We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Postprocedural LGE-CMR comparison of laser and radiofrequency ablation lesions after pulmonary vein isolation.
Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology 2018 August
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to compare the anatomical characteristics of scar formation achieved by visual-guided laser balloon (Laser) and radiofrequency (RF) pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), using late-gadolinium-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (LGE-CMR).
METHODS AND RESULTS: We included 17 patients with paroxysmal or early persistent drug resistant AF who underwent Laser ablation; 2 were excluded due to procedure-related complications. The sample was matched with a historical group of 15 patients who underwent PVI using RF. LGE-CMR sequences were acquired before and 3 months post-PVI. Ablation gaps were defined as pulmonary vein (PV) perimeter sections showing no gadolinium enhancement. The number of ablation gaps was lower in Laser versus RF ablations (median 7 vs. 14, P = 0.015). Complete anatomical PVI (circumferential scar around PV, without gaps) was more frequently achieved with Laser than with RF (39% vs. 19% of PVs, P = 0.025). Fewer gaps were present at the superior and anterior left PV and posterior right PV antral regions in the Laser group, compared to RF. Scar extension into the PVs was similar in both groups, although RF produced more extensive ablation scar toward the LA body. AF recurrences at 1 year were similar in both groups (Laser 36% vs. RF 27%, P = 1.00).
CONCLUSIONS: Compared to RF, Laser ablation achieved more complete anatomical PVI, with less LA scar extension. However, AF recurrence appears to be similar after Laser compared to RF ablation. Further studies are needed to assess whether the anatomical advantages of Laser ablation translate into clinical benefit in patients with AF.
METHODS AND RESULTS: We included 17 patients with paroxysmal or early persistent drug resistant AF who underwent Laser ablation; 2 were excluded due to procedure-related complications. The sample was matched with a historical group of 15 patients who underwent PVI using RF. LGE-CMR sequences were acquired before and 3 months post-PVI. Ablation gaps were defined as pulmonary vein (PV) perimeter sections showing no gadolinium enhancement. The number of ablation gaps was lower in Laser versus RF ablations (median 7 vs. 14, P = 0.015). Complete anatomical PVI (circumferential scar around PV, without gaps) was more frequently achieved with Laser than with RF (39% vs. 19% of PVs, P = 0.025). Fewer gaps were present at the superior and anterior left PV and posterior right PV antral regions in the Laser group, compared to RF. Scar extension into the PVs was similar in both groups, although RF produced more extensive ablation scar toward the LA body. AF recurrences at 1 year were similar in both groups (Laser 36% vs. RF 27%, P = 1.00).
CONCLUSIONS: Compared to RF, Laser ablation achieved more complete anatomical PVI, with less LA scar extension. However, AF recurrence appears to be similar after Laser compared to RF ablation. Further studies are needed to assess whether the anatomical advantages of Laser ablation translate into clinical benefit in patients with AF.
Full text links
Trending Papers
Acute and non-acute decompensation of liver cirrhosis (47/130).Liver International : Official Journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver 2024 March 2
Guide to Utilization of the Microbiology Laboratory for Diagnosis of Infectious Diseases: 2024 Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and the American Society for Microbiology (ASM).Clinical Infectious Diseases 2024 March 6
Ten Influential Point-of-Care Ultrasound Papers: 2023 in Review.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 Februrary 20
Administration of methylene blue in septic shock: pros and cons.Critical Care : the Official Journal of the Critical Care Forum 2024 Februrary 17
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