Nonfluoroscopic ICE-guided catheter ablation of AF without prior cardiac image integration or angiography is feasible and safe. PVI without fluoroscopy did not affect procedure duration or long-term efficacy.
Our data strengthen the value of CB ablation for the treatment of AF as an effective and safe procedure in elderly patients, with similar success and complication rates when compared with a younger population.
Background: Data regarding atrial tachycardia (AT) following second-generation cryoballoon ablation (CBA) of atrial fibrillation (AF) are limited. Aim: To describe the incidence, mechanisms, and clinical predictors of ATs following CBA. Methods and results: In this retrospective single-center study 238 patients undergoing CBA for treatment of paroxysmal (91/238; 38.2%) or persistent AF were analyzed. During a mean follow-up of 11.9 AE 5.5 months recurrence of AF occurred in 49/238 patients (20.6%) and AT in 27/238 (11.3%). Twenty-six patients with AT and 14 with AF only underwent a redo ablation. The prevailing mechanism of AT was macroreentry [typical atrial flutter (AFL) (n = 10), left atrial macroreentry (n = 14), focal left-AT (n = 2)]. Non-cavotricuspid-isthmus-dependent macroreentry right-AT was mapped and ablated in 3 patients after initial AFL ablation. In a multivariate regression model, persistent type of AF (HR = 3.3; CI = 1.2-9.4), cardiomyopathy (HR = 3.5; CI = 1.5-8.4), treatment with beta-blockers (HR = 0.3; CI = 0.1-0.6), and pulmonary vein-abnormality (HR = 4.6; CI = 2.1-10.4) were independent predictors of AT. Substrate analysis revealed a significantly higher number of low voltage areas in the left atrium in patients with left-AT in comparison to patients with AF recurrence only (2.0; IQR=2.0À4.0 vs. 0.5; IQR = 0.0-2.25; p = 0.005).
Conclusion:In this study, AT after CBA occurred in 11.3% of patients with macroreentry being the prevalent mechanism. All patients with left-AT presented with low voltage areas in the left atrium, suggesting a more progressive underlying fibrotic disease in these patients.
Aims
We report the collective European experience of percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) suture ligation using the recent generation LARIAT+ suture delivery device.
Methods and results
A total of 141 patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and contraindication to oral anticoagulation (OAC), thrombo-embolic events despite OAC or electrical LAA isolation were enrolled at seven European hospitals to undergo LAA ligation. Patients were followed up by clinical visits and transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE) following LAA closure. Left atrial appendage ligation was completed in 138/141 patients (97.8%). Three patients did not undergo attempted deployment of the LARIAT device due to pericardial adhesion after previous epicardial ventricular tachycardia ablation (n = 1), a pericardial access-related complication (n = 1), and multiple posterior LAA lobes (n = 1). Serious 30-day procedural adverse events occurred in 4/141 patients (2.8%). There were two device-related LAA perforations (1.4%) not resulting in any corrective intervention as the LAA was completely sealed with the LARIAT. Minor adverse events occurred in 19 patients (13.5%), including two pericardial effusions due to procedure-related pericarditis requiring pericardiocentesis. Transoesophageal echocardiography was performed after LAA ligation in 103/138 patients (74.6%) after a mean of 181 ± 72 days. Complete LAA closure was documented in 100 patients (97.1%). Two patients (1.8% of patients with follow-up) experienced a transient ischaemic attack at 4 and 7 months follow-up, although there was no leak observed with TOE. There were two deaths during long-term follow-up which were both not device related.
Conclusion
Initial experience with the LARIAT+ device demonstrates feasibility of LAA exclusion. Further larger prospective studies with longer follow-up are warranted.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.