Open AccessValue of adenosine test to reveal dormant conduction or adenosine‐induced atrial fibrillation after pulmonary vein isolation
Author(s) -
Iqbal Mohammad,
Jena Anupam,
Park HeeSoon,
Baek YongSoo,
Lee KwangNo,
Roh SeungYoung,
Shim JaeMin,
Choi JongIl,
Kim YoungHoon
Publication year - 2017
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.2017.07.015
Subject(s) - adenosine , medicine , pulmonary vein , atrial fibrillation , ablation , cardiology , catheter ablation , hazard ratio , confidence interval , anesthesia
Abstract Background Recent studies investigating the implications of additional ablation guided by dormant pulmonary vein (PV) conduction testing using adenosine showed conflicting results, and the data about atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence after trigger site elimination in adenosine‐induced AF are still lacking. Methods Of 846 patients with paroxysmal AF (PAF) who underwent PV isolation (PVI), adenosine test after PVI was performed in 148 patients. Results PVI was successfully achieved in 846 patients. We excluded 58 patients due to loss to the follow‐up. A higher rate of AF recurrence was found in the group without adenosine test (136/644, 21%) compared to the group with adenosine test (20/144, 13%, log‐rank P =0.047). In multivariate analysis model for AF freedom during the follow‐up period, the only significant clinical predictor of AF freedom was adenosine test (hazard ratio [HR] 1.97; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.2–3.23; P =0.007). Among 148 patients with adenosine test, 114 (77%) patients showed neither dormant conductions nor AF‐induced, 22 (15%) showed positive dormant conductions only, and 12 (8%) revealed adenosine‐induced AF (6 of them also showed dormant conduction). After additional ablation in positive dormant conduction group and adenosine‐induced AF group, AF recurrence was noted in 4/21 (19%) patients in positive dormant conduction group and 2/11 (18%) patients in adenosine‐induced AF group, which was not different from that of patients in negative dormant conduction/ no AF‐induced group (14/112, 12%, log‐rank P =0.67). Conclusions Adenosine test after PVI to confirm the absence of dormant conduction and triggers initiating AF is beneficial to improve the outcomes after catheter ablation of PAF.