
Efficacy of atrial substrate modification based on dominant frequency of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation
Author(s) -
Kumagai Koji,
Minami Kentaro,
Kutsuzawa Daisuke,
Oshima Shigeru
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
journal of arrhythmia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.463
H-Index - 21
eISSN - 1883-2148
pISSN - 1880-4276
DOI - 10.1016/j.joa.2016.02.005
Subject(s) - medicine , ablation , cardiology , pulmonary vein , atrial fibrillation , cardioversion , catheter ablation , atrial flutter , atrial tachycardia , paroxysmal atrial fibrillation , anesthesia
Background The endpoint of ablation procedures is suggested to be non‐inducibility of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). However, the prognosis of induced AF/atrial tachycardia (AT) after pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) in PAF patients remains unclear. Methods A total of 122 PAF patients were divided into the following 3 groups: Group 1, 79 without AF/AT induced after PVI; Group 2, 21 with AF/AT induced or sustained after PVI, and followed by a high‐dominant frequency (DF) and continuous complex fractionated atrial electrogram (CFAE) site ablation and, if necessary, linear ablation; and Group 3, 22 with external cardioversion of AF/AT induced or sustained after PVI. High‐DF (DF≥8 Hz) and continuous CFAE (fractionated intervals≤50 ms) sites were targeted. The ablation endpoint was non‐inducibility of PAF. Results In Group 2, AF terminated in 2 patients with a high‐DF and continuous CFAE site ablation. In 4 patients, AF induced after cardioversion did not terminate with left atrium linear ablation, and required additional cardioversion. Common atrial flutter in 2 patients terminated with cavotricuspid isthmus ablation. An AT terminated with a roofline ablation. Finally, no AF/AT could be induced in any of the patients in Group 2 after all the procedures. The cumulative freedom from AF/AT recurrence without antiarrhythmic drugs in Groups 1 and 2 was significantly greater than that in Group 3 after 1 procedure during 12 months of follow‐up (90% and 91% vs. 64%, Log‐rank test P =0.001 and P =0.033, respectively). Conclusions Atrial substrate ablation may improve the clinical outcome after ablation in patients after PVI with residual arrhythmia inducibility.