UNLABELLED: Duodecapolar catheters (DPCs) have been widely used to diagnose isthmus block after ablation in patients with atrial flutters. The purpose of this study was to assess the ability of DPC to diagnose isthmus block utilizing electroanatomical mapping system (CARTO). METHODS: Sixty-two patients with common atrial flutter underwent isthmus ablation during CS pacing while DPC was positioned at lateral wall of RA along tricuspid annulus (TA). When activation sequence of DPC recording changed exclusively counter-clockwise after ablation, or did not even after ablations targeting single potentials on ablation line (Ab-L), only lateral side of Ab-L was remapped using CARTO to assess whether complete block (CB) was established. RESULTS: After ablation, DPC recording suggested CB and incomplete block (ICB) in 53 (85%) and 9 patients (15%), respectively. In 51/53 patients (96%) with CB suggested by DPC recordings, CARTO remap also demonstrated CB, however, in the remaining two patients (4%), demonstrated ICB with residual isthmus conduction that was slow enough to allow wavefront conducting around TA to arrive at distal dipole of DPC earlier, mimicking CB. In 4/9 patients (44%) with ICB suggested by DPC recordings, CARTO remap also demonstrated ICB, however, in the remaining five patients (56%), demonstrated CB with earlier arrival of wavefront traversing posterior wall at just lateral to Ab-L than that conducting around TA, mimicking ICB. Sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values of DPC to diagnose CB were 91, 67, 96, and 44%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Mapping using DPC would not be sufficient for diagnosis of CB and ICB.
UNLABELLED: Duodecapolar catheters (DPCs) have been widely used to diagnose isthmus block after ablation in patients with atrial flutters. The purpose of this study was to assess the ability of DPC to diagnose isthmus block utilizing electroanatomical mapping system (CARTO). METHODS: Sixty-two patients with common atrial flutter underwent isthmus ablation during CS pacing while DPC was positioned at lateral wall of RA along tricuspid annulus (TA). When activation sequence of DPC recording changed exclusively counter-clockwise after ablation, or did not even after ablations targeting single potentials on ablation line (Ab-L), only lateral side of Ab-L was remapped using CARTO to assess whether complete block (CB) was established. RESULTS: After ablation, DPC recording suggested CB and incomplete block (ICB) in 53 (85%) and 9 patients (15%), respectively. In 51/53 patients (96%) with CB suggested by DPC recordings, CARTO remap also demonstrated CB, however, in the remaining two patients (4%), demonstrated ICB with residual isthmus conduction that was slow enough to allow wavefront conducting around TA to arrive at distal dipole of DPC earlier, mimicking CB. In 4/9 patients (44%) with ICB suggested by DPC recordings, CARTO remap also demonstrated ICB, however, in the remaining five patients (56%), demonstrated CB with earlier arrival of wavefront traversing posterior wall at just lateral to Ab-L than that conducting around TA, mimicking ICB. Sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values of DPC to diagnose CB were 91, 67, 96, and 44%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Mapping using DPC would not be sufficient for diagnosis of CB and ICB.
Authors: A Arenal; J Almendral; J M Alday; J Villacastín; J M Ormaetxe; J L Sande; N Perez-Castellano; S Gonzalez; M Ortiz; J L Delcán Journal: Circulation Date: 1999-06-01 Impact factor: 29.690