV ablation procedures preceded PV isolation procedures at our institution. To limit a learning curve effect and validate the comparison, the results included outcome of procedures by a single experienced operator in the last 32 consecutive patients undergoing focal PV ablation and in 75 consecutive patients undergoing PV isolation. Patient characteristics were similar with respect to mean age (50 vs 52 years), mean left atrial size (4.3 vs 4.2 cm), presence of paroxysmal AF (84% vs 88%), and demonstration of non-PV triggers (16% in both groups). PV isolation was confirmed in 99% of PVs by multipolar circular catheter. MEAM confirmed noncircumferential ostial ablation in 69% of PVs. Patients undergoing PV isolation had less AF from PV triggers at the end of ablation (1% vs 16%, P < 0.01); had less AF at 2 months (17% vs 42%, P < 0.001); and had 1-year freedom from AF of 80% versus 45% (P < 0.001). Adverse events were low in both groups with no stroke or symptomatic PV stenosis.
CONCLUSION: Using the described techniques, PV electrical isolation of PVs demonstrating spontaneous and/or provoked triggers is superior to focal PV ablation, with marked differences in outcome by 2 months. MEAM confirmed the noncircumferential nature of ostial ablation for effective isolation of most PVs and may play a role in the low risk and good outcome observed. The good outcome of targeted PV isolation as described suggests the need for a prospective comparison of targeted versus empiric PV isolation techniques.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Multipolar recordings identified PVs with triggers based on PV ostial pace map match for spontaneous and provoked triggers. PV triggers were provoked by isoproterenol, adenosine, and AF induction followed by cardioversion. MEAM defined PV ostial anatomy and assisted in localization of AF trigger and ablation lesions. All focal PV ablation procedures preceded PV isolation procedures at our institution. To limit a learning curve effect and validate the comparison, the results included outcome of procedures by a single experienced operator in the last 32 consecutive patients undergoing focal PV ablation and in 75 consecutive patients undergoing PV isolation. Patient characteristics were similar with respect to mean age (50 vs 52 years), mean left atrial size (4.3 vs 4.2 cm), presence of paroxysmal AF (84% vs 88%), and demonstration of non-PV triggers (16% in both groups). PV isolation was confirmed in 99% of PVs by multipolar circular catheter. MEAM confirmed noncircumferential ostial ablation in 69% of PVs. Patients undergoing PV isolation had less AF from PV triggers at the end of ablation (1% vs 16%, P < 0.01); had less AF at 2 months (17% vs 42%, P < 0.001); and had 1-year freedom from AF of 80% versus 45% (P < 0.001). Adverse events were low in both groups with no stroke or symptomatic PV stenosis.
CONCLUSION: Using the described techniques, PV electrical isolation of PVs demonstrating spontaneous and/or provoked triggers is superior to focal PV ablation, with marked differences in outcome by 2 months. MEAM confirmed the noncircumferential nature of ostial ablation for effective isolation of most PVs and may play a role in the low risk and good outcome observed. The good outcome of targeted PV isolation as described suggests the need for a prospective comparison of targeted versus empiric PV isolation techniques.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app