Daisuke Sato1, Hiroki Mani2, Yu Makihara3, Hiroki Kitajima4, Yuji Nishikawa4, Seno Keitaro4, Yeong-Hwa Chun4. 1. Arrhythmia Care Center, Koseikai Takeda Hospital, Kyoto City, Japan. satod@takii.kmu.ac.jp. 2. Division of Arrhythmia, Rakuwakai Otowa Hospital, Kyoto City, Japan. 3. Department of Cardiology, Tokyo bay Urayasu Ichikawa Medical Center, Urayasu City, Japan. 4. Arrhythmia Care Center, Koseikai Takeda Hospital, Kyoto City, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Left lateral mitral isthmus (LLMI) linear ablation is a safe and effective technique for treating left mitral flutter. LLMI linear ablation with pulmonary vein isolation may reduce the recurrence of persistent atrial fibrillation. However, epicardial ablation within the coronary sinus (CS) is often required to create the LLMI block line. If the necessity for epicardial ablation is checked before ablation, complications may be reduced. METHODS: We recruited 135 patients who underwent their first LLMI ablation and divided them into two groups, one group not requiring epicardial ablation for creating a conduction block at the LLMI (Endo group) and another requiring it (Epi group). These two groups were compared in terms of the electrogram characteristics of the CS. RESULTS: Bidirectional block through the LLMI was achieved in 94.8% of patients. In 42% of these patients, not only the endocardium but also the epicardium was ablated. As for the electrogram, the Endo group had lower atrium voltage and atrioventricular voltage ratios (p = 0.009) than the Epi group before LLMI ablation. By contrast, there were no significant differences in the atrium voltage and the atrioventricular voltage ratio between these two groups after LLMI ablation. CONCLUSIONS: For creating a conduction block at the LLMI, the atrium voltage and the atrioventricular voltage ratio in the CS before ablation are important. The atrioventricular voltage ratio is a crucial criterion for determining whether epicardial ablation is necessary; furthermore, the atrioventricular voltage ratio in the CS must be reduced with or without epicardial ablation.
BACKGROUND: Left lateral mitral isthmus (LLMI) linear ablation is a safe and effective technique for treating left mitral flutter. LLMI linear ablation with pulmonary vein isolation may reduce the recurrence of persistent atrial fibrillation. However, epicardial ablation within the coronary sinus (CS) is often required to create the LLMI block line. If the necessity for epicardial ablation is checked before ablation, complications may be reduced. METHODS: We recruited 135 patients who underwent their first LLMI ablation and divided them into two groups, one group not requiring epicardial ablation for creating a conduction block at the LLMI (Endo group) and another requiring it (Epi group). These two groups were compared in terms of the electrogram characteristics of the CS. RESULTS: Bidirectional block through the LLMI was achieved in 94.8% of patients. In 42% of these patients, not only the endocardium but also the epicardium was ablated. As for the electrogram, the Endo group had lower atrium voltage and atrioventricular voltage ratios (p = 0.009) than the Epi group before LLMI ablation. By contrast, there were no significant differences in the atrium voltage and the atrioventricular voltage ratio between these two groups after LLMI ablation. CONCLUSIONS: For creating a conduction block at the LLMI, the atrium voltage and the atrioventricular voltage ratio in the CS before ablation are important. The atrioventricular voltage ratio is a crucial criterion for determining whether epicardial ablation is necessary; furthermore, the atrioventricular voltage ratio in the CS must be reduced with or without epicardial ablation.
Entities:
Keywords:
Atrial tachycardia; Lateral mitral annulus to the left inferior pulmonary vein; Mitral isthmus linear ablation; Peri-mitral flutter; Persistent atrial fibrillation; Radiofrequency catheter ablation
Authors: Shinsuke Miyazaki; Ashok J Shah; Isabelle Nault; Matthew Wright; Amir S Jadidi; Andrei Forclaz; Xingpeng Liu; Nick Linton; Olivier Xhaët; Lena Rivard; Nicolas Derval; Frédéric Sacher; Mélèze Hocini; Pierre Jaïs; Michel Haïssaguerre Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2011-02-02
Authors: Hugh Calkins; Josep Brugada; Douglas L Packer; Riccardo Cappato; Shih-Ann Chen; Harry J G Crijns; Ralph J Damiano; D Wyn Davies; David E Haines; Michel Haissaguerre; Yoshito Iesaka; Warren Jackman; Pierre Jais; Hans Kottkamp; Karl Heinz Kuck; Bruce D Lindsay; Francis E Marchlinski; Patrick M McCarthy; J Lluis Mont; Fred Morady; Koonlawee Nademanee; Andrea Natale; Carlo Pappone; Eric Prystowsky; Antonio Raviele; Jeremy N Ruskin; Richard J Shemin Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2007-04-30 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Stephan Willems; Hanno Klemm; Thomas Rostock; Benedikt Brandstrup; Rodolfo Ventura; Daniel Steven; Tim Risius; Boris Lutomsky; Thomas Meinertz Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2006-06-16 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Ji Hyun Lee; Gi-Byoung Nam; Minsu Kim; You Mi Hwang; Jongmin Hwang; Jun Kim; Kee-Joon Choi; You-Ho Kim Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2017-01-31
Authors: Ashok J Shah; Patrizio Pascale; Shinsuke Miyazaki; Xingpeng Liu; Laurent Roten; Nicolas Derval; Amir S Jadidi; Daniel Scherr; Stephen B Wilton; Michala Pedersen; Sebastien Knecht; Frédéric Sacher; Pierre Jaïs; Michel Haïssaguerre; Mélèze Hocini Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2012-08-31