Literature DB >> 21276621

Trends in inflammatory biomarkers during atrial fibrillation ablation across different catheter ablation strategies.

Martin Schmidt1, Harald Marschang, Sarah Clifford, Rittger Harald, Ritscher Guido, Turschner Oliver, Brachmann Johannes, Marcos Daccarett.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Chest pain after atrial fibrillation (AF) ablations is a common complaint with a wide differential diagnosis including coronary events. Elevation of troponins (Trop I) has been shown with radio-frequency (RF) ablation for atrial fibrillation. New devices including cryoballoon and multipolar ablation catheters have been introduced as alternative methods. We aim to compare cardiac injury following AF ablations according to different ablation technologies.
METHODS: In consecutive patients undergoing AF ablations with RF ablation, cryoballoon or multipolar ablation catheter (PVAC), Trop I, creatine kinase (CK) and CRP were analyzed immediately prior to and 24h following completion of ablation. Coronary events and symptoms and serial ECGs post procedure were evaluated.
RESULTS: A total of 243 patients were included, 18.5% of them females. The mean age was 63 ± 11 years old. Baseline Trop I, CK and CRP levels were within normal range in all patients. After RF ablation Trop I, CK and CRP levels were elevated in 100%, 20% and 91% of patients respectively (Trop I 3.55 pg/ml [range: 0.60-24.01 pg/ml], CK 147 U/l [range: 56-380 U/l] and CRP 2.15 mg/dl [range: 0.28-20.98 mg/dl]). All post-procedure Trop I levels were above the range of myocardial infarction (>0.15 ng/ml). After cryoballoon ablation, Trop I and CK levels were significantly higher than after RF or PVAC ablation (p<0.001). No ischemic ECG changes were documented.
CONCLUSIONS: Trop I elevations are not specific for ischemia in the setting of chest pain after AF ablation. Cryoballoon ablation resulted in a higher amount of cardiac injury.
Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21276621     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2010.12.084

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cardiol        ISSN: 0167-5273            Impact factor:   4.164


  5 in total

1.  Radiofrequency catheter ablation versus balloon cryoablation of atrial fibrillation: markers of myocardial damage, inflammation, and thrombogenesis.

Authors:  Bor Antolič; Andrej Pernat; Marta Cvijić; David Žižek; Matevž Jan; Matjaž Šinkovec
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2016-06-06       Impact factor: 1.704

2.  Clinical significance of early recurrence of atrial fibrillation after cryoballoon vs. radiofrequency ablation-A propensity score matched analysis.

Authors:  Michifumi Tokuda; Seigo Yamashita; Seiichiro Matsuo; Mika Kato; Hidenori Sato; Hirotsuna Oseto; Eri Okajima; Hidetsugu Ikewaki; Masaaki Yokoyama; Ryota Isogai; Kenichi Tokutake; Kenichi Yokoyama; Ryohsuke Narui; Shin-Ichi Tanigawa; Michihiro Yoshimura; Teiichi Yamane
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-07-02       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  High-sensitive cardiac troponin T as a predictor of efficacy and safety after pulmonary vein isolation using focal radiofrequency, multielectrode radiofrequency and cryoballoon ablation catheter.

Authors:  Ivan Zeljkovic; Sven Knecht; Nikola Pavlovic; Umut Celikyrut; Florian Spies; Sarah Burri; Dominik Mannhart; Loris Peterhans; Tobias Reichlin; Beat Schaer; Stefan Osswald; Christian Sticherling; Michael Kuhne
Journal:  Open Heart       Date:  2019-04-20

4.  Early recurrence after cryoballoon versus radiofrequency ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: mechanism and implication in long-term outcome.

Authors:  Yue Wei; Yangyang Bao; Changjian Lin; Yun Xie; Qingzhi Luo; Ning Zhang; Liqun Wu
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2022-09-07       Impact factor: 2.174

5.  Is cryoballoon ablation preferable to radiofrequency ablation for treatment of atrial fibrillation by pulmonary vein isolation? A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Junxia Xu; Yingqun Huang; Hongbin Cai; Yue Qi; Nan Jia; Weifeng Shen; Jinxiu Lin; Feng Peng; Wenquan Niu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-02-28       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.