INTRODUCTION: Success of endocardial sinus node (SN) ablation for refractory inappropriate sinus tachycardia (IST) is limited by the epicardial location of the SN and potential damage to the phrenic nerve (PN). An epicardial approach may overcome these limitations. METHODS AND RESULTS: IST patients who failed endocardial ablation underwent an epicardial approach. Percutaneous pericardial access was obtained with a double wire technique for PN protection (i.e., with a balloon catheter), if needed. Earliest sinus activation was mapped and ablated with remapping for changes in P-wave morphology or sinus rate. The endpoint was total SN ablation (patients with atrial pacing [AP]); otherwise the target was a >25% decrease in sinus rate and inversion of P-wave axis. Five patients (all female, age 36 ± 4 years) underwent ablation. Two had prior AP, and 1 elected to have SN ablation and pacemaker during the same procedure. Three had prior endocardial ablation limited by PN proximity. Baseline sinus rate was 119 ± 20 bpm. After 35.2 ± 21.3 lesions (22.4 ± 21.7 epicardial, 12.8 ± 21.3 endocardial), 4 were in junctional rhythm, 1 in atrial rhythm at 90 bpm. This latter patient had symptom recurrence and underwent combined minimally invasive surgical/catheter SN cryoablation. Atrial tachycardia subsequently occurred and was successfully ablated. The only significant complication was pericarditis (3 patients). At last follow-up (30.4 ± 18.4 months), all had symptom resolution. Two were AP >99%, 1 was AP 54%. Two remain in ectopic atrial rhythm with controlled rates. CONCLUSIONS: Combined epicardial/endocardial SN ablation is a viable approach for patients with severely symptomatic IST after a failed endocardial attempt.
INTRODUCTION: Success of endocardial sinus node (SN) ablation for refractory inappropriate sinus tachycardia (IST) is limited by the epicardial location of the SN and potential damage to the phrenic nerve (PN). An epicardial approach may overcome these limitations. METHODS AND RESULTS: IST patients who failed endocardial ablation underwent an epicardial approach. Percutaneous pericardial access was obtained with a double wire technique for PN protection (i.e., with a balloon catheter), if needed. Earliest sinus activation was mapped and ablated with remapping for changes in P-wave morphology or sinus rate. The endpoint was total SN ablation (patients with atrial pacing [AP]); otherwise the target was a >25% decrease in sinus rate and inversion of P-wave axis. Five patients (all female, age 36 ± 4 years) underwent ablation. Two had prior AP, and 1 elected to have SN ablation and pacemaker during the same procedure. Three had prior endocardial ablation limited by PN proximity. Baseline sinus rate was 119 ± 20 bpm. After 35.2 ± 21.3 lesions (22.4 ± 21.7 epicardial, 12.8 ± 21.3 endocardial), 4 were in junctional rhythm, 1 in atrial rhythm at 90 bpm. This latter patient had symptom recurrence and underwent combined minimally invasive surgical/catheter SN cryoablation. Atrial tachycardia subsequently occurred and was successfully ablated. The only significant complication was pericarditis (3 patients). At last follow-up (30.4 ± 18.4 months), all had symptom resolution. Two were AP >99%, 1 was AP 54%. Two remain in ectopic atrial rhythm with controlled rates. CONCLUSIONS: Combined epicardial/endocardial SN ablation is a viable approach for patients with severely symptomatic IST after a failed endocardial attempt.
Authors: Carola Gianni; Luigi Di Biase; Sanghamitra Mohanty; Yalçın Gökoğlan; Mahmut F Güneş; Rodney Horton; Patrick M Hranitzky; J David Burkhardt; Andrea Natale Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2015-08-27 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Moisés Rodríguez-Mañero; Bahij Kreidieh; Mahmoud Al Rifai; Sergio Ibarra-Cortez; Paul Schurmann; Paulino A Álvarez; Xesús Alberte Fernández-López; Javier García-Seara; Luis Martínez-Sande; José Ramón González-Juanatey; Miguel Valderrábano Journal: JACC Clin Electrophysiol Date: 2016-12-21
Authors: Ning Li; Brian J Hansen; Thomas A Csepe; Jichao Zhao; Anthony J Ignozzi; Lidiya V Sul; Stanislav O Zakharkin; Anuradha Kalyanasundaram; Jonathan P Davis; Brandon J Biesiadecki; Ahmet Kilic; Paul M L Janssen; Peter J Mohler; Raul Weiss; John D Hummel; Vadim V Fedorov Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2017-07-26 Impact factor: 17.956
Authors: Demosthenes G Katritsis; Giuseppe Boriani; Francisco G Cosio; Pierre Jais; Gerhard Hindricks; Mark E Josephson; Roberto Keegan; Bradley P Knight; Karl-Heinz Kuck; Deirdre A Lane; Gregory Yh Lip; Helena Malmborg; Hakan Oral; Carlo Pappone; Sakis Themistoclakis; Kathryn A Wood; Kim Young-Hoon; Carina Blomström Lundqvist Journal: Arrhythm Electrophysiol Rev Date: 2016
Authors: Kenneth A Mayuga; Artur Fedorowski; Fabrizio Ricci; Rakesh Gopinathannair; Jonathan Walter Dukes; Christopher Gibbons; Peter Hanna; Dan Sorajja; Mina Chung; David Benditt; Robert Sheldon; Mirna B Ayache; Hiba AbouAssi; Kalyanam Shivkumar; Blair P Grubb; Mohamed H Hamdan; Stavros Stavrakis; Tamanna Singh; Jeffrey J Goldberger; James A S Muldowney; Mark Belham; David C Kem; Cem Akin; Barbara K Bruce; Nicole E Zahka; Qi Fu; Erik H Van Iterson; Satish R Raj; Fetnat Fouad-Tarazi; David S Goldstein; Julian Stewart; Brian Olshansky Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2022-09-08
Authors: Thomas A Csepe; Jichao Zhao; Lidiya V Sul; Yufeng Wang; Brian J Hansen; Ning Li; Anthony J Ignozzi; Anna Bratasz; Kimerly A Powell; Ahmet Kilic; Peter J Mohler; Paul M L Janssen; John D Hummel; Orlando P Simonetti; Vadim V Fedorov Journal: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2017-05-01 Impact factor: 6.875