Ostial dimensional changes after pulmonary vein isolation: Pulsed field ablation vs radiofrequency ablation
Language English Country United States Media print-electronic
Document type Journal Article
PubMed
32380290
DOI
10.1016/j.hrthm.2020.04.040
PII: S1547-5271(20)30410-0
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- Keywords
- Atrial fibrillation, Catheter ablation, Electroporation, Nonthermal ablation, Pulmonary vein stenosis, Pulsed field ablation,
- MeSH
- Atrial Fibrillation diagnosis physiopathology surgery MeSH
- Catheter Ablation methods MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Follow-Up Studies MeSH
- Tomography, X-Ray Computed MeSH
- Heart Conduction System physiopathology MeSH
- Pulmonary Veins surgery MeSH
- Treatment Outcome MeSH
- Imaging, Three-Dimensional methods MeSH
- Check Tag
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Male MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
BACKGROUND: Pulmonary vein (PV) stenosis is an important potential complication of PV isolation using thermal modalities such as radiofrequency ablation (RFA). Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is an alternative energy that causes nonthermal myocardial cell death. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of PFA vs RFA on the incidence and severity of PV narrowing or stenosis. METHODS: Data were analyzed from 4 paroxysmal atrial fibrillation ablation trials using either PFA or RFA; because of absent CT scans or poor computed tomography scan quality, 73 of 153 patients (47.7%) were excluded. Baseline and 3-month cardiac computed tomography scans were reconstructed into 3-dimensional images, and the long and short axes of the PV ostia were quantitatively and qualitatively assessed in a randomized blinded manner by 2 physicians. RESULTS: A total of 299 PVs from 80 patients after either PFA (n = 37) or RFA (n = 43) were enrolled. PV ostial diameters decreased significantly less with PFA than with RFA (% change; long axis: 0.9% ± 8.5% vs -11.9% ± 16.3%; P < .001 and short axis: 3.4% ± 12.7% vs -12.9% ± 18.5%; P < .001). After a combined quantitative/qualitative analysis, mild (30%-49%), moderate (50%-69%), or severe (70%-100%) PV narrowing was observed, respectively, in 9.0% (15 of 166), 1.8% (3 of 166), and 1.2% (2 of 166) of PVs in the RFA cohort but in none of the PVs after PFA (P < .001). Overall, PV narrowing/stenosis was present in 0% and 0% vs 12.0% and 32.5% of PVs and patients who underwent PFA and RFA, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study indicates that unlike after RFA, the incidence and severity of PV narrowing/stenosis after PV isolation is virtually eliminated with PFA.
Cardiology Department Homolka Hospital Prague Czech Republic
Farapulse Inc Menlo Park California
Helmsley Electrophysiology Center Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai New York New York
References provided by Crossref.org