...
【24h】

Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation using remote magnetic catheter navigation: a case-control study.

机译:使用远程磁性导管导航导管消融房颤:病例对照研究。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

AIMS: To compare the acute and the 6 month outcome of catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) using irrigated tip magnetic catheter and remote magnetic cathter navigation (RMN) with manual catheter navigation (MCN) in patients with paroxysmal and persistent AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this retrospective analysis 356 patients (235 male, mean age: 57.9 +/- 10.9 years) with AF (70.5%, paroxysmal) who underwent catheter ablation between August 2007 and May 2008 using either RMN (n = 70, 46 male, mean age: 57.9 +/- 10.1 years, 50% paroxysmal) or MCN (n = 286, 189 male, mean age: 58.0 +/- 13.9 years, 75.5% paroxysmal) were included. All patients completed an intensive follow-up strategy. Complete pulmonary vein isolation was achieved in 87.6 and 99.6% of patients in RMN and MCN groups, respectively (P < 0.05). The procedure, fluoroscopy, and radiofrequency application times were 223 +/- 44 vs. 166 +/- 52 min (P < 0.0001), 13.7 +/- 7.8 vs. 34.5 +/- 15.1 min (P < 0.0001), and 75.4 +/- 20.9 vs. 53.2 +/- 21.4 min (P < 0.0001) in RMN and MCN groups, respectively. Seven (10.0%) and 28 (9.8%) patients in RMN and MCN groups received antiarrhythmic medications during the follow-up (P = 0.96). All the patients completed the 6 month follow-up. Freedom from AF at 6 months was achieved in 57.8 and 66.4% of the patients in RMN and MCN groups, respectively (P = 0.196). In patients without previous AF catheter ablation procedure the freedom from AF at 6 months were 68.2 and 60.5% in the MCN and RMN groups, respectively (P = 0.36). CONCLUSION: Catheter ablation using irrigated tip magnetic catheter and RMN is an effective and safe method for catheter ablation of AF. Compared to manual catheter navigation, the procedure and radiofrequency application times were longer and fluoroscopy time was shorter in the RMN group compared with the MCN group.
机译:目的:比较阵发性和持续性房颤患者使用灌注式尖端磁导管和远程磁导管导航(RMN)与手动导管导航(MCN)对房颤导管消融的急性和6个月结果。方法和结果:这项回顾性分析包括356例房颤(70.5%,阵发性)AF(70.5%,阵发性)的患者(235例男性,平均年龄:57.9 +/- 10.9岁),他们在2007年8月至2008年5月期间使用任一RMN(n = 70,男性46例,平均年龄:57.9 +/- 10.1岁,阵发性为50%)或MCN(n = 286,男性189例,平均年龄:58.0 +/- 13.9岁,阵发性为75.5%)。所有患者均完成了深入的随访策略。 RMN和MCN组分别有87.6和99.6%的患者实现了肺静脉完全隔离(P <0.05)。程序,荧光检查和射频施加时间分别为223 +/- 44分钟与166 +/- 52分钟(P <0.0001),13.7 +/- 7.8与34.5 +/- 15.1分钟(P <0.0001)和75.4在RMN和MCN组中,分别为+/- 20.9分钟和53.2 +/- 21.4分钟(P <0.0001)。 RMN和MCN组中的7位(10.0%)和28位(9.8%)患者在随访期间接受了抗心律失常药物治疗(P = 0.96)。所有患者均完成了6个月的随访。 RMN和MCN组中分别有57.8%和66.4%的患者在6个月时摆脱了房颤(P = 0.196)。在未进行AF导管消融手术的患者中,MCN和RMN组在6个月时的AF分别为68.2和60.5%(P = 0.36)。结论:使用尖端射频消融导管和RMN消融导管是治疗AF的一种安全有效的方法。与手动导尿相比,与MCN组相比,RMN组的手术过程和射频应用时间更长,透视时间更短。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号