三维标测系统指导心房颤动导管消融的临床研究

目的 探讨三维标测系统指导下导管射频消融治疗心房颤动的有效性与安全性.方法 回顾性分析39例在三维标测系统指导下行环肺静脉线性消融术的心房颤动患者(其中阵发性心房颤动33例和持续性心房颤动6例)的临床资料,着重分析术前准备、标测及消融方法 、手术结果 、术后治疗和随访.结果 消融终点为Lagso标测的所有肺静脉均达到完全电学隔离,若消融结束后心房颤动仍未终止,即行同步直流电复律恢复窦性心律.39例患者共完成78条环形消融线,肺静脉完全电学隔离率为93.6%(73/78).手术操作时间为(245±56)min、X线曝光时间为(46±15)min.术后随访6个月～12个月,33例临床症状得到改善,无心房颤动复发,6例需服用抗心律失常药维持窦性心律,其中3例心房颤动复发患者接受再次导管消融后无发作.射频消融术后总成功率为84.6%(33/39).结论 三维标测系统指导下导管射频消融治疗心房颤动是安全和有效的治疗方法.     

经导管射频消融治疗阵发性心房颤动的疗效和安全性

目的 探讨经导管射频消融治疗阵发性心房颤动(简称房颤)的有效性与安全性.方法 42例阵发性房颤患者采用节段性消融肺静脉电隔离术或三维标测系统指导下环肺静脉电隔离术两种不同方法进行经导管射频消融治疗,术后进行随访,观察其疗效和安全性.结果 42例患者中,25例(59.52%)经导管消融成功.4例(9.52%)有效,13例(30.95%)无效,4例(9.52%)出现并发症,无死亡病例.节段性消融肺静脉电隔离术平均手术时间为(235.50±38.01)min,X曝光时间为(74.35±12.73)min;三维标测系统指导下环肺静脉电隔离平均手术时间为(163.18±24.76)min,X曝光时间为(36.90±8.06)min.结论 经导管射频消融治疗阵发性房颤对大部分患者是有效的,三维标测系统指导下环肺静脉电隔离术的手术时间和X曝光时间短于节段性消融肺静脉电隔离术.     

三维标测与肺静脉环状标测联合应用于心房颤动导管消融术

目的　探讨左心房三维电解剖标测与肺静脉环状标测联合指导下行心房颤动 (房颤 )导管消融术治疗房颤的可行性。方法　连续 14例药物治疗无效的房颤患者 ,男 10例 ,女 4例 ,平均年龄 5 2 4± 12 8(2 8～ 74 )岁 ,平均左心房内径 4 6 7± 5 4mm。其中阵发性房颤 10例、永久性房颤 3例、持续性房颤 1例。首先在三维标测系统指导下行左心房基质改良术 ,然后在肺静脉环状标测指导下行肺静脉节段性消融术。消融终点包括以下三点 :(1)完成所有预设的左心房消融径线 ;(2 )全部肺静脉均达电隔离 ;(3)阴性诱发结果。结果　 (1) 10例 (71 4 % )阵发性房颤达到消融终点 ;(2 )手术的总操作时间和X线曝光时间分别为 2 92± 4 9min和 5 4± 9min ;(3)随访 5 2± 5 7(1～ 2 3)周 ,7例 (5 0 % )阵发性房颤患者可以无需抗心律失常药物而维持窦性心律 ,3例 (2 1 4 % )阵发性房颤发作显著减少 ,4例 (2 8 6 % )持续性 永久性房颤仍为房颤 ;(4 )术中及随访期无任何操作相关并发症。结论　左心房三维标测与肺静脉环状标测联合应用于房颤的导管消融术安全可行 ,对于左心房增大的阵发性房颤患者具有一定效果     

EnSite NavX指导下无肺静脉造影的阵发性心房颤动导管消融术

目的探讨不作肺静脉造影行阵发性心房颤动(房颤)环肺静脉电隔离术的有效性和可行性。方法 34例阵发性房颤患者分为无肺静脉造影组(n=18)和肺静脉造影组(n=16),无肺静脉造影组不作肺静脉造影,余步骤与肺静脉造影组相同,两组均在EnSiteNavX三维标测系统指导下重建左心房及肺静脉,再分别行左、右环肺静脉电隔离术,消融终点为肺静脉与心房完全电隔离。结果无肺静脉造影组消融术时间[(92.78±19.46)minvs.(106.44±20.18)min,P0.05]及X-线曝光时间[(11.47±4.32)minvs.(16.06±8.72)min,P0.05]少于肺静脉造影组,差异有统计学意义。两组左心房三维重建时间[(6.22±2.65)minvs.(6.31±3.00)min,P0.05]、左、右侧环肺静脉消融时间[(21.61±7.66)minvs.(20.50±8.09)min,P0.05;(17.33±10.22)minvs.(17.48±7.86)min,P0.05]及即刻消融成功率[100%(18/18)vs.100%(16/16),P0.05]比较,差异无统计学意义。结论不作肺静脉造影,仅在三维标测系统指导下行房颤消融治疗,可达到相同消融效果,可节省消融术及X-线曝光时间,减少手术步骤、耗材和费用。     

对射频消融术后心房颤动复发患者在三维标测系统指导下再次手术治疗

目的探讨射频消融术后心房颤动(房颤)复发的原因及再次手术对房颤的影响。方法入选随访3个月以上自觉症状较术前无好转、心电图证实仍有房颤发作的患者,于三维标测系统指导下行电生理研究及环肺静脉线性消融术,手术终点为环肺静脉消融线的完整及肺静脉的彻底电学隔离。所有患者再次手术后随访至少4个月,观察再次射频消融治疗对复发房性心律失常的影响。结果总计23例复发患者在2005年2月以前入院接受再次手术治疗,占同期复发患者的51.1%(2345)。其中13例首次手术时消融策略为节段性肺静脉消融(SPVA),另外10例为环肺静脉线性消融(CPVA),慢性持续性房颤患者占56.5%(1323)。首次手术为节段性肺静脉消融者肺静脉左心房电传导恢复率(以每根肺静脉为单位计算)为92.3%(4852),而首次接受环肺静脉线性消融术者肺静脉左心房电传导恢复率(以每根肺静脉计算)为75.0%(3040)。手术中见首次接受节段性肺静脉消融术的患者再次手术的手术时间、X线时间及放电时间均较长,与首次接受环肺静脉线性消融术的患者相比差异具有统计学意义。再次手术后平均随访4.2±3.5(4.0～9.0)个月,累计无房性快速心律失常率为82.6%(1923)。结论肺静脉左心房电传导恢复是多数房颤患者复发的原因;三维标测系统指导下的环肺静脉线性消融术用于治疗复发患者同样安全有效。     

双Lasso导管和三维标测指导下环肺静脉线性隔离术治疗心房颤动

目的在双Lasso导管和三维标测指导下环肺静脉线性消融并彻底隔离肺静脉以治疗心房颤动(简称房颤)。方法28例房颤患者接受射频消融治疗,其中阵发性房颤12例,持续性房颤16例。所有患者首先利用三维电解剖标测系统(CARTO)进行左房重建,然后将两根Lasso导管同时置入右(左)上下肺静脉内,在肺静脉口外0.5~1cm左右行环肺静脉线性消融,消融终点为左房-肺静脉完全性传导阻滞。结果28例均电隔离成功,肺静脉完成隔离后,共86.6%(97/112)的肺静脉内可见缓慢自律性电活动。手术时间205±67min,X线透视时间27±16min,无并发症发生。术后随访8.5±3.7个月,23例无房颤复发,总成功率82.1%。结论双Lasso导管和三维标测指导下有明确电学隔离指标的环肺静脉线性消融术治疗房颤安全而有效。     

三维标测指导心房颤动环肺静脉线性消融130例分析

目的:探讨三维标测系统指导下行心房颤动(房颤)环肺静脉线性消融的临床效果。方法:2006年6月至2009年8月对新疆维吾尔自治区人民医院收治的130例房颤患者进行三维标测系统(CARTO系统)指导下的环肺静脉线性消融,消融的主要终点为肺静脉电学隔离。随访3个月症状性快速性房性心律失常消失视为成功。结果:129例(99.2%)实现肺静脉电隔离,阵发性房颤消融成功率为84.5%,持续性、永久性单次房颤消融成功率71.1%。严重并发症包括心脏压塞1例,心包穿刺引流后痊愈;肺栓塞1例,治疗后康复;无死亡病例。结论:三维标测指导下心房颤动环肺静脉线性消融是安全、有效的。     

单纯三维电解剖标测系统指导与图像融合技术辅助下环肺静脉线性消融治疗心房颤动的临床对比分析

目的 评价三维电解剖(Carto)标测系统合并图像融合(Merge)技术指导下行环肺静脉线性消融术治疗心房颤动(房颤)的临床疗效,并与单纯用Carto系统治疗组比较.方法 回顾性分析2005年3月至2007年1月间接受导管射频消融术的连续68例房颤患者,其中单纯 Carto标测系统指导下手术患者11例(A组), Carto-Merge技术指导下手术患者57例.消融策略先行左房肺静脉电隔离,必要时加行左房碎裂电位消融 左房顶部、底部、峡部 右房三尖瓣峡部、上腔静脉、冠状静脉窦口部消融.结果 A组平均X线透视时间56.24±13.92 min,平均随访15.08±1.82个月,7例(57.14%)术后3个月生活质量明显改善,无房颤发作;其中阵发性房颤手术成功率为60%,2例接受第二次消融后治愈.B组平均X线透视时间33.32±13.84 min,平均随访8.97±6.28个月,51例(89.47%)术后3个月生活质量明显改善,无房颤发作;其中阵发性房颤手术成功率达95.12%;其X线透视时间,总体及阵发性房颤手术成功率均与A组有明显差异;B组中3例扩张型心肌病和1例肥厚型心肌病房颤消融成功,术后心功能明显改善.结论 在Carto-Merge技术指导下行环肺静脉线性消融术治疗房颤能提高手术效率及成功率,进一步减少X线曝光时间.左房肺静脉电隔离 左房碎裂电位消融 左房顶部、底部、峡部 右房三尖瓣峡部、上腔静脉、冠状窦口的消融可能通过改良心房基质而提高房颤手术成功率.     

环肺静脉左心房线性消融术后复发的房性心律失常

目的研究心房颤动(房颤)患者环肺静脉左心房线性消融术后复发房性心律失常的机制。方法28例房颤患者接受环肺静脉左心房线性消融术,平均年龄(54±11)岁,其中阵发性房颤10例,持续性房颤18例。采用Carto电解剖标测系统及双Lasso标测导管技术,分别进行环左、右侧肺静脉线性消融;消融终点为肺静脉电位消失,左心房-肺静脉双向阻滞。复发患者再次消融术采用双Lasso导管指导在原环形消融线上标测“漏点”并消融封闭之,对不能终止心动过速者再行拖带标测、激动标测或结合Carto系统标测;对典型心房扑动(房扑)行右心房峡部线性消融。结果初次消融术后平均随访(245±65)d,18例无复发;8例复发房性心律失常包括5例典型房扑、2例其他房性心动过速、1例阵发性房颤;2例左上肺静脉电位未完全隔离者仍持续房颤。除外1例持续性房颤,另外9例接受了再次消融术,证实所有复发患者均有左心房-肺静脉传导恢复;8例射频消融成功并随访(192±92)d无复发。结论左心房-肺静脉传导恢复是环肺静脉左心房线性消融术后复发房性心律失常的重要因素;初次手术附加右心房峡部线性消融可能减少复发率。     

环状电极在Ensite/NavX指导下的心房颤动环肺静脉消融术中的应用

目的评价环肺静脉消融术联合应用环状电极标测对心房颤动(房颤)消融成功率的影响。方法连续入选61例房颤患者,其中男40例,女21例,阵发性房颤50例,慢性房颤11例。在EnsiteNavX三维电解剖标测系统指导下行环肺静脉消融术。应用环状电极标测肺静脉电位,以肺静脉电隔离为消融终点。结果61例均顺利完成手术。环左肺静脉消融使左肺静脉电隔离34例(55.7%),环右肺静脉消融使右肺静脉电隔离35例(57.4%),环左、右肺静脉消融使所有肺静脉电隔离23例(37.7%)。16例阵发性房颤和5例慢性房颤放电时终止房颤,终止房颤部位为左、右上肺静脉外近房顶前、后壁19例,右上肺静脉外后壁中部1例,完成左肺静脉消融时房颤终止1例。平均随访6±2个月,50例阵发性房颤中42例(84.0%)以及11例慢性房颤中5例(45.4%)无房颤发作,总成功率为77%。并发症:少量心包积液1例,经心包穿刺引流后积液消失;左侧血胸1例,经胸腔穿刺引流痊愈。结论EnsiteNavX系统指导下的环肺静脉消融术中联合应用环状电极标测可使房颤消融成功率进一步提高。     

Complete pulmonary vein isolation guided by three-dimensional electroanatomical mapping for the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in patients with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy.

AIMS: Evaluation of the clinical outcome of patients with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy (HOCM) and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) treated with complete pulmonary vein (PV) isolation guided by three-dimensional (3-D) electroanatomical (EA) mapping. METHODS: Circumferential radiofrequency (RF) ablation and continuous circular lesions (CCLs) around the left and right-sided PVs were performed in 4 highly symptomatic patients (2 males; age 57.5 +/- 8.3 years) with HOCM and anti-arrhythmic drug (AAD) refractory paroxysmal AF. Ablation was guided by 3-D EA mapping combined with conventional circumferential PV mapping. The endpoints of the ablation were defined as: (1) absence of all PV spikes documented with the two Lasso catheters within the ipsilateral PVs; and (2) no recurrence of the PV spikes within all PVs following intravenous administration of adenosine. RESULTS: The ablation endpoints were achieved in all patients. A repeat ablation was performed in one patient due to repetitive atrial tachycardia, 1 month after the initial procedure. During a follow-up of 5.8 +/- 2.7 months, all patients are free of AF recurrence. Short episodes of symptomatic AT were documented after the repeat procedure, and were well controlled with oral amiodarone in the patient. No procedure-related complications were observed. CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrates that complete isolation of ipsilateral PVs guided by 3-D EA mapping is potentially effective for the treatment of highly symptomatic, drug refractory paroxysmal AF in patients with HOCM.     

阵发性心房颤动患者肺静脉前庭电生理现象及分析

目的采用EnSite/NavX系统指导下,结合单Lasso进行环肺静脉电隔离术治疗阵发性心房颤动(简称房颤),分析消融过程中肺静脉前庭电生理现象。方法入选2004年10月~2005年12月症状性阵发性房颤患者143例,男85例、女58例,年龄60.7±10.3(35~80)岁,房颤病程5.5±6.7年(21天~50年),左房内径36.9±6.4(24~54)mm。在EnSite-NavX系统引导下行环肺静脉消融达到肺静脉电隔离。结果143例完成环肺静脉隔离术,手术时间157±30(90~240)min,放射线时间25.8±8.8(9.8~60.1)min。环单侧左、右肺静脉前庭消融电隔离率分别为81.2%、78.3%,其余病例结合节段性消融(SOA)达到肺静脉电隔离。房颤终止的比例为69.7%(23/33例),第一次消融63.6%(91/143)可记录到肺静脉内自发电位,2.1%(3/143)可记录到肺静脉内快速的自主节律,而体表心电图为稳定的窦性心律。房颤复发患者第二次消融时,所有21例均有肺静脉电位(PVP)恢复,其中第一次消融时结合SOA达到肺静脉隔离的患者:57.1%左侧PVP恢复,55.6%右侧PVP恢复。第二次消融时,85.7%(18/21)例存在肺静脉内自发电位。术后房性心动过速/心房扑动15例(10.5%),12例再次行射频消融治疗,11例消融成功。术后随访10.7±4.9(4~18)个月,包括第二次消融术后患者在内,共90.2%(129/143)在无抗心律失常药物治疗下无房颤发作。心包积液2例,Ensite/NavX电极贴片故障1例。结论心房-肺静脉传导存在优势传导径路,且传导方式并非“全或无”;结合SOA的消融方法复发率较高;多数患者肺静脉隔离后可记录到自发肺静脉电位,复发患者的肺静脉通常具有较高的兴奋性。     

心房颤动环肺静脉隔离术后复发左房房性心动过速的特点及消融治疗

目的探讨心房颤动(简称房颤)环肺静脉隔离术后(CPVI)复发左房房性心动过速(简称房速)再次射频消融中,房速机制的鉴别和消融策略的选择。方法18例房颤经CPVI术后复发房速患者,其中男16例,女2例,年龄61.4±6.5(50～70)岁。在持续稳定的自发/诱发房速时在Carto指导下行激动顺序标测,经电生理检测,明确房速机制并选择相应消融方式:对于局灶性房速,重新阻断原消融径线上裂隙或消融最早激动区;对于折返性房速,明确关键峡部,行线性消融,如果有肺静脉电位亦行对裂隙的消融。结果共有13例肺静脉恢复电活动(72.7%)。局灶性房速6例,折返性房速12例(包括11例左房大折返和1例肺静脉-左房折返)。相应方式消融后房速均转为窦性心律,且肺静脉电位消失。结论房颤CPVI术后复发的左房房速与肺静脉电位的恢复密切相关;与消融线和裂隙形成的折返有关。     

经导管消融治疗甲状腺机能亢进患者心房颤动

目的探讨经导管消融治疗并发于原发性甲状腺机能亢进(简称甲亢)的心房颤动(简称房颤)的效果。方法18例甲亢并发房颤患者,均经抗甲亢治疗控制甲状腺激素水平在正常范围内3个月以上,仍伴有发作频繁、症状严重,经抗心律失常药物治疗无效的阵发性或持续性房颤。在三维电解剖标测系统和肺静脉环状标测联合指导下行环绕两侧肺静脉的线性消融。消融终点为双侧肺静脉的电学隔离。结果18例患者术中均达到消融终点。随访12.6±6.8(4~27)个月,13例(72%)患者在不服用任何抗心律失常药物前提下无房颤发作,5例(28%)房颤复发。无任何操作相关并发症。结论对于发生于甲亢患者的房颤,三维标测系统指导下的环肺静脉线性消融术是一项可供选择的治疗措施。     

Efficacy and safety of segmental ostial versus circumferential extra-ostial pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation

INTRODUCTION: Pulmonary vein (PV) isolation for atrial fibrillation (AF) can be performed using a segmental ostial or a circumferential extra-ostial approach. The relative merits and potential limitations of each approach are currently debated. Here we report our early experience with each of these approaches, including their relative efficacy and safety. METHODS AND RESULTS: Forty patients with drug-refractory AF underwent segmental ostial PV isolation and were compared to 40 consecutive patients who underwent PV isolation using a circumferential extra-ostial approach. The latter approach described here is novel in two aspects: (1) the endpoint for ablation was PV isolation and not only delay in left atrial to PV conduction time, and (2) isolation of the right and left PVs was achieved by a single encirclement of ipsilateral veins. At follow-up, 60% of the patients in the segmental group were free of AF compared to 75% of the patients in the circumferential group. There was one thromboembolic cerebrovascular complication during the ablation procedure in each group. CONCLUSION: PV isolation using a circumferential extra-ostial approach, where the ipsilateral PVs are isolated together by one encircling line of block using electroanatomic mapping, is a technically feasible procedure. This approach is at least as effective and safe as the more established segmental ostial approach for AF ablation.     

心房颤动导管消融复发患者二次消融研究

目的心房颤动（房颤）导管消融治疗仍然存在一定的复发率,而其复发的特点目前仍然不清,本文对房颤消融复发患者二次消融的特点进行分析。方法共442例房颤消融治疗患者中,29例消融后复发的患者[男性19例,年龄（56±11）岁],本文患者复发时间〉6个月。对这些复发患者进行二次导管消融治疗。分析和对比初次与二次消融的电生理特点。结果29例房颤患者（20例为阵发性房颤,9例为持续性房颤）复发时间6—33（11．3±5．3）个月,所有患者初次消融后均服用3个月抗心律失常药。在复发的29例患者中,（1）3例初次消融术采用单纯靶肺静脉电隔离,二次消融发现1例出现非消融肺静脉触发灶,予以补充消融;另2例发现原靶肺静脉均有传导恢复,予以所有肺静脉经验性电隔离。（2）12例初次消融策略为所有肺静脉（48根）经验性电隔离,二次消融时发现所有患者存在不同程度的肺静脉传导恢复（36根）,8例再次所有肺静脉节段电隔离（其中1例发现上腔静脉起源予以针对性电隔离）;4例患者采用三维标测系统指导下同侧肺静脉环形电隔离。（3）12例患者初次消融策略为三维标测系统指导下同侧肺静脉环形电隔离,二次消融时重复进行环肺静脉电隔离。1例患者术中发现左心房局灶性房性心动过速（房速）并成功消融,2例患者术中出现左心房不典型心房扑动（房扑）成功消融。二次消融术后随访（15±10）个月,5例患者出现房颤复发（阵发性房颤1例,持续性房颤4例;成功率82．8％）,1例患者出现严重左肺静脉狭窄。结论对于房颤进行肺静脉消融电隔离治疗,其复发患者以肺静脉传导恢复为复发的主要原因。单纯进行靶肺静脉消融的部分患者,其他肺静脉的触发灶对于复发起着重要的作用。部分复发患者与非肺静脉起源的触发灶相关。复发的房颤患者,再次导管消融治疗可以达到较高的治疗成功率。     

心房颤动环肺静脉电隔离术后房性心律失常的再消融治疗

目的探讨应用三维电解剖(Carto)系统引导左房(left atrium,LA)内环肺静脉(pulmo-naryvein,PV)消融治疗心房颤动(房颤)后复发房性心律失常的可能原因和再消融治疗。方法共对77例房颤患者进行环肺静脉电隔离术消融治疗,其中男性58例,20～76岁;阵发性房颤56例,持续性房颤21例。穿刺2～3次房间隔送入2～3支2·67mm(8F)长鞘至LA,送入1～2支Lasso导管入PV。应用Carto-XP系统,3·5mm生理盐水灌注消融导管,在LA内建立三维电解剖结构图。行PV选择性造影标识出PV口。在沿PV口外0·5～1·0cm的LA,设定围绕左或右侧上、下PV的环状消融线,消融终点为PV-LA电隔离。结果71/77例左侧和右侧PV-LA均达到电隔离,6/77例仅单侧PV-LA电隔离。复发病例中,14例再次消融,心电图或动态心电图示房性心动过速(房速)8例,房速-房颤5例,典型心房扑动1例。13例(93%)有左和/或右侧PV-LA传导恢复,其中左、右两侧均恢复8例,左侧和右侧恢复分别为3例和2例。7例患者在术中记录到左房房速,均起源于PV。13例再次消融均达到PV-LA电隔离,1例典型心房扑动达到三尖瓣峡部双向传导阻滞;随访3～30个月,其中12例无房性心律失常发作。结论采用Carto系统引导环同侧PV线性消融治疗房颤安全有效,PV-LA传导恢复可以是房颤消融后复发房性心律失常的主要机制,再次消融达到PV-LA电隔离可进一步提高房颤消融的成功率。     

Mechanisms of recurrent atrial fibrillation after pulmonary vein isolation by segmental ostial ablation

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the mechanisms responsible for recurrent atrial fibrillation (AF) after pulmonary vein isolation (PV) by segmental ostial ablation. BACKGROUND: Recovery of conduction into a previously isolated PV is a common observation when there is recurrent AF soon after segmental ostial ablation. However, the mechanisms of recurrent AF have been unclear. METHODS: A repeat ablation procedure was performed in 50 patients who had recurrent paroxysmal AF at a mean of 7 +/- 6 months after segmental ostial ablation to isolate the PVs. During the repeat procedure, a ring catheter was inserted into each PV during sinus rhythm and AF to determine whether the veins were still isolated and, if not, whether there were PV tachycardias with a cycle length shorter than in the adjacent left atrium during AF. RESULTS: There was recovery of conduction over a previously ablated muscle fascicle in >/=1 PV in 49 patients (98%). There were 10 +/- 2 episodes of PV tachycardia per minute in 36 (72%) of the 50 patients during AF. Repeat ablation was performed by segmental ostial ablation (23 patients) or by left atrial catheter ablation to encircle the left- and right-sided PVs 1 to 2 cm from the ostia, with additional ablation lines in the posterior left atrium and mitral isthmus (27 patients). At 6-month follow-up, among 23 patients who underwent repeat ablation by segmental ostial ablation, AF recurred in 4 (21%) of the 19 patients who had PV tachycardias and in 3 (75%) of the 4 patients who did not (P = .03). Among the 27 patients who underwent left atrial ablation, AF recurred in 2 (12%) of the 17 patients who had PV tachycardias and in 1 (10%) of the 10 patients who did not (P = 0.7). CONCLUSIONS: Recovery of conduction in previously ablated muscle fascicles is a common finding in patients with recurrent AF after segmental ostial ablation. The efficacy of repeat segmental ostial ablation depends on the presence of PV tachycardias, whereas left atrial ablation is effective regardless of whether PV tachycardias are present or not during AF.     

Prevalence of pulmonary vein disconnection after anatomical ablation for atrial fibrillation: consequences of wide atrial encircling of the pulmonary veins.

AIMS: Anatomical and wide atrial encircling of the pulmonary veins (PVs) has been proposed as a cure of atrial fibrillation (AF). We evaluated the acute achievement of electrical PV isolation using this approach. In addition, the consequences of wide encircling of the PVs with isolation were assessed. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty patients with paroxysmal AF were studied. Anatomically guided ablation was performed utilizing the CARTO system to deliver coalescent lesions circumferentially around each PV to produce a voltage reduction to <0.1 mV, with the operator blinded to recordings of circumferential PV mapping. After achieving the anatomical endpoint, the incidence of residual conduction and the amplitude and conduction delay of residual PV potentials were determined. Electrical isolation of the PV was then performed and the residual far-field potentials evaluated. Individual PV ablation was performed in all PVs. Anatomically guided PV ablation was performed for 47.3+/-11 min, after which 44 (55%) PVs were electrically isolated. In the remaining 45%, despite abolition of the local potential at the ablation site, PV potentials [amplitude 0.2 mV (range 0.09-0.75) and delay of 50.3+/-12.6 ms] were identified by circumferential mapping. After electrical isolation (12.2+/-11.7 min ablation), 55 (69%) PVs demonstrated far-field potentials; with a greater incidence (P=0.015) and amplitude (P=0.021) on the left compared with the right PVs. At 13.2+/-8.3 months follow-up, 13 patients (65%) remained arrhythmia-free without anti-arrhythmics. In four patients (20%), spontaneous sustained left atrial macrore-entry required re-mapping and ablation. Macrore-entry was observed to utilize regions around or bordering the previous ablation as its substrate. CONCLUSION: Anatomically guided circumferential PV ablation results in apparently coalescent but electrically incomplete lesions with residual conduction in 45% of PVs. Wide encircling of the PVs was associated with left atrial macrore-entry in 20% of patients.