Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology最新文献

Introduction: A hybrid approach with very high-power short-duration (vHPSD) posteriorly and ablation-index guided HPSD (50 W) anteriorly seems to be an optimal balance between efficiency and effectiveness for point-by-point pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). The aim of the current study is to compare vHPSD/HPSD ablation to cryoballoon ablation (CBA) in patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF).

Methods and results: In this retrospective single-center study, we identified 110 consecutive patients who underwent their first PVI with either vHPSD/HPSD (n = 54) or CBA (n = 56). We compared procedural efficacy, efficiency, safety, and long-term outcomes. Baseline characteristics of both groups were comparable; however, patients in the vHPSD/HPSD group had larger left atrial volume index (35, IQR 27-45 vs. 28, IQR 21-36 ml/m², P = 0.005). Complete PVI was achieved in all patients except two CBA cases (100% vs. 96.4%, P = 0.50). First-pass isolation rate was 79.6% in the hybrid group. Procedure times were similar between groups (53, IQR 47-63 vs. 55, IQR 49-65 min, P = 0.35), but fluoroscopy time was shorter in the vHPSD/HPSD group (3.9 [2.7, 5.6] vs. 11.9 [9.3, 14.9] min, P < 0.001). There were 3 temporary phrenic nerve palsies (5.4%) in the CBA group which resolved within 1 year. The 1-year freedom from any atrial tachyarrhythmias after a single procedure was similar between groups (68.5% vs. 73.2%, P = 0.56). During repeat procedure, the durability of PVI was comparable.

Conclusions: The use of vHPSD/HPSD ablation renders point-by-point PVI as fast and effective as CBA. Furthermore, it has lower radiation exposure compared to CBA.

Background: Patients with transposition of the great arteries (TGA) who undergo atrial switch procedures may develop symptomatic atrial arrhythmias necessitating ablation. We present a single-centre retrospective analysis of a novel approach using jugular access for catheter ablation in this unique patient population.

Methods: A 5-year retrospective analysis was conducted on patients referred for atrial arrhythmia ablation following atrial switch procedures. Procedures were performed by experienced operators, and data on patient demographics, procedural characteristics, and outcomes were collected. Statistical analysis was performed to compare outcomes between jugular and femoral access groups.

Results: Jugular access (N = 9) and femoral access (N = 13) cohorts were comparable in age, gender distribution, and clinical characteristics. Procedural success rates were high in both groups, with no significant difference in recurrence rates. Jugular access demonstrated a comparatively safe profile compared to femoral access.

Discussion: The jugular approach offers a viable alternative to femoral access for atrial arrhythmia ablation in patients with atrial switch procedures. The trajectory from the internal jugular vein to the baffle is straightforward, reducing vascular complications. Success rates and procedural times were comparable, highlighting the feasibility and safety of the jugular approach. The option for rapid post-procedural mobilisation adds to its appeal.

Conclusion: Atrial arrhythmia ablation with jugular access in patients with atrial switch procedures is safe and effective, providing an alternative in cases where femoral access may pose challenges. This approach warrants consideration in the management of atrial arrhythmias in this unique patient population.

Background: An electrophysiology (EP) recording system is recommended throughout the left bundle branch area pacing (LBBaP) procedure. However, the requirement of an EP recording system limits the wide adoption of LBBaP in non-EP laboratory settings. Thus, in this study, we proposed a novel set-up in non-EP laboratories using manufacturer pacing system analyzer (PSA)-derived electrogram guidance and fluoroscopy of the angiography system for LBBaP.

Methods: Our study prospectively enrolled consecutive patients who underwent LBBaP for bradyarrhythmia indications. LBBaP was performed using a stylet-driven lead (SDL) delivered through a dedicated delivery sheath. Procedural characteristics were recorded at the implant. The agreement of measurements on the modified 3-lead ECG of PSA and standard 12-lead ECG was analyzed.

Results: A total of 83 patients were enrolled (mean age 65.4 ± 11.8 years, 55.4% male). The LBBaP with an SDL was successful for all patients. The pacing response was observed as LBBP in 69.9% of cases, while 30.1% were classified as left ventricular septal pacing. The mean paced QRS duration (pQRSd) and the stimulus to left ventricular activation time (LVAT) were measured at 117.6 ± 11.4 ms and 68 ± 17 ms using a modified 3-lead ECG of PSA, compared to 118.5 ± 11.8 ms and 70 ± 13 ms using the standard 12-lead ECG, with agreements of 0.89 and 0.93, respectively. SDL-LBBaP resulted in low unipolar and bipolar pacing thresholds (0.7 ± 0.2 V at 0.4 ms and 0.8 ± 0.2 V at 0.4 ms), which remained stable at a median 12-month follow-up (p > 0.05). An atrial lead revision was needed for one (1.2%) patient during the first-month visit. Acute interventricular septal perforation occurred in two (2.4%) patients as a specific complication of LBBaP.

Conclusion: Our novel setting in non-EP laboratories, utilizing fluoroscopy from the angiography system and manufacturer-modified 3-lead ECG and EGM of PSA during LBBaP, is feasible, reliable, and widely available. LBB capture was confirmed by both the standard EP recording system and new modified PSA 3-lead ECG measurements, which showed good agreement. Further large-scale data is needed to validate our findings.

Background: Slow activation areas, characterized by decreased conduction velocities in the left atrium, are commonly observed in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (PeAF). However, it remains unclear whether the ablation of slow activation areas combined with pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) improves clinical outcomes in these patients.

Methods: This single-center retrospective study included patients who underwent catheter ablation for PeAF. A total of 78 consecutive patients were included in the PVI + SAA group, while another 78 patients who underwent PVI with/without the roof line, matched 1:1 by propensity score, served as the control group. Slow activation area was defined as ≥ 4 10 ms-step isochrones within 10 mm distance. The endpoint was AF recurrence, atrial flutter, or atrial tachycardia (AT) lasting > 30 s after the blanking period.

Results: The mean mapping time was 10 ± 3 min in the PVI + SAA group. Slow activation areas were identified in 37 of the 78 patients, predominantly located in the anterior wall and often overlapping with the low-voltage areas. The proportion of atrial arrhythmia-free patients was significantly higher in the PVI + SAA group compared to the PVI group (Log-rank P = 0.024; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.40; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.19-0.85). Subgroup analysis showed no significant difference in AT/AF recurrence rates between patients who underwent additional ablation of slow activation area and those without identified slow activation areas in the PVI + SAA group (Log-rank P = 0.73; HR: 1.20; 95% CI: 0.42-3.42).

Conclusions: Slow activation areas can be efficiently identified using isochronal mapping. Targeted ablation of slow activation areas helps reduce AT/AF recurrence in patients with PeAF.

Background: The relationship between premature ventricular contractions (PVC) and right ventricular (RV) function is not widely known. Left ventricular (LV) dysfunction due to PVC is known as PVC-induced cardiomyopathy (PIC) and suppressing the PVC substrate would improve LV function. The effect of PVC ablation on changes in RV function in patients with subtle RV subclinical dysfunction remains unknown.

Objective: Understanding the alterations in RV function parameters after PVC ablation.

Method: Basic and speckle-tracking echocardiography has been performed on 42 individuals with symptomatic idiopathic outflow tract PVC before and 1 month after a successful ablation.

Result: At the baseline of the study, there were 26 patients with RV subclinical dysfunction and 16 patients without RV dysfunction. Patients with RV subclinical dysfunction exhibited significantly higher PVC burden and QRS complex duration than those with normal RV function (p < 0.05). A PVC burden ≥ 21% (OR 9.11, 1.54-53.87, p = 0.015) and a QRS complex duration ≥ 138 ms (OR 5.74, 1.07-30.90, p = 0.042) were independently associated with RV subclinical dysfunction. In both groups, measurements of RV subclinical function before and after ablation, specifically by free wall longitudinal strain (FWLS) and global longitudinal strain (GLS), demonstrated significant changes. These improvements were more pronounced in the group with RV dysfunction (FWLS 9.7 ± 4.0, p < 0.001; GLS 7.5 ± 4.2, p < 0.001). Lower initial FWLS and GLS before ablation emerged as significant parameters in the multivariate analysis for the improvement of RV function post-ablation.

Conclusion: Patients with RV subclinical dysfunction had higher PVC burden and wider QRS duration. Patients with idiopathic outflow tract PVC with RV subclinical dysfunction may experience improvements in RV function after successful PVC ablation.

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with adverse remodeling of the left atrium (LA). The impact of the extent of atrial myopathy and post-ablation remodeling on quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes has not been studied.

Objective: The aim of our study was to investigate the association between atrial myopathy and post-ablation remodeling on quality-of-life outcomes in patients with persistent AF.

Methods: We conducted an analysis of DECAAF II participants who underwent late-gadolinium enhancement MRI (LGE-MRI) before and after AF ablation. We assessed atrial myopathy and post-ablation atrial remodeling, scar formation, and fibrosis coverage with ablation. QoL metrics were assessed using the Short Form Survey (SF-36) and Atrial Fibrillation Severity Scale (AFSS). Uni- and multivariable regression models were developed for this analysis.

Results: Six hundred thirteen patients with persistent AF were included in our analyses. At baseline, AFSS burden and total AFSS score were 18.94 ± 7.35 and 12.24 ± 8.17, respectively. Following ablation, all QoL and AFSS metrics improved in both the pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) and MRI-guided fibrosis ablation groups. On average, one unit of post-ablation reduction in left atrial volume index (LAVI) was associated with an improvement of 0.085 in total AFSS score (p = 0.001), 0.01 in shortness of breath with activity (p < 0.001), 0.15 in AF burden (p < 0.001), - 0.016 in global well-being (p = 0.018), 0.519 in health change (p < 0.001), 0.19 in vitality (vitality (p = 0.01), and 0.27 in physical functioning (p = 0.001). Baseline fibrosis and residual fibrosis post-ablation were associated with improved vitality and general health.

Conclusion: Atrial myopathy and post-ablation atrial remodeling significantly impact QoL in patients with persistent AF undergoing ablation.

Background: Atrioventricular node ablation (AVNA) and pacemaker implantation enhance prognosis in heart failure patients experiencing rapid ventricular response due to atrial fibrillation. This meta-analysis assessed the clinical benefits of various pacing modalities following AVNA.

Methods: The electrophysiological endpoint was defined as QRS duration, while the echocardiographic endpoint was the change in left ventricular ejection fraction. Secondary endpoints included pacing threshold, mortality rates, and improvements in the 6-min walk test.

Results: This meta-analysis of 13 studies involving 1257 patients suggested that His bundle pacing (HBP) and left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) conferred an advantage in narrowing QRS duration compared to biventricular pacing (BVP) (HBP vs BVP OR = - 59.05, 95%CI = - 73.12 to - 44.97; LBBAP vs BVP OR = - 48.64, 95%CI = - 64.05 to - 33.24). The findings of echocardiographic endpoints suggested that LBBAP and HBP emerged as the optimal strategies over RVP (vs HBP OR = - 7.59, 95%CI = - 11.85 to - 3.32; vs LBBAP OR = - 6.58, 95%CI = - 12.08 to - 1.07). LBBAP reduced all-cause mortality compared to BVP (OR = 0.10, 95%CI = 0.01-0.78); however, no significant differences in all-cause mortality were observed between LBBAP and HBP. The pacing threshold of LBBAP was significantly lower than HBP (OR = - 0.40, 95%CI = - 0.57 to - 0.23).

Conclusion: LBBAP not only demonstrated superior clinical outcomes regarding mortality compared to ventricular pacing strategies, but also was associated with a lower pacing threshold than HBP, thereby indicating its potential advantage over HBP in patients undergoing AVNA and subsequent pacemaker implantation.