Cargando…

Comparison of pulmonary vein reconnection patterns after multielectrode phased radiofrequency- and cryoballoon ablation of atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) using phased radiofrequency (RF) energy has been shown to be effective in the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS: We characterize and compare pulmonary vein (PV) reconnection at repeat ablation in patients with AF after initially successful PVI...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wieczorek, Marcus, Sassani, Kiarash, Hoeltgen, Reinhard
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7181531/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32326885
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12872-020-01459-4
_version_ 1783526058302111744
author Wieczorek, Marcus
Sassani, Kiarash
Hoeltgen, Reinhard
author_facet Wieczorek, Marcus
Sassani, Kiarash
Hoeltgen, Reinhard
author_sort Wieczorek, Marcus
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) using phased radiofrequency (RF) energy has been shown to be effective in the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS: We characterize and compare pulmonary vein (PV) reconnection at repeat ablation in patients with AF after initially successful PVI using phased RF technology (PVAC) or 2nd generation cryoballoon (CB). Eighty five patients undergoing redo PVI using multielectrode PVAC phased RF catheter and 66 patients after CB PVI were enrolled 9.7 ± 3.4 months after the initial ablation procedure. RESULTS: The percentage of patients with PV reconnection(s) was comparably high between both groups (93% PVAC and 92% CB). However, 75% of all PVs and left common trunks (CTs) isolated with PVAC were reconnected, compared with 52% reconnections after CB PVI (p < 0.001). A mean of 2.79 ± 1.2 PVs and CTs/patient were reconnected after PVAC PVI compared with 1.97 ± 0.8 in CB patients, p < 0.0001. No patients in the CB group had 4 reconnected PVs, while this pattern of reconnection was observed in 33% in the PVAC group (p < 0.0001). The percentage of patients in the PVAC group with ≥3 reconnected PVs was significantly higher compared with CB patients (56 patients (66%) vs. 17 patients (26%), p < 0.0001), while the percentage of patients with no PV reconnection was comparably low in PVAC and CB patients (7 and 8%, respectively). CTs were most frequently reconnected after PVAC PVI (94%) and left superior PVs after CB ablation (67%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The number of patients with recurrent AF and PV reconnection(s) at redo PVI was comparably high between both groups. However, the extent and distribution of PV reconnections was different in many aspects, indicating more stable atrial lesions after CB PVI compared with PVAC technology.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7181531
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71815312020-04-28 Comparison of pulmonary vein reconnection patterns after multielectrode phased radiofrequency- and cryoballoon ablation of atrial fibrillation Wieczorek, Marcus Sassani, Kiarash Hoeltgen, Reinhard BMC Cardiovasc Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) using phased radiofrequency (RF) energy has been shown to be effective in the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS: We characterize and compare pulmonary vein (PV) reconnection at repeat ablation in patients with AF after initially successful PVI using phased RF technology (PVAC) or 2nd generation cryoballoon (CB). Eighty five patients undergoing redo PVI using multielectrode PVAC phased RF catheter and 66 patients after CB PVI were enrolled 9.7 ± 3.4 months after the initial ablation procedure. RESULTS: The percentage of patients with PV reconnection(s) was comparably high between both groups (93% PVAC and 92% CB). However, 75% of all PVs and left common trunks (CTs) isolated with PVAC were reconnected, compared with 52% reconnections after CB PVI (p < 0.001). A mean of 2.79 ± 1.2 PVs and CTs/patient were reconnected after PVAC PVI compared with 1.97 ± 0.8 in CB patients, p < 0.0001. No patients in the CB group had 4 reconnected PVs, while this pattern of reconnection was observed in 33% in the PVAC group (p < 0.0001). The percentage of patients in the PVAC group with ≥3 reconnected PVs was significantly higher compared with CB patients (56 patients (66%) vs. 17 patients (26%), p < 0.0001), while the percentage of patients with no PV reconnection was comparably low in PVAC and CB patients (7 and 8%, respectively). CTs were most frequently reconnected after PVAC PVI (94%) and left superior PVs after CB ablation (67%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The number of patients with recurrent AF and PV reconnection(s) at redo PVI was comparably high between both groups. However, the extent and distribution of PV reconnections was different in many aspects, indicating more stable atrial lesions after CB PVI compared with PVAC technology. BioMed Central 2020-04-23 /pmc/articles/PMC7181531/ /pubmed/32326885 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12872-020-01459-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Wieczorek, Marcus
Sassani, Kiarash
Hoeltgen, Reinhard
Comparison of pulmonary vein reconnection patterns after multielectrode phased radiofrequency- and cryoballoon ablation of atrial fibrillation
title Comparison of pulmonary vein reconnection patterns after multielectrode phased radiofrequency- and cryoballoon ablation of atrial fibrillation
title_full Comparison of pulmonary vein reconnection patterns after multielectrode phased radiofrequency- and cryoballoon ablation of atrial fibrillation
title_fullStr Comparison of pulmonary vein reconnection patterns after multielectrode phased radiofrequency- and cryoballoon ablation of atrial fibrillation
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of pulmonary vein reconnection patterns after multielectrode phased radiofrequency- and cryoballoon ablation of atrial fibrillation
title_short Comparison of pulmonary vein reconnection patterns after multielectrode phased radiofrequency- and cryoballoon ablation of atrial fibrillation
title_sort comparison of pulmonary vein reconnection patterns after multielectrode phased radiofrequency- and cryoballoon ablation of atrial fibrillation
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7181531/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32326885
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12872-020-01459-4
work_keys_str_mv AT wieczorekmarcus comparisonofpulmonaryveinreconnectionpatternsaftermultielectrodephasedradiofrequencyandcryoballoonablationofatrialfibrillation
AT sassanikiarash comparisonofpulmonaryveinreconnectionpatternsaftermultielectrodephasedradiofrequencyandcryoballoonablationofatrialfibrillation
AT hoeltgenreinhard comparisonofpulmonaryveinreconnectionpatternsaftermultielectrodephasedradiofrequencyandcryoballoonablationofatrialfibrillation