PURPOSE: Recently, new catheter technologies have been developed for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. We investigate the diagnostic accuracy of a circular mapping and pulmonary vein ablation catheter (PVAC) compared with a standard circular mapping catheter (Orbiter) and the influence of filter settings on signal quality. METHODS: After reconstruction of the left atrium by three-dimensional atriography, baseline PV potentials (PVP) were recorded consecutively with PVAC and Orbiter in 20 patients with paroxysmal AF. PVPs were compared and attributed to predefined anatomical PV segments. Ablation was performed in 80 PVs using the PVAC. If isolation of the PVs was assumed, signal assessment of each PV was repeated with the Orbiter. If residual PV potentials could be uncovered, different filter settings were tested to improve mapping quality of the PVAC. Ablation was continued until complete PV isolation (PVI) was confirmed with the Orbiter. RESULTS: Baseline mapping demonstrated a good correlation between the Orbiter and PVAC. Mapping accuracy using the PVAC for mapping and ablation was 94% (74 of 79 PVs). Additional mapping with the Orbiter improved the PV isolation rate to 99%. Adjustment of filter settings failed to improve quality of the PV signals compared with standard filter settings. CONCLUSIONS: Using the PVAC as a stand-alone strategy for mapping and ablation, one should be aware that in some cases, different signal morphology mimics PVI isolation. Adjustment of filter settings failed to improve signal quality. The use of an additional mapping catheter is recommended to become familiar with the particular signal morphology during the first PVAC cases or whenever there is a doubt about successful isolation of the pulmonary veins.
PURPOSE: Recently, new catheter technologies have been developed for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. We investigate the diagnostic accuracy of a circular mapping and pulmonary vein ablation catheter (PVAC) compared with a standard circular mapping catheter (Orbiter) and the influence of filter settings on signal quality. METHODS: After reconstruction of the left atrium by three-dimensional atriography, baseline PV potentials (PVP) were recorded consecutively with PVAC and Orbiter in 20 patients with paroxysmal AF. PVPs were compared and attributed to predefined anatomical PV segments. Ablation was performed in 80 PVs using the PVAC. If isolation of the PVs was assumed, signal assessment of each PV was repeated with the Orbiter. If residual PV potentials could be uncovered, different filter settings were tested to improve mapping quality of the PVAC. Ablation was continued until complete PV isolation (PVI) was confirmed with the Orbiter. RESULTS: Baseline mapping demonstrated a good correlation between the Orbiter and PVAC. Mapping accuracy using the PVAC for mapping and ablation was 94% (74 of 79 PVs). Additional mapping with the Orbiter improved the PV isolation rate to 99%. Adjustment of filter settings failed to improve quality of the PV signals compared with standard filter settings. CONCLUSIONS: Using the PVAC as a stand-alone strategy for mapping and ablation, one should be aware that in some cases, different signal morphology mimics PVI isolation. Adjustment of filter settings failed to improve signal quality. The use of an additional mapping catheter is recommended to become familiar with the particular signal morphology during the first PVAC cases or whenever there is a doubt about successful isolation of the pulmonary veins.
Authors: M Haïssaguerre; P Jaïs; D C Shah; S Garrigue; A Takahashi; T Lavergne; M Hocini; J T Peng; R Roudaut; J Clémenty Journal: Circulation Date: 2000-03-28 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: M Haïssaguerre; D C Shah; P Jaïs; M Hocini; T Yamane; I Deisenhofer; M Chauvin; S Garrigue; J Clémenty Journal: Circulation Date: 2000-11-14 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Hakan Oral; Bradley P Knight; Hiroshi Tada; Mehmet Ozaydin; Aman Chugh; Sohail Hassan; Christoph Scharf; Steve W K Lai; Radmira Greenstein; Frank Pelosi; S Adam Strickberger; Fred Morady Journal: Circulation Date: 2002-03-05 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Hakan Oral; Bradley P Knight; Mehmet Ozaydin; Aman Chugh; Steve W K Lai; Christoph Scharf; Sohail Hassan; Radmira Greenstein; Jihn D Han; Frank Pelosi; S Adam Strickberger; Fred Morady Journal: Circulation Date: 2002-09-03 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Maurits C E F Wijffels; Matthijs Van Oosterhout; Lucas V A Boersma; Randy Werneth; Chris Kunis; Betty Hu; Jet D M Beekman; Marc A Vos Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2009-06-01
Authors: J Siebermair; B Neumann; F Risch; L Riesinger; N Vonderlin; M Koehler; K Lackermaier; S Fichtner; K Rizas; S M Sattler; M F Sinner; S Kääb; H L Estner; R Wakili Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-06-20 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Ka H C Li; Mei Dong; Mengqi Gong; George Bazoukis; Ishan Lakhani; Yan Y Ting; Sunny H Wong; Guangping Li; William K K Wu; Vassilios S Vassiliou; Martin C S Wong; Konstantinos Letsas; Yimei Du; Victoria Laxton; Bryan P Yan; Yat S Chan; Yunlong Xia; Tong Liu; Gary Tse Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2018-05-22 Impact factor: 4.566