INTRODUCTION: We investigated the impact of the mode of left atrial (LA) access via patent foramen ovale (PFO) versus transseptal (TS) puncture on LA linear lesions during atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. METHODS AND RESULTS: We investigated 139 (PFO: 25) consecutive patients who underwent mitral isthmus (MI) and/or LA roof linear ablation. Technical endpoint was completeness of linear lesions and duration of radiofrequency (RF) application. During the initial procedure, complete MI and LA roof blocks were created in 13 of 19 (68%) and 14 of 17 (82%) patients in the PFO group, and in 57 of 94 (61%) and 54 of 70 (74%) patients in the TS group, respectively (P = NS). There was no significant difference in RF durations at MI (11.1 ± 8.9 and 15.1 ± 7.6 minutes, P = 0.11), and LA roof (10.1 ± 3.5 and 8.3 ± 5.0 minutes, P = 0.21) between the 2 groups. Among 28 patients who underwent repeat linear ablation, complete MI and LA roof blocks were created in 3 of 4 (75%) and 0 of 1 (0%) patients in the PFO group, and in 16 of 21 (76%) and 7 of 10 (70%) patients in the TS group, respectively (P = NS). There was no significant difference in RF durations at MI (15.3 ± 8.3 and 19.5 ± 18.3 minutes, P = 0.71), and LA roof (19.0 and 10.3 ± 5.4 minutes, P = 0.19) between the 2 groups. Clinical outcomes at 12 months were also similar. CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences in the procedural success rates, durations of RF application, 12-month clinical outcomes, and complication rates of LA linear ablation between the PFO and TS groups. Accessing the LA via a PFO is not an unfavorable approach toward LA linear ablation.
INTRODUCTION: We investigated the impact of the mode of left atrial (LA) access via patent foramen ovale (PFO) versus transseptal (TS) puncture on LA linear lesions during atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. METHODS AND RESULTS: We investigated 139 (PFO: 25) consecutive patients who underwent mitral isthmus (MI) and/or LA roof linear ablation. Technical endpoint was completeness of linear lesions and duration of radiofrequency (RF) application. During the initial procedure, complete MI and LA roof blocks were created in 13 of 19 (68%) and 14 of 17 (82%) patients in the PFO group, and in 57 of 94 (61%) and 54 of 70 (74%) patients in the TS group, respectively (P = NS). There was no significant difference in RF durations at MI (11.1 ± 8.9 and 15.1 ± 7.6 minutes, P = 0.11), and LA roof (10.1 ± 3.5 and 8.3 ± 5.0 minutes, P = 0.21) between the 2 groups. Among 28 patients who underwent repeat linear ablation, complete MI and LA roof blocks were created in 3 of 4 (75%) and 0 of 1 (0%) patients in the PFO group, and in 16 of 21 (76%) and 7 of 10 (70%) patients in the TS group, respectively (P = NS). There was no significant difference in RF durations at MI (15.3 ± 8.3 and 19.5 ± 18.3 minutes, P = 0.71), and LA roof (19.0 and 10.3 ± 5.4 minutes, P = 0.19) between the 2 groups. Clinical outcomes at 12 months were also similar. CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences in the procedural success rates, durations of RF application, 12-month clinical outcomes, and complication rates of LA linear ablation between the PFO and TS groups. Accessing the LA via a PFO is not an unfavorable approach toward LA linear ablation.
Authors: Mélèze Hocini; Ashok J Shah; Isabelle Nault; Lena Rivard; Nick Linton; Sanjiv Narayan; Shinsuke Myiazaki; Amir S Jadidi; Sébastien Knecht; Daniel Scherr; Stephen B Wilton; Laurent Roten; Patrizio Pascale; Michala Pedersen; Nicolas Derval; Frédéric Sacher; Pierre Jaïs; Jacques Clémenty; Michel Haïssaguerre Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2012-01-09