Predictive value of noninducibility after catheter ablation for paroxysmal and persistent atrial fibrillation.

atrial fibrillation catheter ablation inducibility pacing interval rapid atrial pacing

Journal

Journal of arrhythmia
ISSN: 1880-4276
Titre abrégé: J Arrhythm
Pays: Japan
ID NLM: 101263026

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Jun 2020
Historique:
received: 26 10 2019
revised: 24 01 2020
accepted: 07 02 2020
entrez: 13 6 2020
pubmed: 13 6 2020
medline: 13 6 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

It is unclear whether pacing maneuver at the end of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) predicts recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmia postintervention. To investigate whether the predictive value of incremental pacing maneuver after catheter ablation for AF depends on the pacing cycle length and type of AF. This study included 298 consecutive patients who underwent initial catheter ablation for nonvalvular AF (61% paroxysmal AF [PAF], 39% persistent AF [PeAF]). Rapid atrial pacing was performed at the end of the procedure. We analyzed minimum coupling interval (CI) of pacing, arrhythmia-inducibility, and atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence in patients with PAF and PeAF. Patients were divided into the following three groups according to their response to pacing maneuver: AF-inducible (inducible group; n = 86), noninducible at CI ≥200 ms (non-CI ≥200 group; n = 100), and noninducible at CI <200 ms (non-CI <200 group; n = 112). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that response to pacing maneuver was significantly associated with recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmias ( Noninducibility with shorter CI predicted atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence only for PeAF. Pacing CI and type of AF could influence the predictive value of atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
It is unclear whether pacing maneuver at the end of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) predicts recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmia postintervention.
OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE
To investigate whether the predictive value of incremental pacing maneuver after catheter ablation for AF depends on the pacing cycle length and type of AF.
METHODS METHODS
This study included 298 consecutive patients who underwent initial catheter ablation for nonvalvular AF (61% paroxysmal AF [PAF], 39% persistent AF [PeAF]). Rapid atrial pacing was performed at the end of the procedure. We analyzed minimum coupling interval (CI) of pacing, arrhythmia-inducibility, and atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence in patients with PAF and PeAF.
RESULTS RESULTS
Patients were divided into the following three groups according to their response to pacing maneuver: AF-inducible (inducible group; n = 86), noninducible at CI ≥200 ms (non-CI ≥200 group; n = 100), and noninducible at CI <200 ms (non-CI <200 group; n = 112). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that response to pacing maneuver was significantly associated with recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmias (
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Noninducibility with shorter CI predicted atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence only for PeAF. Pacing CI and type of AF could influence the predictive value of atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32528569
doi: 10.1002/joa3.12320
pii: JOA312320
pmc: PMC7279986
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

439-447

Informations de copyright

© 2020 The Authors. Journal of Arrhythmia published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of the Japanese Heart Rhythm Society.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors declare no conflict of interest for this article.

Références

J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2007 Jun;18(6):607-11
pubmed: 17488268
Circulation. 2004 Jun 22;109(24):3007-13
pubmed: 15184286
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012 Aug 14;60(7):628-36
pubmed: 22818076
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2013 Jun;24(6):617-23
pubmed: 23387879
Circulation. 2014 Dec 2;130(23):2071-104
pubmed: 24682348
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016 Jul 19;68(3):274-282
pubmed: 27163758
Heart Rhythm. 2006 Feb;3(2):140-5
pubmed: 16443526
N Engl J Med. 1998 Sep 3;339(10):659-66
pubmed: 9725923
Heart Rhythm. 2016 Apr;13(4):870-8
pubmed: 26711800
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2010 Jan;21(1):13-20
pubmed: 19682170
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014 Dec 16;64(23):2455-67
pubmed: 25500229
Europace. 2008 Aug;10(8):949-54
pubmed: 18492681
N Engl J Med. 2006 Mar 2;354(9):934-41
pubmed: 16510747
Circ J. 2013;77(1):249-74
pubmed: 23165786
Europace. 2018 May 1;20(5):778-785
pubmed: 28575293
Eur Heart J. 2006 Nov;27(21):2553-9
pubmed: 17038349
Circulation. 2006 Aug 15;114(7):e257-354
pubmed: 16908781
J Arrhythm. 2019 Jan 18;35(2):223-229
pubmed: 31007786
Eur Heart J. 2005 Dec;26(23):2550-5
pubmed: 16183686
Heart Rhythm. 2018 May;15(5):660-665
pubmed: 29056544
Circulation. 2004 Nov 2;110(18):2797-801
pubmed: 15505091

Auteurs

Shinichi Tachibana (S)

Department of Cardiology Yokohama City Minato Red Cross Hospital Yokohama Japan.

Akira Mizukami (A)

Department of Cardiology Kameda Medical Center Kamogawa Japan.

Shunsuke Kuroda (S)

Cardiovascular Medicine Department Cleveland Clinic Cleveland OH USA.

Tatsuya Hayashi (T)

Cardiovascular Medicine Tokyo Medical and Dental University Tokyo Japan.

Akihiko Matsumura (A)

Department of Cardiology Kameda Medical Center Kamogawa Japan.

Masahiko Goya (M)

Cardiovascular Medicine Tokyo Medical and Dental University Tokyo Japan.

Tetsuo Sasano (T)

Cardiovascular Medicine Tokyo Medical and Dental University Tokyo Japan.

Classifications MeSH