Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Aryana, Arash, MS, MD, FHRS
• Mugnai, Giacomo, MD
• Singh, Sheldon M., MD
• Pujara, Deep K., MBBS
• de Asmundis, Carlo, MD, PhD, FHRS
• Singh, Steve K., MSc, MD
• Bowers, Mark R., MS, MD
• Brugada, Pedro, MD, PhD
• d’Avila, André, MD, PhD
• O’Neill, Padraig Gearoid, MD, FHRS
• Chierchia, Gian-Battista, MD, PhD

Titel

Procedural and biophysical indicators of durable pulmonary vein isolation during cryoballoon ablation of atrial fibrillation

Ist Teil von

• Heart rhythm, 2016-02, Vol.13 (2), p.424-432

Ort / Verlag

United States: Elsevier Inc

Erscheinungsjahr

2016

Link zum Volltext

Quelle

MEDLINE

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• background Limited data exist on procedural and biophysical indicators of pulmonary vein (PV) isolation durability after the cryoballoon ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF). Objective The aim of this study was to investigate the procedural and biophysical characteristics associated with late PV reconnection (PVR ) and durable PV isolation (PVI ) after cryoablation using the currently available second-generation cryoballoon. Methods Data from 435 PVs targeted in 112 consecutive patients who underwent a repeat procedure 14 ± 3 months after an index cryoablation of AF were examined. Results Altogether, 111 PVs (25.5%) in 71 patients (63.4%) demonstrated PVR , whereas 324 PVs (74.5%) exhibited PVI . The number and duration of cryoballoon applications did not differ between PVR and PVI . However, the time to PV isolation (time to effect) was considerably shorter (39.1 ± 11.7 seconds vs 67.6 ± 19.7 seconds; P < .001), the balloon temperature at time to effect was significantly warmer (−32.1°C ± 7.8°C vs −39.4°C ± 5.8°C; P < .001), the balloon nadir temperature was slightly cooler (−48.7°C ± 4.6°C vs −47.8°C ± 2.9°C; P = .034), and the total thaw time (56.5 ± 25.4 seconds vs 34.8 ± 9.1 seconds; P < .001) and interval thaw times at 0°C (iTT0 ; 14.8 ± 10.9 seconds vs 7.1 ± 2.0 seconds; P < .001) and 15°C (54.2 ± 25.4 seconds vs 33.3 ± 9.1 seconds; P < .001) were notably longer with PVI than with PVR . However, only a time to effect of ≤60 seconds and an iTT0 of ≥10 seconds emerged as significant predictors of PV isolation durability. Consequently, in a multivariate model, presence of both criteria predicted <1% and their mere absence ~75% likelihood of PVR. Conclusion A time to effect of ≤60 seconds and an iTT0 of ≥10 seconds significantly predict PV isolation durability after the cryoballoon ablation of AF. If both criteria are met, the likelihood of PV reconnection may be exceedingly low.