Cargando…

Reduction in Pulmonary Vein Stenosis and Collateral Damage With Pulsed Field Ablation Compared With Radiofrequency Ablation in a Canine Model

Pulmonary vein (PV) stenosis is a highly morbid condition that can result after catheter ablation for PV isolation. We hypothesized that pulsed field ablation (PFA) would reduce PV stenosis risk and collateral injury compared with irrigated radiofrequency ablation (IRF). METHODS: IRF and PFA deliver...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Howard, Brian, Haines, David E., Verma, Atul, Packer, Douglas, Kirchhof, Nicole, Barka, Noah, Onal, Birce, Fraasch, Steve, Miklavčič, Damijan, Stewart, Mark T.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7495982/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32877256
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCEP.120.008337
_version_ 1783582997133393920
author Howard, Brian
Haines, David E.
Verma, Atul
Packer, Douglas
Kirchhof, Nicole
Barka, Noah
Onal, Birce
Fraasch, Steve
Miklavčič, Damijan
Stewart, Mark T.
author_facet Howard, Brian
Haines, David E.
Verma, Atul
Packer, Douglas
Kirchhof, Nicole
Barka, Noah
Onal, Birce
Fraasch, Steve
Miklavčič, Damijan
Stewart, Mark T.
author_sort Howard, Brian
collection PubMed
description Pulmonary vein (PV) stenosis is a highly morbid condition that can result after catheter ablation for PV isolation. We hypothesized that pulsed field ablation (PFA) would reduce PV stenosis risk and collateral injury compared with irrigated radiofrequency ablation (IRF). METHODS: IRF and PFA deliveries were randomized in 8 dogs with 2 superior PVs ablated using one technology and 2 inferior PVs ablated using the other technology. IRF energy (25–30 W) or PFA was delivered (16 pulse trains) at each PV in a proximal and in a distal site. Contrast computed tomography scans were collected at 0, 2, 4, 8, and 12-week (termination) time points to monitor PV cross-sectional area at each PV ablation site. RESULTS: Maximum average change in normalized cross-sectional area at 4-weeks was −46.1±45.1% post-IRF compared with −5.5±20.5% for PFA (P≤0.001). PFA-treated targets showed significantly fewer vessel restrictions compared with IRF (P≤0.023). Necropsy showed expansive PFA lesions without stenosis in the proximal PV sites, compared with more confined and often incomplete lesions after IRF. At the distal PV sites, only IRF ablations were grossly identified based on focal fibrosis. Mild chronic parenchymal hemorrhage was noted in 3 left superior PV lobes after IRF. Damage to vagus nerves as well as evidence of esophagus dilation occurred at sites associated with IRF. In contrast, no lung, vagal nerve, or esophageal injury was observed at PFA sites. CONCLUSIONS: PFA significantly reduced risk of PV stenosis compared with IRF postprocedure in a canine model. IRF also caused vagus nerve, esophageal, and lung injury while PFA did not.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7495982
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74959822020-09-24 Reduction in Pulmonary Vein Stenosis and Collateral Damage With Pulsed Field Ablation Compared With Radiofrequency Ablation in a Canine Model Howard, Brian Haines, David E. Verma, Atul Packer, Douglas Kirchhof, Nicole Barka, Noah Onal, Birce Fraasch, Steve Miklavčič, Damijan Stewart, Mark T. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Original Articles Pulmonary vein (PV) stenosis is a highly morbid condition that can result after catheter ablation for PV isolation. We hypothesized that pulsed field ablation (PFA) would reduce PV stenosis risk and collateral injury compared with irrigated radiofrequency ablation (IRF). METHODS: IRF and PFA deliveries were randomized in 8 dogs with 2 superior PVs ablated using one technology and 2 inferior PVs ablated using the other technology. IRF energy (25–30 W) or PFA was delivered (16 pulse trains) at each PV in a proximal and in a distal site. Contrast computed tomography scans were collected at 0, 2, 4, 8, and 12-week (termination) time points to monitor PV cross-sectional area at each PV ablation site. RESULTS: Maximum average change in normalized cross-sectional area at 4-weeks was −46.1±45.1% post-IRF compared with −5.5±20.5% for PFA (P≤0.001). PFA-treated targets showed significantly fewer vessel restrictions compared with IRF (P≤0.023). Necropsy showed expansive PFA lesions without stenosis in the proximal PV sites, compared with more confined and often incomplete lesions after IRF. At the distal PV sites, only IRF ablations were grossly identified based on focal fibrosis. Mild chronic parenchymal hemorrhage was noted in 3 left superior PV lobes after IRF. Damage to vagus nerves as well as evidence of esophagus dilation occurred at sites associated with IRF. In contrast, no lung, vagal nerve, or esophageal injury was observed at PFA sites. CONCLUSIONS: PFA significantly reduced risk of PV stenosis compared with IRF postprocedure in a canine model. IRF also caused vagus nerve, esophageal, and lung injury while PFA did not. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2020-07-27 /pmc/articles/PMC7495982/ /pubmed/32877256 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCEP.120.008337 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology is published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial-NoDerivs (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is properly cited, the use is noncommercial, and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Howard, Brian
Haines, David E.
Verma, Atul
Packer, Douglas
Kirchhof, Nicole
Barka, Noah
Onal, Birce
Fraasch, Steve
Miklavčič, Damijan
Stewart, Mark T.
Reduction in Pulmonary Vein Stenosis and Collateral Damage With Pulsed Field Ablation Compared With Radiofrequency Ablation in a Canine Model
title Reduction in Pulmonary Vein Stenosis and Collateral Damage With Pulsed Field Ablation Compared With Radiofrequency Ablation in a Canine Model
title_full Reduction in Pulmonary Vein Stenosis and Collateral Damage With Pulsed Field Ablation Compared With Radiofrequency Ablation in a Canine Model
title_fullStr Reduction in Pulmonary Vein Stenosis and Collateral Damage With Pulsed Field Ablation Compared With Radiofrequency Ablation in a Canine Model
title_full_unstemmed Reduction in Pulmonary Vein Stenosis and Collateral Damage With Pulsed Field Ablation Compared With Radiofrequency Ablation in a Canine Model
title_short Reduction in Pulmonary Vein Stenosis and Collateral Damage With Pulsed Field Ablation Compared With Radiofrequency Ablation in a Canine Model
title_sort reduction in pulmonary vein stenosis and collateral damage with pulsed field ablation compared with radiofrequency ablation in a canine model
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7495982/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32877256
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCEP.120.008337
work_keys_str_mv AT howardbrian reductioninpulmonaryveinstenosisandcollateraldamagewithpulsedfieldablationcomparedwithradiofrequencyablationinacaninemodel
AT hainesdavide reductioninpulmonaryveinstenosisandcollateraldamagewithpulsedfieldablationcomparedwithradiofrequencyablationinacaninemodel
AT vermaatul reductioninpulmonaryveinstenosisandcollateraldamagewithpulsedfieldablationcomparedwithradiofrequencyablationinacaninemodel
AT packerdouglas reductioninpulmonaryveinstenosisandcollateraldamagewithpulsedfieldablationcomparedwithradiofrequencyablationinacaninemodel
AT kirchhofnicole reductioninpulmonaryveinstenosisandcollateraldamagewithpulsedfieldablationcomparedwithradiofrequencyablationinacaninemodel
AT barkanoah reductioninpulmonaryveinstenosisandcollateraldamagewithpulsedfieldablationcomparedwithradiofrequencyablationinacaninemodel
AT onalbirce reductioninpulmonaryveinstenosisandcollateraldamagewithpulsedfieldablationcomparedwithradiofrequencyablationinacaninemodel
AT fraaschsteve reductioninpulmonaryveinstenosisandcollateraldamagewithpulsedfieldablationcomparedwithradiofrequencyablationinacaninemodel
AT miklavcicdamijan reductioninpulmonaryveinstenosisandcollateraldamagewithpulsedfieldablationcomparedwithradiofrequencyablationinacaninemodel
AT stewartmarkt reductioninpulmonaryveinstenosisandcollateraldamagewithpulsedfieldablationcomparedwithradiofrequencyablationinacaninemodel