We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, N.I.H., EXTRAMURAL
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Organized Sources Are Spatially Conserved in Recurrent Compared to Pre-Ablation Atrial Fibrillation: Further Evidence for Non-Random Electrical Substrates.
INTRODUCTION: Recurrent atrial fibrillation (AF) after ablation is associated with reconnection of initially isolated pulmonary vein (PV) trigger sites. Substrates are often targeted in addition to PVI, but it is unclear how substrates progress over time. We studied if substrates in recurrent AF are conserved or have developed de novo from pre-ablation AF.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Of 137 patients undergoing Focal Impulse and Rotor Mapping (FIRM) at their index procedure for AF, 29 consecutive patients (60 ± 8 years, 79% persistent) recurred and were also mapped at repeat procedure (21 ± 20 months later) using carefully placed 64-pole baskets and RhythmView(TM) (Topera, Menlo Park, CA, USA) to identify AF sources and disorganized zones. Compared to index AF, recurrent AF had a longer cycle length (177 ± 21 vs. 167 ± 19 milliseconds, P = 0.01). All patients (100%) had 1 or more conserved AF rotors between procedures with surrounding disorganization. The number of sources was similar for recurrent AF post-PVI versus index AF (3.2 ± 1.4 vs. 3.1 ± 1.0, P = 0.79), but was lower for recurrent AF after FIRM+PVI versus index AF (4.4 ± 1.4 vs. 2.9 ± 1.7, P = 0.03). Overall, 81% (61/75) of AF sources lay in conserved regions, while 19% (14/75) were detected de novo.
CONCLUSION: Electrical propagation patterns for recurrent AF after unsuccessful ablation are similar in individual patients to their index AF. These data support temporospatial stability of AF substrates over 1-2 years. Trials should determine the relative benefit of adding substrate mapping and ablation to PVI for recurrent AF.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Of 137 patients undergoing Focal Impulse and Rotor Mapping (FIRM) at their index procedure for AF, 29 consecutive patients (60 ± 8 years, 79% persistent) recurred and were also mapped at repeat procedure (21 ± 20 months later) using carefully placed 64-pole baskets and RhythmView(TM) (Topera, Menlo Park, CA, USA) to identify AF sources and disorganized zones. Compared to index AF, recurrent AF had a longer cycle length (177 ± 21 vs. 167 ± 19 milliseconds, P = 0.01). All patients (100%) had 1 or more conserved AF rotors between procedures with surrounding disorganization. The number of sources was similar for recurrent AF post-PVI versus index AF (3.2 ± 1.4 vs. 3.1 ± 1.0, P = 0.79), but was lower for recurrent AF after FIRM+PVI versus index AF (4.4 ± 1.4 vs. 2.9 ± 1.7, P = 0.03). Overall, 81% (61/75) of AF sources lay in conserved regions, while 19% (14/75) were detected de novo.
CONCLUSION: Electrical propagation patterns for recurrent AF after unsuccessful ablation are similar in individual patients to their index AF. These data support temporospatial stability of AF substrates over 1-2 years. Trials should determine the relative benefit of adding substrate mapping and ablation to PVI for recurrent AF.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app