射频消融治疗多条折返径路的心动过速12例

目的 总结实用而有效的常规消融方法。方法 回顾分析了12例具有多条折返径路的心动过速病例的电生理检查结果，总结了其消融操作流程。结果 12例中，同时具有三条房室旁路1例，两条房室旁路者7例，一条房室旁路伴房室结多径路者2例，房室结三径路者2例。共计消融慢径2条、旁路19条（包括左侧旁路7条、右侧旁路12条，其中显性旁路10条，隐匿性旁路9条）。结论 消融前后详细，标准的心内电生理检查可提高多折返径路心动过速的检出率。     

射频消融治疗阵发性室上性心动过速62例体会

目的总结室上性心动过速(PSVT)射频消融治疗的经验。方法左房室旁路消融二尖瓣室侧，右房室旁路消融三尖瓣房侧；房室结双径路通过下位能量递增消融法改良房室结慢径。结果房室折返型心动过速38例，左侧旁道30条右侧旁道9条，消融成功37条，成功率95％，房室结折返型心动过速24例，房室结双径路改良全部成功，成功率100％，总成功率97％。无1例复发。结论射频消融治疗室上速安全、有效、复发率低。’     

双房室旁道合并房室结双径路二例

2例患者经心脏电生理检查证实为左、右侧房室旁道伴房室结双径路,并诱发多种室上性心动过速(PSVT),其折返机制及途径各不相同。射频消融一侧房室旁道后,还能诱发其它折返机制及途径的PSVT。提示:QRS波群频率或形态不同的PSVT可为多发性旁道或(和)伴房室结双径路等多种折返机制。仔细的电生理检查,逐一消融阻断旁道或(和)房室结慢径路才能根治PSVT。     

心动过速RR间期交替的发生机制及导管射频消融治疗

目的　分析QRS心动过速伴RR间期长短交替的发生机制及导管射频消融情况。方法　对 6例心动过速伴RR间期长短交替患者 ,常规行动态心电图及食管电生理检查。心内电生理检查提示存在房室旁路或房性心动过速伴房室结双径路 ,先进行旁路或房性心动过速的消融 ,消融成功后再进行心内电生理检查 (包括应用异丙肾上腺素进行心动过速诱发 ) ,如不能诱发心动过速则终止手术。若提示存在房室结多径路 ,则进行慢路径改良术。结果　食管电生理检查提示 :4例患者存在房室旁路伴房室结双径路 ;2例患者存在房室结三径路。心内电生理检查及消融结果显示 :3例患者为房室旁路伴房室折返性心动过速 ,成功消融后不能诱发房室结折返性心动过速 ;1例患者同时存在房室及房室结折返性心动过速 ,成功消融房室旁路后再改良慢路径 ;2例患者为房室结三径路 ,经慢径路改良后房室结传导曲线连续 ,未诱发心动过速。 6例患者无并发症发生 ,随访期间无心动过速发作。结论　室上性心动过速伴RR间期交替发生率较低 ,且均与房室结传导不连续有关。心动过速伴RR间期交替发生机制较为复杂 ,除了与房室结纵向传导的不连续有关外 ,还与其不应期密切相关。食管电生理检查与心内电生理检查相比对揭示RR间期交替的发生机制具有较高的诊断价值。     

经食管心脏电生理检查误诊房室折返性心动过速的不典型房室结折返性心动过速的特点及分析

目的探讨食管电生理检查中被误诊为房室折返性心动过速的不典型的慢快型房室结折返性心动过速的特点。方法回顾性分析5例误诊为房室折返性心动过速患者的食管电生理及心内电生理资料。结果 5例患者在食管电生理检查S1S2程控期前刺激中,均未观察到S2-R间期有跳跃性延长,心动过速的R-P-EB间期70ms;逆行P-波在V1导联直立,下壁导联倒置;食管电生理诊断为左后间隔隐匿性旁道参与的房室折返性心动过速。心内电生理诊断为慢快型房室结折返性心动过速,并成功消融慢径路。结论部分R-P-EB间期70ms的不典型慢快型房室结折返性心动过速食管电生理特点与后间隔隐匿性旁道参与的房室折返性心动过速类似,必要时需心内电生理检查加以明确。     

隐匿性旁道、房室结双径路致阵发性房颤(附12例报告)

总结12例房室结双径路及房室隐匿性旁道所致阵发性房颤的可能机制和射频消融后效果。本组12例阵发性房颤患者中，男7例，女5例，年龄19岁－46岁。电生理证实房室结双径路4例，隐匿性旁道8例。射频消融慢径及旁道后，随访6个月－20个月，11例无房颤发作，1例心悸发作较前明显减轻。结论：预激、多径路与阵发性房颤密切相关，射频消融慢径及旁道后，阵发性房颤可获根治。     

导管射频消融治疗阵发性室上性心动过速的临床研究

目的 对97例阵发性室上性心动过速(PSVT)患者进行分析，探讨射频消融的治疗效果及临床特点。方法 回顾性分析97例经导管射频消融治疗PSVT患者的治疗效果，其中房室结内折返性心动过速42例、房室旁道所致房折返性心动过速50例，房室结双径路合并房室旁道5例。结果 房室结双径路42例，其中慢-快型41例，快-慢型1例；房室旁道50例，其中左侧旁道34例，右侧旁道10例，双旁道4例，多旁道1例；房室结双径路合并房室旁道5例，共计107条。成功率95．6％，复发率3．3％，并发症2．2％。结论经导管射频消融治疗阵发性室上性心动过速是安全有效的方法。掌握消副放电时间及能量，减少复发率。操作要规范，细心，减少并发症。     

房室双旁道的食管心脏电生理特征

目的：探讨房室双旁道食管心脏电生理检查的特征性改变。方法：对14例经射频导管消融术证实的房室双旁道的食管心脏电生理检查作回顾性分析。结果：10例房室双旁道的电生理特征为：（1）心房起搏时显示两种不同的预激图形和／或特殊类型室性融合波群，经食管心房起搏有利于显现左侧旁道。（2）诱发出两种逆向型房室折返性心动过速，由两条旁道形成折返环路。（3）顺向型房室折返性心动过速时，出现两种不同的R－P^-间期和P^-波或房性融合波。（4）排除房室结双径路后，逆向型房室折返性心过速的频率快于顺向型房室折返性心动过速。（5）预激旁道的部位与顺向型房室折返性心动过速时P^-波提示的部位不同。（6）双旁道隐匿性传导是造成其中一条旁道丧失传导功能的重要因素之一。另4例未能表现出上述电生理特征，其中右侧隐性旁道合并左侧隐匿性旁道1例，右侧隐匿性双旁道1例，左侧隐匿性双旁道2例。结论：食管心脏电生理检查能够确诊大部分的房室双旁道，采用多导联同步记录及在房室折返性心动过速时仔细分析电生理表现有助于揭示房室双旁道。     

射频消融术治疗室上性心动过速192例临床分析

目的对192例阵发性室上性心动过速（PSVT）病人进行分析,探讨射频消融的治疗效果及安全性。方法回顾性分析192例经导管射频消融治疗PSVT病人的临床资料,其中房室结内折返性心动过速（AVNRT）101例,房室旁道所致房室折返性心动过速（AVRT）81例,房室结双径路合并房室旁道10例。结果房室结双径路111例（单一房室结双径路101例,房室双径路合并房室旁道10例）,其中慢-快型109例,快-慢型1例,慢-慢型1例;房室旁道81例,其中左侧旁道62例,右侧旁道16例,双旁道3例;房室结双径路合并房室旁道10例,旁道共计91条。成功率98.9%,复发率2.1%,近期并发症3.6%。结论射频消融术是一种安全、有效的根治室上性心动过速的方法,成功率高,并发症少。     

房室结折返性心动过速慢径消融术后复发原因分析

目的探讨房室结折返性心动过速(AVNRT)导管射频电消融(RFCA)术后复发的原因。方法对行导管射频电消融术100例慢快型房室结折返性心动过速患者进行随访,回顾性分析其心电生理和临床资料。结果100例患者中复发10例,复发率为10%。复发病例中7例术后慢径残存,未复发病例中3例慢径残存,慢径残存患者复发率高。未复发病例消融后的快径前传有效不应期(FPERP)较消融前缩短,分别为(277±41)m s和(318±46)m s(P<0.05);而复发病例消融后的快径前传有效不应期(FPERP)较消融前无明显缩短,分别为(298±48)m s和(311±56)m s(P>0.05)。复发病例心内电生理特点复杂多变,多种类型房室结折返性心动过速多见,未复发病例多为单纯典型房室结折返性心动过速。结论房室结折返性心动过速复发的电生理基础仍然是房室结双径路,房室结折返性心动过速复发与慢径残存及复杂的房室结、慢径结构有关。     

特殊类型房室结折返性心动过速的电生理机制及其射频消融

报道２例特殊类型的房室结折返性心动过速（ＡＶＮＲＴ），１例为慢－慢型ＡＶＮＲＴ伴起始部多径路逆传；１例为两种不同电生理特性的慢径交替前传、快径逆传构成的ＡＶＮＲＴ。电生理检查均提示房室结三径路。２例病人均于冠状静脉窦口上方消融慢径改良房室结成功，心动过速不再被诱发。随访２个月心动过速均无复发。提示房室结多径路形成的特殊类型ＡＶＮＲＴ，需详细的电生理检查并仔细鉴别方能予以诊断。射频导管消融方法同典型ＡＶＮ－ＲＴ，且安全、有效。     

Clinical application of radiofrequency ablation]

I. Radiofrequency ablation of atrioventricular accessory pathway in patients with WPW syndrome: Seventeen accessory pathways in 15 patients with Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome (WPW) were ablated with radiofrequency current. There were 15 accessory pathways located on the left side of the heart (12 left free wall, 1 posterioseptal, 1 posteriolateral and 1 midseptal) and 2 pathways on the right side (1 right free wall, 1 anterioseptal). 16 accessory pathways (94.1%) in 14 patients were permanently abolished. Plasma CK-Mb, SGOT and LDH increased moderately in 7 cases (46.7%) and decreased to normal level in 3-4 days. Conclusion: catheter ablation of accessory pathways with radiofrequency current is a safe and effective therapeutic method for patients with refractory tachycardias mediated by these pathways. II. Radiofrequency ablation of slow pathways to cure AV nodal reentrant tachycardia: Radiofrequency energy was used to selectively ablate the slow pathways in 8 patients with atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia. The slow pathways in all 8 cases were ablated successfully and no episodes of tachycardia could be induced. The A-H, H-V interval and P-R interval of ECG did not change significantly. The Wenckebach points of atrioventricular node remained unchanged. The effective refractory periods of the fast pathways were shortened in 3 and prolonged in 5 cases after the procedure. There were no severe complications. No tachycardia recurred during the follow-up period between 2 weeks and 7 months.     

射频导管消融360例儿童心律失常的疗效和安全性

目的 评价射频导管消融360例儿童心律失常的疗效和安全性。方法 回顾性分析2000年1月2013年12月360例因心律失常在我院接受射频导管消融的儿童患者360(男213例、女147)例,年龄15个月14(10±3)岁,平均体质量34 kg。结果 急性期消融成功率98.9%(356/360例),4例消融失败。360例患者中,阵发性室上性心动过速308例,占85.6%,307例(99.7%)患者消融成功,其中隐匿性房室旁路伴房室折返性心动过速121例、显性旁路(预激综合征)82例、房室结折返性心动过速105例;室性心律失常42例,其中室性早搏15例(均消融成功),27例室性心动过速(其中4例并发结构性心脏病,25例消融成功);房性心律失常10例(9例消融成功,其中典型心房扑动3例,不典型心房扑动1例,局灶性房性心动过速6例)。所有患儿围术期均未出现明重要并发症。术后随访至少12个月,随访期复发率为2.2%(8/356例),其中6例经再次消融成功。结论 射频导管消融术治疗有适应证的心律失常儿童安全有效。     

房室结双径路合并房室旁路的折返性心动过速及射频消融治疗

目的本研究旨在探讨房室结双径路（ＤＡＶＮＰ）合并房室旁路（ＡＰ）的电生理特征和射频消融要求。方法对２１８例阵发性室上性心动过速（ＰＳＶＴ）进行电生理检查，观察ＰＳＶＴ的前传和逆传途径，然后对ＡＰ或房室结慢径（ＳＰ）进行消融治疗。结果２１８例ＰＳＶＴ中检出ＤＡＶＮＰ＋ＡＰ１０例，检出率为４．６％。其中ＳＰ前传、ＡＰ逆传（ＳＰ－ＡＰ折返）４例，快径（ＦＰ）前传、ＡＰ逆传（ＦＰ－ＡＰ折返）１例，ＳＰ－ＡＰ折返并ＦＰ－ＡＰ折返或ＳＰ／ＦＰ交替前传折返４例，ＳＰ前传、ＦＰ逆传（ＡＰ旁观）１例。１０例患者均作ＡＰ消融，诱发房室结折返性心动过速（ＡＶＮＲＴ）的３例加作ＳＰ消融，术后随访均无复发。结论ＤＡＶＮＰ合并ＡＰ者ＡＰ均作为逆传途径，阻断ＡＰ是消融关键；ＡＰ旁观者也应作ＡＰ消融；仅有ＡＨ跳跃延长者不必接受房室结改良；ＡＰ消融者应作ＤＡＶＮＰ电生理检查。     

Quadruple atrioventricular nodal pathways: involved in orthodromic atrioventricular reentrant tachycardia

Supraventricular tachycardia can be caused by multiple atrioventricular nodal pathways or atrioventricular accessory pathways. Herein, we report the case of a patient who was diagnosed with an orthodromic atrioventricular reentrant tachycardia that was caused by an unusual combination of quadruple atrioventricular nodal pathways and an atrioventricular accessory pathway. Radiofrequency catheter ablation of the accessory pathway successfully eliminated the arrhythmias and the patient's symptoms. Careful analysis of complete electrophysiologic studies can help in the diagnosis of such rare clinical presentations.     

Ablation of Atrioventricular nodal “slow pathway” for simultaneous treatment of coexisting atrioventricular and nodal reciprocating tachycardias

Introduction We report the case of a 49-year-old male patient with recurrent palpitations and two different supraventricular reciprocating tachycardias due to atrioventricular (AV) nodal reentry and orthodromic AV reentry sustained by a left-sided, concealed AV accessory pathway (AP). Methods and results During the baseline electrophysiological study, dual AV nodal conduction (90 ms jump) and non-decremental, eccentric, ventriculo-atrial conduction due to a left-sided, unidirectional, postero-septal AP were documented. Both typical AV nodal reentrant and orthodromic AV reentrant tachycardias were induced by programmed electrical stimulation. In both cases, shift and sustained conduction over the AV “slow pathway” were required for tachycardia induction and maintenance, respectively. Accordingly, catheter ablation was performed by targeting the AV nodal “slow pathway” first with radiofrequency current applications delivered at the inferior portion of the Koch’s triangle. Irritative, slow-rate junctional rhythm was observed during ablation. Afterward, programmed electrical stimulation demonstrated a continuous AV nodal conduction curve, persistent conduction over the AP, and only single orthodromic AV echo beat inducible under baseline condition and pharmacological stress (atropine 0.02 mg/kg i.v. bolus and continuous isoprenaline i.v. administration). Sustained reentrant tachycardias were not inducible any more. For these reasons, the procedure was stopped without any attempt to ablate the AP. After a 4 years follow-up the patient is still asymptomatic without antiarrhythmic drug usage. Conclusion AV nodal “slow pathway” ablation may abolish both typical AV nodal reentry tachycardia and orthodromic AV reentry tachycardia induction when the latter arrhythmia is dependent from AV nodal “slow pathway” conduction for induction and maintenance. This ablation strategy could be considered, under some instances (e.g. right antero-septal accessory pathways, older patients, etc), in order to reduce the procedure risks due to multiple arrhythmia substrate ablations.     

下位法射频消融慢径路改良房室结治疗室上性心动过速23例

用下位法射频消融慢径路改良房室结治疗房室结折返性心动过速(AVNRT)18例,房室折返性心动过速(AVRT)5例.AVNRT中16例为慢—快型,1例快—慢型,1例慢—快型与快—慢型并存,18例慢径路全部阻断成功.AVRT中1例显性预激,4例隐性预激,有5例慢径路和3例房室旁路消融成功.射频放电时21例出现结性心律.无严重并发症出现.AVNRT病人中随仿1—15个月有1例复发,第二次射频成功.认为下位法射频消融阻断慢径路成功率高,并发症少.     

Comparison of late results of surgical or radiofrequency catheter modification of the atrioventricular node for atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia.

AIMS: Although arrhythmia surgery and radiofrequency catheter ablation to cure atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia differ in technical concept, the late results of both methods, in terms of elimination of the arrhythmogenic substrate and procedure-related new and different arrhythmias, have never been compared. This constituted the purpose of this prospective follow-up study. METHODS AND RESULTS: Between 1988 and 1992, 26 patients were surgically treated using perinodal dissection or 'skeletonization', and from 1991 up to 1995, 120 patients underwent radiofrequency modification of the atrioventricular node for atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia. The acute success rates of surgery and radiofrequency catheter ablation were 96% and 92%, respectively. Late recurrence, rate in the surgical and radiofrequency catheter ablation groups was 12% and 17%, respectively. Mean follow-up was 53 months in the surgical group and 28 months in the radiofrequency catheter ablation group. The final success rate after repeat intervention was 100% in the surgical group and 98% in the radiofrequency catheter ablation group. Comparison of the initial and recent series of radiofrequency catheter ablated patients showed an increased initial success rate with fewer applications. In the radiofrequency catheter ablation group, a second- or third-degree block developed in three patients (2%), requiring permanent pacing, whereas in the surgical group no complete atrioventricular block was observed. Inappropriate sinus tachycardia needing drug treatment was observed in 13 patients (11%), mostly after fast pathway ablation, but was never observed after surgery. New and different supraventricular tachyarrhythmias arose in 27% of the patients in the surgical group and in 11% of the radiofrequency catheter ablation group, but did not clearly differ. CONCLUSION: This one-institutional follow-up study demonstrated comparable initial and late success rates as well as incidence of new and different supraventricular arrhythmias following arrhythmia surgery and radiofrequency catheter ablation for atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia. Today radiofrequency catheter ablation has replaced arrhythmia surgery for various reasons, but the late arrhythmic side-effects warrant refinement of technique.     

Radiofrequency ablation in two patients with typical and atypical atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardias, associated with atrioventricular reentrant tachycardias.

The incidence of dual atrioventricular nodal physiology in patients with Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome is quite frequent, but arrhythmia related to an accessory pathway and atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT) in a single patient is less common. Two of our cases (patients aged 24 and 19 yrs) presented the rare evidence of both typical and atypical AVNRTs, associated in the first case with two other atrioventricular reentrant tachycardias (AVRTs), and in the second case with a single AVRT. Both underwent radiofrequency catheter ablation of the slow nodal pathway and of the accessory pathways in a single session, without any complications. After a 3-month follow-up, they were free from symptoms suggestive of tachycardia, without any antiarrhythmic treatment.