| Literature DB >> 35877591 |
Guohua Fu1,2, Bin He1,2, Binhao Wang1,2, Mingjun Feng1,2, Xianfeng Du1,2, Jing Liu1,2, Yibo Yu1,2, Fang Gao1,2, Weidong Zhuo1,2, Yi Xu1,2, Yingbo Qi1,2, Huimin Chu1,2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This research explores the relationship between the unipolar electrogram (UP-EGM) and lesion size index (LSI) in different regions of continuous circular lesions (CCLs) and to assess the safety and efficacy of UP-EGM-guided versus LSI-guided radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF).Entities:
Keywords: lesion index; paroxysmal atrial fibrillation; pulmonary vein isolation; unipolar electrogram
Year: 2022 PMID: 35877591 PMCID: PMC9320701 DOI: 10.3390/jcdd9070229
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cardiovasc Dev Dis ISSN: 2308-3425
Figure 1Regional definitions of right and left CCLs and schematic diagrams of target LSIs in different regions of CCLs in the LSI group. The target LSI values were 4.5–5.5 for the roof and anterior walls and 4.0–4.5 for the posterior and inferior walls, respectively. CCLs—continuous circular lesions; LSI—lesion size index.
Figure 2Catheter ablation guided by UP−EGM. Every point in the CCLs was ablated until the UP−EGM turned completely positive and was extended 5 s after elimination of the negative component of the UP−EGM. The LSI value for every ablation point was also recorded for comparison. (a) Before ablation, the UP−EGM of the point showed a negative component (in the red circle). (b) After ablation, UP−EGMs turned completely positive (in the red circle). UP−EGM—unipolar electrogram; CCLs—continuous circular lesions. The Green, Red and Black Chinese word in Figure 2 indicated Power, Temperature and RF time respectively.
Baseline characteristics.
| Variables | UP-EGM Group ( | LSI Group ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, years | 62.9 ± 10.3 | 62.5 ± 9.1 | 0.779 |
| Male, | 35 (58.3%) | 29 (48.3%) | 0.272 |
| Body mass index, kg/m2 | 24.0 ± 3.0 | 24.0 ± 2.8 | 0.980 |
| History of AF, months | 24 (8.3, 60) | 24 (9.5, 60) | 0.694 |
| CHA2DS2-VASc score | 2 (1, 3) | 2 (1, 3) | 0.388 |
| HAS-BLED score | 1 (0, 2) | 1 (0, 2) | 0.547 |
| Comorbidity | |||
| Hypertension, | 31 (51.7%) | 38 (63.3%) | 0.196 |
| Diabetes mellitus, | 7 (11.7%) | 7 (11.7%) | 1.000 |
| Congestive heart failure, | 4 (6.7%) | 5 (8.3%) | 0.729 |
| Coronary artery disease, | 4 (6.7%) | 3 (5.0%) | 0.697 |
| Previous TIA/stroke, | 6 (10.0%) | 7 (11.7%) | 0.769 |
| Echocardiography | |||
| LA diameter, mm | 37.9 ± 5.3 | 36.8 ± 4.9 | 0.207 |
| LVEF, % | 64.2 ± 5.5 | 65.1 ± 5.2 | 0.348 |
LA—Left atrial; LVEF—left ventricular ejection fraction.
Index AF Ablation Procedures.
| Variables | UP-EGM Group ( | LSI Group ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total ablation points | 86.1 ± 12.5 | 89.7 ± 10.6 | 0.087 |
| Procedural duration, min | 101 (86, 112) | 113 (105, 117) | <0.001 |
| X-ray exposure, min | 4.6 (3.4, 5.5) | 6.0 (4.2, 8.3) | 0.008 |
| Ablation time, min | 21.1 ± 2.4 | 32.6 ± 3.9 | <0.001 |
| Ablation energy delivered, kJ | 49.4 ± 5.7 | 57.8 ± 14.5 | <0.001 |
| Mean CF, g | 11 (10, 12) | 11 (10, 12) | 0.568 |
| Mean impedance decrease, Ω | 12 (11, 13) | 11.5 (10, 14) | 0.736 |
| Required targeting of the carina regions for PVI completion, | 11 (18.3%) | 12 (20%) | 0.817 |
| The first-pass PVI, | 54 (90%) | 55 (91.7%) | 0.752 |
| Acutely PVI, | 100% | 100% | 1.000 |
| Additional ablation after PVI | |||
| Cavotricuspid isthmus ablation, | 6 (10.0%) | 5 (8.3%) | 0.752 |
| Superior vena cava isolation, | 1 (1.7%) | 1 (1.7%) | 1.000 |
| Complications | |||
| Reactive pneumonia, | 0 (0%) | 1 (1.7%) | 1.000 |
| Pseudoaneurysm, | 1 (1.7%) | 0 (0%) | 1.000 |
CF—contact force; PVI—pulmonary vein isolation; PV—pulmonary vein.
LSI in different regions of continuous circular lesions (CCLs).
| Regions | UP-EGM Group ( | LSI Group ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Roof | 4.12 ± 0.37 | 5.07 ± 0.18 | <0.001 |
| Antero-superior | 4.23 ± 0.35 | 5.12 ± 0.13 | <0.001 |
| Antero-inferior | 4.20 ± 0.33 | 5.03 ± 0.13 | <0.001 |
| Postero-superior | 3.90 ± 0.29 | 4.43 ± 0.10 | <0.001 |
| Postero-inferior | 3.83 ± 0.29 | 4.39 ± 0.10 | <0.001 |
| Inferior | 3.98 ± 0.30 | 4.45 ± 0.11 | <0.001 |
|
| |||
| Roof | 4.13 ± 0.30 | 4.75 ± 0.15 | <0.001 |
| Antero-superior | 4.19 ± 0.40 | 5.16 ± 0.15 | <0.001 |
| Antero-inferior | 4.15 ± 0.32 | 5.06 ± 0.16 | <0.001 |
| Postero-superior | 3.91 ± 0.24 | 4.45 ± 0.11 | <0.001 |
| Postero-inferior | 3.89 ± 0.24 | 4.38 ± 0.10 | <0.001 |
| Inferior | 3.89 ± 0.24 | 4.45 ± 0.08 | <0.001 |
LSI—lesion size index.
Figure 3The scatter diagram of the average LSI values in different regions of CCLs in both groups. (Left): six regions in left CCL. (Right): six regions in right CCL. The variation in the LSI values in the UP-EGM group was significantly greater than that in the LSI group in all CCL regions. LSI—lesion size index; UP-EGM—unipolar electrogram; CCLs—continuous circular lesions.
Figure 4The Kaplan–Meier survival curve for atrial arrhythmia recurrence in both groups.