Symptomatic periesophageal vagal nerve injury by different energy sources during atrial fibrillation ablation.
atrial fibrillation
catheter ablation
complication
gastric hypomotility
pulmonary vein isolation
vagal nerve injury
Journal
Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine
ISSN: 2297-055X
Titre abrégé: Front Cardiovasc Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101653388
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
16
08
2023
accepted:
18
10
2023
medline:
15
11
2023
pubmed:
15
11
2023
entrez:
15
11
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Symptomatic gastric hypomotility (SGH) is a rare but major complication of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation, but data on this are scarce. We compared the clinical course of SGH occurring with different energy sources. This multicenter study retrospectively collected the characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients with SGH after AF ablation. The data of 93 patients (67.0 ± 11.2 years, 68 men, 52 paroxysmal AF) with SGH after AF ablation were collected from 23 cardiovascular centers. Left atrial (LA) ablation sets included pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) alone, a PVI plus a roof-line, and an LA posterior wall isolation in 42 (45.2%), 11 (11.8%), and 40 (43.0%) patients, respectively. LA ablation was performed by radiofrequency ablation, cryoballoon ablation, or both in 38 (40.8%), 38 (40.8%), and 17 (18.3%) patients, respectively. SGH diagnoses were confirmed at 2 (1-4) days post-procedure, and 28 (30.1%) patients required re-hospitalizations. Fasting was required in 81 (92.0%) patients for 4 (2.5-5) days; the total hospitalization duration was 11 [7-19.8] days. After conservative treatment, symptoms disappeared in 22.3% of patients at 1 month, 48.9% at 2 months, 57.6% at 3 months, 84.6% at 6 months, and 89.7% at 12 months, however, one patient required surgery after radiofrequency ablation. Symptoms persisted for >1-year post-procedure in 7 patients. The outcomes were similar regardless of the energy source and LA lesion set. The clinical course of SGH was similar regardless of the energy source. The diagnosis was often delayed, and most recovered within 6 months, yet could persist for over 1 year in 10%.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Symptomatic gastric hypomotility (SGH) is a rare but major complication of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation, but data on this are scarce.
Objective
UNASSIGNED
We compared the clinical course of SGH occurring with different energy sources.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
This multicenter study retrospectively collected the characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients with SGH after AF ablation.
Results
UNASSIGNED
The data of 93 patients (67.0 ± 11.2 years, 68 men, 52 paroxysmal AF) with SGH after AF ablation were collected from 23 cardiovascular centers. Left atrial (LA) ablation sets included pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) alone, a PVI plus a roof-line, and an LA posterior wall isolation in 42 (45.2%), 11 (11.8%), and 40 (43.0%) patients, respectively. LA ablation was performed by radiofrequency ablation, cryoballoon ablation, or both in 38 (40.8%), 38 (40.8%), and 17 (18.3%) patients, respectively. SGH diagnoses were confirmed at 2 (1-4) days post-procedure, and 28 (30.1%) patients required re-hospitalizations. Fasting was required in 81 (92.0%) patients for 4 (2.5-5) days; the total hospitalization duration was 11 [7-19.8] days. After conservative treatment, symptoms disappeared in 22.3% of patients at 1 month, 48.9% at 2 months, 57.6% at 3 months, 84.6% at 6 months, and 89.7% at 12 months, however, one patient required surgery after radiofrequency ablation. Symptoms persisted for >1-year post-procedure in 7 patients. The outcomes were similar regardless of the energy source and LA lesion set.
Conclusions
UNASSIGNED
The clinical course of SGH was similar regardless of the energy source. The diagnosis was often delayed, and most recovered within 6 months, yet could persist for over 1 year in 10%.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37965084
doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2023.1278603
pmc: PMC10642562
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1278603Informations de copyright
© 2023 Miyazaki, Kobori, Jo, Keida, Yoshitani, Mukai, Sagawa, Asakawa, Sato, Yamao, Horie, Manita, Fukaya, Hayashi, Tanimoto, Iwayama, Chiba, Sato, Sekiguchi, Sugiura, Iwai, Isonaga, Miwa, Kato, Inaba, Hirota, Nagata, Ono, Hachiya, Yamauchi, Goya, Nitta, Tada and Sasano.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.
Références
Heart Rhythm O2. 2020 May 28;1(3):173-179
pubmed: 34113871
Heart Rhythm. 2017 May;14(5):670-677
pubmed: 28434448
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2013 Aug;24(8):847-51
pubmed: 23551640
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2022 Jun;33(6):1160-1166
pubmed: 35488745
Heart Rhythm. 2014 Oct;11(10):1779-84
pubmed: 24952149
Am J Cardiol. 2015 Jul 1;116(1):92-7
pubmed: 25933733
Heart Rhythm. 2015 Oct;12(10):2195-203
pubmed: 26031374
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2015 Jun;8(3):531-6
pubmed: 25772541
Heart Rhythm. 2014 Apr;11(4):574-8
pubmed: 24418167
J Arrhythm. 2021 Aug 28;37(5):1330-1336
pubmed: 34621432
N Engl J Med. 2016 Jun 9;374(23):2235-45
pubmed: 27042964
Heart Rhythm. 2008 Sep;5(9):1327-30
pubmed: 18774112
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005 Jul 19;46(2):327-30
pubmed: 16022963
J Am Heart Assoc. 2014 Sep 23;3(5):e001209
pubmed: 25249299
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2018 Apr;41(4):389-395
pubmed: 29435991
Heart Rhythm. 2011 Jun;8(6):826-32
pubmed: 21315839
Int J Cardiol. 2021 Mar 1;326:103-108
pubmed: 33130261
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2014 Jan;25(1):1-7
pubmed: 24134539
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2016 Sep;27(9):1038-44
pubmed: 27221011
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2023 Mar;16(3):e011605
pubmed: 36745559
Heart Rhythm. 2017 Oct;14(10):e445-e494
pubmed: 31631881