COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Does the amount of atrial mass reduction improve clinical outcomes after radiofrequency catheter ablation for long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation? Comparison between linear ablation and defragmentation.

BACKGROUND: Although a large isolated surface area of the left atrium (LA) may improve the success rate of catheter ablation (CA) for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF), little is known about the relation between clinical outcomes and the amount of atrial mass reduction (AMR: ratio of total isolated and ablated areas to LA surface area) in different ablation strategies for patients with long-standing persistent AF (L-PeAF).

METHODS: We randomly assigned 119 consecutive L-PeAF patients to adjunctive linear ablation (n=60) or complex fractionated atrial electrogram (CFAE)-guided ablation (n=59) after circumferential antral pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). Linear lesions included roof and anterior lines with conduction block. LA defragmentation was performed with an automated CFAE-detection algorithm. Cavotricuspid isthmus block was performed in all patients. Creatine kinase-MB (CK-MB) and troponin-T levels were measured 1 day post-CA.

RESULTS: CK-MB and troponin-T levels were higher, ablation time was longer, and AMR was greater in the CFAE-guided ablation group than in the linear ablation group. AF termination during CA was more frequently observed in the linear ablation group than in the CFAE-guided ablation group (P=0.031). Twelve months after a single procedure, recurrence occurred in 16 (26.7%) patients with linear ablation and 27 (45.8%) patients with CFAE-guided ablation (P=0.023). On multivariate analysis, LA volume and ablation method were the only independent risk factors for arrhythmia recurrence.

CONCLUSION: Conduction block through linear lines+PVI was an efficient ablation strategy for L-PeAF, whereas the AMR amount did not influence clinical outcomes.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

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 Toggle icon

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