BACKGROUND: Acute pulmonary vein (PV) reconnection predicts atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence after ablation. Contact-force (CF) sensing catheters improve lesion delivery. We assessed the incidence, timing, location, and lesion characteristics of acute reconnection after PV isolation with CF sensing catheters. METHODS: Patients undergoing radiofrequency ablation for AF from October 2016 to February 2017 were studied. Assessment for acute reconnection at 20 and 40 minute intervals was performed in each isolated PV. Additional lesions were applied as needed. Lesion location, contact force, power, duration, impedance, and force-time integral values were compared at sites with and without reconnection. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients (60.6 + 1.8 years; 36.4% female; 27.3% persistent AF; CHA2DS2VASC 1.9 + 0.3) were included. Eighty-eight veins were isolated. Eleven reconnections occurred in 10 patients; 9 occurred by 20 minutes and 2 between 20 - 40 minutes. Most reconnections (6/11) were in the left superior PV. Of 4993 ablation points analyzed, 72 were at acute reconnection sites, and no differences in average contact force (11.4 + 8.1 vs 11.3 + 7.1 gm, p=0.868), power (29.7 + 3.9 vs 29.9 + 4.6 watts, p=0.620), impedance (64.1 + 60 vs 72.5 + 60, p=0.236) and the force time integral (86.9 + 78.8 vs 99.7 + 100 gm/sec, p=0.282) were found. CONCLUSION: Acute PV reconnection rates using CF sensing catheters are roughly 12.5%, with the majority occurring within 20 minutes. We found no significant differences in characteristics of ablation points in areas of reconnection. Optimum wait periods after isolation to check for acute reconnection may be as brief as 20 minutes.
BACKGROUND: Acute pulmonary vein (PV) reconnection predicts atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence after ablation. Contact-force (CF) sensing catheters improve lesion delivery. We assessed the incidence, timing, location, and lesion characteristics of acute reconnection after PV isolation with CF sensing catheters. METHODS: Patients undergoing radiofrequency ablation for AF from October 2016 to February 2017 were studied. Assessment for acute reconnection at 20 and 40 minute intervals was performed in each isolated PV. Additional lesions were applied as needed. Lesion location, contact force, power, duration, impedance, and force-time integral values were compared at sites with and without reconnection. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients (60.6 + 1.8 years; 36.4% female; 27.3% persistent AF; CHA2DS2VASC 1.9 + 0.3) were included. Eighty-eight veins were isolated. Eleven reconnections occurred in 10 patients; 9 occurred by 20 minutes and 2 between 20 - 40 minutes. Most reconnections (6/11) were in the left superior PV. Of 4993 ablation points analyzed, 72 were at acute reconnection sites, and no differences in average contact force (11.4 + 8.1 vs 11.3 + 7.1 gm, p=0.868), power (29.7 + 3.9 vs 29.9 + 4.6 watts, p=0.620), impedance (64.1 + 60 vs 72.5 + 60, p=0.236) and the force time integral (86.9 + 78.8 vs 99.7 + 100 gm/sec, p=0.282) were found. CONCLUSION: Acute PV reconnection rates using CF sensing catheters are roughly 12.5%, with the majority occurring within 20 minutes. We found no significant differences in characteristics of ablation points in areas of reconnection. Optimum wait periods after isolation to check for acute reconnection may be as brief as 20 minutes.
Authors: Hugh Calkins; Karl Heinz Kuck; Riccardo Cappato; Josep Brugada; A John Camm; Shih-Ann Chen; Harry J G Crijns; Ralph J Damiano; D Wyn Davies; John DiMarco; James Edgerton; Kenneth Ellenbogen; Michael D Ezekowitz; David E Haines; Michel Haissaguerre; Gerhard Hindricks; Yoshito Iesaka; Warren Jackman; José Jalife; Pierre Jais; Jonathan Kalman; David Keane; Young-Hoon Kim; Paulus Kirchhof; George Klein; Hans Kottkamp; Koichiro Kumagai; Bruce D Lindsay; Moussa Mansour; Francis E Marchlinski; Patrick M McCarthy; J Lluis Mont; Fred Morady; Koonlawee Nademanee; Hiroshi Nakagawa; Andrea Natale; Stanley Nattel; Douglas L Packer; Carlo Pappone; Eric Prystowsky; Antonio Raviele; Vivek Reddy; Jeremy N Ruskin; Richard J Shemin; Hsuan-Ming Tsao; David Wilber Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2012-03-01 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Waqas Ullah; Ailsa McLean; Muzahir H Tayebjee; Dhiraj Gupta; Matthew R Ginks; Guy A Haywood; Mark O'Neill; Pier D Lambiase; Mark J Earley; Richard J Schilling Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2016-05-09 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Shouvik Haldar; Julian W E Jarman; Sandeep Panikker; David G Jones; Tushar Salukhe; Dhiraj Gupta; Gareth Wynn; Wajid Hussain; Vias Markides; Tom Wong Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2012-12-04 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: Aamir Cheema; Jun Dong; Darshan Dalal; Joseph E Marine; Charles A Henrikson; David Spragg; Alan Cheng; Saman Nazarian; Kenneth Bilchick; Sunil Sinha; Daniel Scherr; Ibrahim Almasry; Henry Halperin; Ronald Berger; Hugh Calkins Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2007-04
Authors: Elad Anter; Fernando M Contreras-Valdes; Alexei Shvilkin; Cory M Tschabrunn; Mark E Josephson Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2014-02-16 Impact factor: 1.900