阵发性心房颤动导管消融术后早期复发的电生理机制和再消融

目的 评价阵发性心房颤动(房颤)导管消融术后早期复发的电生理机制及早期再消融的可行性、疗效.方法 入选环肺静脉电隔离术后1个月内复发的阵发性房颤患者14例,其中男8例,女6例,平均年龄61.8±8.4岁,房颤复发距首次消融时间4.9±3.7 d.若肺静脉传导恢复,则补点消融再次隔离.肺静脉隔离后诱发房颤,标测并消融非肺静脉异位灶.术后随访心电图和24 h动态心电图.结果 14例患者首次消融后24.7±5.5 d再次消融.仅1例肺静脉传导无恢复,其余13例(92.9%)中均有至少一侧肺静脉传导恢复,补点消融后均再次隔离.3例(21.4%)为上腔静脉起源房颤,行上腔静脉隔离房颤终止.1例(7.1%)为界嵴上部起源,行局灶消融成功.3例诱发出典型心房扑动(房扑),1例诱发出左心房房扑,消融均成功.术后平均随访5.8±1.4个月,13例患者无房性快速性心律失常复发(不用抗心律失常药物),1例有阵发性房速发作(服用维拉帕米).结论 肺静脉传导恢复是阵发性房颤消融术后早期复发的主要因素,其次是非肺静脉(上腔静脉、界嵴)的异位灶,早期再消融可行有效.     

心房电压标测对心房颤动患者射频消融结果的影响

目的:研究心房双极电压对心房颤动(房颤)患者射频消融结果的影响.方法:入选213例接受由CARTO系统引导的环肺静脉隔离术的房颤患者,其中持续性房颤患者77例,阵发性房颤患者136例.在CARTO指导下行环肺静脉电隔离.消融前窦律下标测得到电解剖图像,记录平均电压幅度等.消融后进行为期(12±7)个月的随访,同时分析这些患者的临床资料如性别、房颤持续时间、左房大小、基础疾病(高血压等)等.结果:阵发性房颤组成功者较复发者双极电压高[(1.77±1.01)∶(1.29±0.93)mV,P=0.048],低电压区比例低(P=0.011).持续性房颤组成功者较复发者双极电压也高[(1.31±0.96)∶(0.78±0.35)mV,P=0.046],低电压比例降低(P=0.008).结论:无论对于阵发性房颤还是持续性房颤,消融复发患者均较成功患者的心房电压下降、瘢痕点和低电压区面积增多,易于房颤的产生和维持.进一步证实了心房基质变化可能是导致房颤消融复发的一个重要因素.     

三维标测系统指引导管消融治疗心房颤动——单中心800例总结

目的评价三维标测系统(CARTO或EnSite-NavX)指引导管消融治疗心房颤动(房颤)的总体疗效和安全性。方法2004年9月至2006年12月期间入选800例房颤患者,男性482例,女性318例,平均年龄62.1±15.6(18～82)岁。其中阵发性房颤611例,持续性房颤189例,平均左心房内径38.4±9.2(30～60)mm。采用EnSite-NavX系统260例,CARTO系统540例。对于阵发性房颤采取环肺静脉前庭电隔离,对于持续性房颤采取环肺静脉前庭电隔离 心房碎裂电位消融 二尖瓣峡部消融。术后口服华法林及ⅠC类和Ⅲ类抗心律失常药物1～3个月,每月随访心电图、24小时动态心电图一次。对于术后1个月的房颤或房性心动过速(房速)复发进行再次标测和消融。结果795例完成手术。平均手术时间161±33(140～245)min,X线透视时间17±13(12～45)min。左肺静脉电隔离率为96.5%,右肺静脉电隔离率为98.6%。阵发性房颤术中发作98例,消融终止房颤90例。阵发性房颤术后2周内早期复发137例(22.5%),103例2周后不再发作,共57例接受再次消融(6例接受三次消融)。持续性房颤环肺静脉消融恢复窦性心律30例(16.1%),转变为房速/心房扑动(房扑)15例(8.1%)。心房碎裂电位消融恢复窦性心律20例(10.8%),转变为房速/房扑23例(12.4%)。持续性房颤术后早期复发78例(41.9%),14例随访中不再发作。65例再次消融(10例接受三次消融)。所有病例房颤消融术后房扑/房速104例(13.1%),68例随访中自愈,30例再次消融,23例消融成功。并发症:心脏压塞5例(0.6%,3例内科保守治疗成功,2例外科修补),肺静脉狭窄6例(0.7%),一过性脑缺血(TIA)1例,脑栓塞2例,肠系膜动脉栓塞1例。血胸1例,气胸1例。股动脉假性动脉瘤3例,股动静脉瘘1例。术后平均随访16.2±5.7(3～27)个月,阵发性房颤550例(90.3%)无房性快速性心律失常发作(9.4%再次消融,11.5%口服抗心律失常药物);持续性房颤159例(85.5%)无房性快速心律失常发作(34.9%再次消融,28.5%服用抗心律失常药物)。结论三维标测系统(CARTO或EnSite-NavX)指引导管消融治疗房颤疗效较高,安全性好。对于阵发房颤采用环肺静脉前庭电隔离术式即有良好效果;对于持续性房颤结合碎裂电位消融、二尖瓣峡部消融等方法,而且40%患者需要多次消融以提高成功率。     

肺静脉前庭重构与环肺静脉前庭电隔离术后肺静脉-左房电传导恢复的关系

目的分析肺静脉前庭重构与环肺静脉前庭电隔离术(CPVI)后肺静脉-左房电传导恢复之间的关系。方法入选2007年1月至2009年9月因房颤行导管射频消融术后复发,再次消融患者359例(阵发性房颤180例,持续性房颤179例)。LASSO环状电极标测肺静脉-左房电传导恢复情况,在Carto系统引导下行补点消融。利用CARTO系统自带软件测量左右肺静脉前庭面积。结果 359例患者均顺利完成导管射频消融。阵发性房颤患者中有144例(80%)电传导恢复,其中单支肺静脉电传导恢复占45例(31.25%),2支占58例(40.28%),3支占24例(16.67%),4支恢复占17例(11.81%)。持续性房颤患者中有155例(86.59%)电传导恢复,其中单支肺静脉电传导恢复占24例(15.48%),2支占72例(46.45%),3支占17例(10.97%),4支占42例(27.1%)。阵发性房颤左肺静脉前庭面积(6.15±0.65)cm2,右肺静脉前庭面积(7.95±2.24)cm2。持续性房颤左肺静脉前庭面积(10.48±1.00)cm2,右肺静脉前庭面积(11.4±2.16)cm2。统计学分析提示阵发性房颤CPVI术后单支肺静脉电传导恢复比例高于持续性房颤(P=0.001),而持续性房颤4支肺静脉电传导恢复比例高于阵发性房颤(P=0.001)。阵发性房颤左、右肺静脉前庭面积均小于持续性房颤(P0.001,P=0.022)。结论持续性房颤肺静脉前庭重构程度高于阵发性房颤,因此持续性房颤电隔离术后肺静脉-左房电传导恢复比例高于阵发性房颤。     

节段性肺静脉电隔离术治疗心房颤动的疗效及相关因素分析

目的探讨Lasso电极标测下节段性肺静脉电隔离术对心房颤动(房颤)的疗效及其影响因素。方法对120例(其中男性105例;平均年龄50.0±8.6岁)行节段性肺静脉电隔离术的患者(包括阵发性房颤99例,持续性房颤21例),分析其年龄、性别、房颤类型、左心房大小、房颤病史、左心室射血分数、合并高血压与首次术后疗效的关系。结果99例阵发性房颤中首次治愈52例,治愈率52.5%;21例持续性房颤中首次治愈6例,治愈率为28.5%。单因素分析示房颤首次术后复发与左心房扩大、持续性房颤及年龄显著相关;阵发性房颤再次术后治愈率有高于持续性房颤的趋势,但差异无统计学意义(P=0.094)。逻辑回归分析结果只有左心房扩大是首次术后房颤复发的独立危险因素。结论节段性肺静脉电隔离首次术后阵发性房颤治愈率可达50%左右。左心房扩大是房颤复发的独立危险因素,高龄及持续性房颤影响房颤的首次术后治愈率。     

应用重叠参考图像透视技术易化环肺静脉电隔离术操作治疗阵发性心房颤动

目的 探讨重叠参考图像透视技术(Overlay Ref)对环肺静脉电隔离术治疗阵发性心房颤动(房颤)的影响.方法 入选194例阵发性房颤患者,随机分为Overlay Ref组(97例)及对照组(97例).Overlay Ref组使用Overlay Ref技术(将参考图像以反白的形式叠加于透视屏上)辅助环肺静脉电隔离术的操作.对照组常规方法完成环肺静脉电隔离术.比较两组的总消融手术时间、消融时间、X线曝光量、肺静脉隔离率及随访1年的成功率.结果 两组患者的基线临床特征差异无统计学意义.所有患者均接受了环肺静脉电隔离术.Overlay Ref组的消融时间〔(89±13) min对(102±22) min,P＜0.01〕和总消融术时间[ (139±22) min对(162±31) min,P＜0.01]均明显比对照组短.Oveday Ref组的X线曝光量[( 13531±283) mGy对(13123±369)mGy]稍大,但差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).两组的环肺静脉电隔离率(97.9％对96.9％,P=NS)及随访1年的成功率(84.5％对81.4％,P＞0.05)差异也无统计学意义.结论 Overlay Ref技术可以易化环肺静脉电隔离术的操作,缩短房颤导管消融术的学习曲线.     

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.     

磁导航指导下阵发性与持续性心房颤动导管消融的比较

目的探讨磁导航指导下阵发性心房颤动(简称房颤)与持续性房颤导管消融的方法学、安全性和有效性并进行比较。方法 151例房颤患者,按房颤类型分为阵发性房颤组(n=102)和持续性房颤组(n=49)。两组患者均在磁导航指导下进行左心房建模及双侧肺静脉前庭电隔离术,其中持续性房颤患者同时行左房顶部和二尖瓣狭部线性消融术。分析两组患者手术操作时间、从建模到肺静脉隔离时间、X线暴露时间、肺静脉前庭隔离急性成功率及手术相关并发症。术后1、3、6个月和1年分别进行随访,观察并比较两组患者房颤的复发率。结果阵发性房颤组与持续性房颤组肺静脉前庭隔离急性成功率分别为98.04%和97.96%(P=0.974);两组患者手术操作时间、从建模到肺静脉隔离时间、X线暴露时间及导管消融时间无明显差异(P0.05);阵发性房颤组术后发生2例血胸;持续性房颤组1例发生腹股沟处血肿;随访1年,两组房颤消融成功率分别为70.6%和57.1%(P=0.102)。结论磁导航指导下阵发性房颤和持续性房颤导管消融均具有较高的有效性和安全性。     

Carto系统指导下环肺静脉线性消融治疗心房颤动的临床应用

目的 报道50例在Carto标测指导下环肺静脉线性消融治疗心房颤动(房颤)的结果和体会.方法 46例阵发性和4例持续性房颤患者采用Carto标测构建左心房三维电解剖图,行肺静脉造影了解其形态,围绕左侧和右侧肺静脉口线性消融,对肺静脉进行隔离.结果 50例患者均完成预定的线性消融.4例阵发性房颤患者术后1～2 d有房颤复发,l例自行转复,3例静脉用胺碘酮转复.术后1例患者出现少量心包积液,1例出现顽固性呃逆,3例出现颈部血肿.随访6～12(8.5 ±3.8)个月,37例患者未发生有症状的房颤,13例患者术后出现复发,1例患者发生肺静脉狭窄.结论 环肺静脉线性电隔离治疗房颤有较好的治疗效果,但也存在一定的并发症和复发可能性,仍需积累更多病例和做更长时间的观察.     

节段性肺静脉电隔离术后心房颤动早期复发的处理对策

目的对比分析阵发性心房颤动(房颤,AF)患者行节段性肺静脉电隔离(PVI)术后早期复发房颤的不同治疗方法,以探讨对早期复发房颤的处理对策.方法顽固性阵发AF患者66例,其中男性50例,平均年龄55±17(35～76)岁.术前部分患者行多层螺旋CT肺静脉血管成像,术中先行非选择性或选择性逆行肺静脉造影,Lasso环形标测电极导管指导下,在肺静脉口逐一标测4根肺静脉,行节段性PVI,并常规标测和消融上腔静脉.消融温度控制在50～55℃,功率25～35 W.结果电学隔离肺静脉219根,电隔离成功210根,即刻成功率96%.PVI术后2周内AF复发26例,占39.3%.其中9例再次行PVI,发现9根原隔离的PV恢复袖房传导,2个左房后游离壁异位兴奋灶.其余17例患者用抗心律失常药物控制AF发作.随访10±6(4～24)月,再次行PVI的9例患者中5例无AF发作(成功率55.6%),17例药物控制者中6例无AF发作(成功率35.3%),P＞0.05.40例无早期复发AF患者中34例无AF发作(成功率85%).总成功率为68.2%(45/66).术中1例发生心包压塞,术后1例左上肺静脉狭窄60%.结论阵发性房颤患者行节段性PVI术后房颤早期复发在临床上并非罕见,但早期复发并不意味着AF治疗的失败,在长期随访中,大约1/3的早期复发房颤患者无房颤发作,对AF早期复发的患者短期使用抗心律失常药物治疗比早期再次行PVI可能更为恰当.     

Circumferential pulmonary vein isolation: the role of key target sites.

AIMS: Circumferential pulmonary vein isolation (CPVI) had been proved effective for treating atrial fibrillation (AF). However, the achievement of pulmonary vein (PV) isolation was sometimes challenging. PVs could not be isolated until some key target sites (KTSs) were ablated thoroughly. The aim of our study was to explore the distribution of KTSs. METHODS AND RESULTS: Four hundred and fifty-two cases (271 males, mean age 62.5 +/- 12.6 years) with drug-refractory AF were enrolled for catheter ablation. CARTO-guided CPVI was performed in all cases with one circular catheter for verification of PVs isolation. Target sites where PV potentials delayed, conduction sequence changed, slowed down, or isolated were defined as KTSs. From 452 CPVI procedures, 1520 KTSs were identified; 813 of which were located at left PV antrums and 707 were at right PV antrums. KTSs at left PV antrums were most commonly situated at anterior wall (63%), while KTSs at right PV antrums were most commonly situated at posterior wall (66.2%). Additional gaps ablation was performed for left PVs in 344 cases and for right PVs in 248 cases owing to incomplete PVs isolation by a single attempt of CPVI. One thousand one hundred and fifty-eight KTSs were identified, 662 of which were located at left PV antrums and 496 were at right PV antrums. At the anterior wall, 66.1% of left PV KTSs were located, and 67.9% of right PV KTSs were located at the posterior wall. Out of 1158, 961 (82.99%) KTSs were predicted correctly by circular mapping. PV isolation could not be achieved until some KTSs were ablated by higher power, longer duration, and higher irrigation rate than usual. CONCLUSION: KTSs during CPVI were most commonly situated at the anterior wall of left PVs and at the posterior wall of right PVs. Circular mapping within ipsilateral PVs' ostia could accurately predict the location of KTSs. Some KTSs must be ablated thoroughly by applying higher power, longer duration, and higher irrigation rate than usual to achieve PV isolation.     

心房颤动初次环肺静脉隔离与再次消融的关键部位分析

目的评价心房颤动（房颤）初次环肺静脉隔离与再次消融的关键部位分布特点。方法入选48例房颤复发患者,其中男性30例,女性18例;平均年龄54.3±10.2岁;阵发性房颤24例,慢性房颤24例。初次消融采用环肺静脉隔离。再次消融距初次消融时间平均37.2±7.4d。环肺静脉隔离的关键部位为消融时引起肺静脉电位延迟、激动顺序变化或肺静脉电位频率减慢和肺静脉电隔离的部位。将环肺静脉消融线划均分为8个区域,统计初次消融和再次消融关键部位的分布异同。结果48例患者初次消融共有关键部位145个,平均每例患者3.02±1.08个;再次消融共有关键部位76个,平均每例患者1.58±1.09个（P〈0.001）。阵发性房颤7例（29.2%）左肺静脉传导未恢复,7例（29.2%）右肺静脉传导未恢复;12例（50%）左肺静脉中再次消融关键部位与初次消融相同者6例,位于初次消融关键部位的相邻节段者6例;8例（33.3%）右肺静脉中再次消融关键部位与初次消融相同者3例,位于初次消融关键部位的相邻节段者5例。慢性房颤9例（37.5%）左肺静脉传导未恢复,11例（45.8%）右肺静脉传导未恢复;10例（41.7%）左肺静脉中再次消融关键部位与初次消融相同者3例,位于初次消融关键部位的相邻节段者7例;5例（20.8%）右肺静脉中再次消融关键部位与初次消融相同者2例,位于初次消融关键部位的相邻节段者3例。结论房颤复发患者再次消融关键部位显著少于初次消融。约30%~40%一侧肺静脉传导未恢复,约20%~50%再次消融关键部位位于初次消融关键部位或其邻近节段。提示对于关键部位及其附近应巩固消融。     

Is circumferential pulmonary vein isolation preferable to stepwise segmental pulmonary vein isolation for patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation?

BACKGROUND: Stepwise segmental pulmonary vein isolation (SPVI) and circumferential pulmonary vein isolation (CPVI) have been developed to treat patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), but the preferable approach for paroxysmal AF (PAF) has not been established. METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred and ten patients with symptomatic PAF were randomized into a stepwise SPVI group (n=55) or CPVI group (n=55). Systemic SPVI combined with left atrial linear ablation tailored by inducibility of AF was performed in the stepwise SPVI group. Circumferential linear ablation around the left and right-sided pulmonary veins (PVs) guided by 3-dimensional electroanatomic mapping was performed in the CPVI group. The endpoints of ablation are non-induciblity of AF in the stepwise SPVI group and continuity of circular lesions combined with PV isolation in the CPVI group. After the initial procedures, atrial tachyarrhythmis (ATa) recurred within the first 3 months in 23 of the 55 patients (41.8%) who underwent stepwise SPVI and in 20 of the 55 patients (36.4%) who had CPVI (p=0.69). Repeat procedures were performed in 7 patients from the stepwise SPVI group and 5 from the CPVI group (p=0.76). During the 3-9 months after the last procedure, 46 patients (83.6%) from the CPVI group and 43 (78.2%) from the stepwise SPVI group did not have symptomatic ATa while not taking anti-arrhythmic drugs (p=0.63). Severe subcutaneous hematoma or PV stenosis occurred in 3 patients. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of stepwise SPVI is comparable to that of CPVI for patients with PAF.     

Pulmonary vein isolation to treat paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: conventional versus multi-electrode radiofrequency ablation

Purpose

For patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF), a curvilinear multi-electrode ablation (MEA) catheter has been reported to be successful to achieve pulmonary vein (PV) isolation. However, this approach has not been compared prospectively with conventional PV isolation (CPVI) using a standard circular mapping catheter and 3D electro-anatomic mapping. In this prospective non-randomized study, we compared the efficacy of these two techniques.

Methods

Of 185 consecutive patients, age 54.6?±?10.1?years, with symptomatic paroxysmal AF (PAF), 96 patients underwent PV isolation by CPVI and 89 patients underwent MEA to isolate the PVs. CPVI was performed by encircling the left- and right-sided PVs. During MEA, the PV ablation catheter (Medtronic, USA) was used to isolate PVs with duty-cycled radiofrequency energy.

Results

The mean procedure time was 171.73?±?52.87?min for CPVI and 133.25?±?37.99?min for MEA, respectively (P?P?=?0.651). At 12?months, 80% of patients who underwent CPVI and 82% of patients who underwent MEA were free of symptomatic PAF off antiarrhythmic drug therapy (P?=?0.989). Among the variables of age, gender, duration and frequency of PAF, left ventricular ejection fraction, left atrial size, structural heart disease, and the ablation technique, only an increased left atrial size was an independent predictor of recurrent PAF. Left atrial flutter occurred after CPVI in two patients and after MEA ablation in three patients.

Conclusion

In patients undergoing catheter ablation for PAF, MEA and CPVI proved equally efficacious.     

Early Detection of Pulmonary Vein Reconnection After Isolation in Patients With Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: A Comparison of ATP‐Induction and Reassessment at 30 Minutes Postisolation

Introduction: Catheter ablation for paroxysmal AF (PAF) is limited by an unacceptable recurrence rate, mainly due to pulmonary vein (PV) reconnection. Strategies to minimize reconnection include adenosine infusion and also a waiting period of 30 minutes after PV isolation. The aim of the present study was to assess whether these two strategies revealed the same conduction gap. Methods and Results: In total, 88 consecutive patients (54 males, mean age of 60 years) with drug refractory PAF underwent circumferential PV isolation (CPVI). After isolation of ipsilateral PVs, with entry and exit block checked using a circular mapping catheter, 20 mg ATP was injected during isoproterenol infusion to reveal dormant conduction gap(s). Unless the reconnection revealed by ATP persisted, PVs were further remapped with the circular mapping catheter at 30 minutes postisolation. Totally, PV reconnection was observed in 56 (64%) patients. 24.3% veins (80/329) were found reconnected. Reassessment at 30 minutes postablation was more efficient as compared to ATP induction (19.8% vs 14.6% for ATP). The agreement between these 2 methods is moderate (kappa value = 0.50). In veins that transiently reconnected after ATP administration and later observed at 30 minutes postablation, 94% (17 of 19) of them were found being reconnected with the same gap. Conclusion: Acute PV reconnection is common, occurring in 64% of patients, as detected by adenosine infusion and waiting time. Each shows a unique quality as compared to one another. The combined use of these 2 methods may reduce the AF recurrence rate after CPVI.     

Triggering Pulmonary Veins: A Paradoxical Predictor for Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence After PV Isolation

Triggering Pulmonary Veins and Recurrence After Ablation . Purpose: To identify procedural parameters predicting recurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF) after a first circumferential pulmonary vein isolation (CPVI). Methods: One hundred seventy‐one patients undergoing CARTO‐guided CPVI for recurrent AF with a left atrial (LA) diameter <45 mm were studied. Follow‐up (symptoms and 7‐day Holter) was performed at 1 and 3 months and every 3 months thereafter. Clinical and procedural characteristics between successful patients and patients undergoing repeat ablation were compared. In addition, procedural parameters of the first procedure were compared with parameters during repeat ablation. Results: After first CPVI, 80% of patients were free of AF without antiarrhythmic drugs after a follow‐up (FU) of 28 ± 11 months (N = 136). Thirty‐five patients (20%) had recurrence of AF of which 25 underwent repeat ablation (N = 25). Clinical characteristics did not differ between the successful and repeat group. A triggering vein during the index procedure was significantly more observed in the repeat group (56% vs 11%, P < 0.001). At repeat ablation, 2.6 ± 1.2 veins per patient were reconnected. Whereas there was no preferential reconnecting PV, all PVs triggering at index were reconnected (100%). Conclusions: (1) In patients with symptomatic recurrent AF, the presence of a triggering pulmonary vein during ablation is a paradoxical predictor for AF recurrence after PV isolation. (2) The consistent finding of reconnection of the triggering PV at repeat ablation, suggests that, in these patients, the triggering PV is the culprit vein and that reconnection invariably results in clinical AF recurrence. (3) The present study advocates a strategy of even more stringent PV isolation in case of a triggering PV. (J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol, Vol. 21, pp. 381–388, April 2010)     

Clinical significance of early recurrences of atrial fibrillation after pulmonary vein isolation

OBJECTIVES: The purposes of this study were to describe the prevalence of early recurrences of atrial fibrillation (ERAF) that occur within two weeks after pulmonary vein (PV) isolation, and to determine whether ERAF is predictive of long-term outcome after PV isolation. BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) sometimes recurs within days after PV isolation and may prompt an early repeat intervention. METHODS: Segmental PV isolation was performed using radiofrequency energy in 110 consecutive patients (mean age 53 +/- 11 years) with paroxysmal (93 patients) or persistent (17 patients) AF. Three to four PVs were targeted for isolation in all patients. Pulmonary vein isolation was complete in 338 of the 358 PVs that were targeted (94%). RESULTS: Early recurrences of AF occurred in 39 of 110 patients (35%) at a mean of 3.7 +/- 3.5 days after the procedure. The prevalence of ERAF was similar in patients with paroxysmal and persistent AF (33% and 47%, respectively, p = 0.4). Beyond the first two weeks, at 208 +/- 125 days of follow-up, 60 of the 71 patients without ERAF (85%) and 12 of the 39 patients with ERAF (31%) were free of recurrent AF in the absence of antiarrhythmic drug therapy (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Early recurrences of AF occur in approximately 35% of patients within two weeks after isolation of three to four PVs, and are associated with a lower long-term success rate than in patients without ERAF. However, approximately 30% of patients with ERAF have no further symptomatic AF during long-term follow-up. Therefore, temporary antiarrhythmic drug therapy may be more appropriate than early repeat ablation in patients with ERAF.     

Early identification and treatment of PV re-connections: role of observation time and impact on clinical results of atrial fibrillation ablation.

AIMS: Circumferential pulmonary vein isolation (CPVI) has been reported to account for 30% of atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence after initial ablation, and pulmonary vein (PV) re-connection accounts for about 80% of AF recurrence. There is no information in the literature whether early identification and treatment of acute PV conduction recovery during initial ablation has an impact on subsequent clinical results. The objective is to investigate the prevalence of acute PV conduction recovery during the observation time after PV isolation for paroxysmal AF, and to evaluate the impact of re-isolation treatment on clinical results. METHODS AND RESULTS: Ninety cases with paroxysmal AF (51 males, mean age of 56.4 +/- 12.3 years) were randomized to 3 groups to undergo CPVI. In Group A, there was no observation time post-ablation. In Group B, there was 30 min of observation time post-ablation. In Group C, there was 60 min of observation time post-ablation. All PV re-conduction was re-isolated at the end of the observation time. ECG and Holter monitors were used to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of ablation. All cases underwent the procedure successfully. The mean procedural time in Group A was significantly shorter than in Group B and Group C, but there was no significant difference on fluoroscopic time and PV isolation time among the three groups. In Group B, PV re-conduction occurred in 8 cases (25%) at 30 min post-isolation, in 10 cases (31.2%) at 60 min post-isolation for left PVs, and in 6 cases (18.8%) at 30 min post-isolation for right PVs. In Group C, PV re-conduction for left PVs occurred in 9 cases (30%) at 30 min post-isolation and in 11 cases (36.7%) at 60 min post-isolation; for right PVs this occurred in 7 cases (23.3%) at 30 min post-isolation and in 8 cases (26.7%) at 60 min post-isolation. During a mean follow-up of 6.7 +/- 2.3 months, 17 cases (60.7%) in Group A, 27 cases (84.3%) in Group B, and 26 cases (86.7%) in Group C had no recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmias, P = 0.04. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of acute PV conduction recovery was about 30% after PV isolation, which mostly occurred within 30 min after initial isolation. Re-isolation of recovered PV conduction contributed to the improvement in the success rate of ablation for paroxysmal AF.     

Comparison of Cooled-Tip Versus 4-mm-Tip Catheter in the Efficacy of Acute Ablative Tissue Injury During Circumferential Pulmonary Vein Isolation

Introduction: Although several studies have reported the benefits of cooled-tip ablation for circumferential pulmonary veins isolation (CPVI), the acute change of substrate property and acute PV reconnection have not been well demonstrated. The aim of this study was to compare the cooled-tip with regular 4-mm-tip catheter in acute substrate change after CPVI and long-term efficacy.
Methods and Results: One hundred and fifty-six patients (115 males, age 53 ± 12 years) who underwent CPVI for treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) were included. Group A consisted of 52 patients with cooled-tip ablation, and group B consisted of 104 patients with 4-mm-tip catheter ablation. The bipolar voltage of circumferential lesions was obtained using a 3-dimensional (3D) mapping system (NavX) before and after CPVI. The electrical reconnections of 4 PVs were evaluated 30 minutes after CPVI using a circular catheter. Cooled-tip catheter caused more reduction of the electrical voltage in PV antrum, lower incidence of acute PV reconnection, inducibility of AF, and gap-related atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT). Less number of left atrial (LA) ablation line and ablation applications and less procedure time were found in cooled-tip group compared to 4-mm-tip group. No significant difference in the incidence of pain sensation and complication was observed between the 2 groups. At a 14-month follow-up, the recurrence rate in the cooled-tip group was lower than in the 4-mm group (13.5% vs 33.7%, P = 0.009).
Conclusion: Cooled-tip catheter has a superior long-term outcome than the 4-mm-tip catheter in CPVI, which may be associated with the efficacy of transmural block and electrical isolation in PV antrum.     

ATP对阵发性心房颤动环肺静脉电隔离术后疗效判断的价值

目的探讨三磷酸腺苷（ATP）对阵发性心房颤动患者环肺静脉电隔离（CPVI）术后左房-肺静脉电传导恢复的影响。方法75例阵发性心房颤动患者在完成消融术后两次给予三磷酸腺苷诱导肺静脉电传导恢复,对肺静脉电位恢复者补充消融重新到达肺静脉隔离。另有对照组84例阵发性心房颤动患者常规完成消融术后不做诱导试验。比较两组患者心房颤动术后复发率。结果试验组心房颤动复发率21.33％,对照组心房颤动复发率30.95％,差异有统计学意义（ P＜0.05）。结论补充消融三磷酸腺苷“暴露”的肺静脉电传导间隙,可减少阵发性心房颤动的复发率。