Acute change in left atrial performance in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing catheter ablation using AutoStrain

Author(s):  
Asim Katbeh
PLoS ONE ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. e0129274 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bin Xiong ◽  
Dan Li ◽  
Jianling Wang ◽  
Laxman Gyawali ◽  
Jinjin Jing ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Xiao-yu Liu ◽  
Hai-feng Shi ◽  
Jie Zheng ◽  
Ku-lin Li ◽  
Xiao-xi Zhao ◽  
...  

Objective. The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of left atrial (LA) size for the ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) using remote magnetic navigation (RMN). Methods. A total of 165 patients with AF who underwent catheter ablation using RMN were included. The patients were divided into two groups based on LA diameter. Eighty-three patients had small LA (diameter <40 mm; Group A), and 82 patients had a large LA (diameter ≥40 mm; Group B). Results. During mapping and ablation, X-ray time (37.0 (99.0) s vs. 12 (30.1) s, P<0.001) and X-ray dose (1.4 (2.7) gy·cm2 vs. 0.7 (2.1) gy·cm2, P=0.013) were significantly higher in Group A. No serious complications occurred in any of the patients. There was no statistical difference in the rate of first anatomical attempt of pulmonary vein isolation between the two groups (71.1% vs. 57.3%, P=0.065). However, compared with Group B, the rate of sinus rhythm was higher (77.1% vs. 58.5%, P<0.001) during the follow-up period. More patients in Group A required a sheath adjustment (47/83 vs. 21/82, P<0.001), presumably due to less magnets positioned outside of the sheath. In vitro experiments with the RMN catheter demonstrated that only one magnet exposed created the sheath affects which influenced the flexibility of the catheter. Conclusions. AF ablation using RMN is safe and effective in both small and large LA patients. Patients with small LA may pose a greater difficulty when using RMN which may be attributed to the fewer magnets beyond the sheath. As a result, the exposure of radiation was increased. This study found that having at least two magnets of the catheter positioned outside of the sheath can ensure an appropriate flexibility of the catheter.


2014 ◽  
Vol 8s1 ◽  
pp. CMC.S15036 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane Dewire ◽  
Irfan M. Khurram ◽  
Farhad Pashakhanloo ◽  
David Spragg ◽  
Joseph E. Marine ◽  
...  

Introduction Atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence after ablation is associated with left atrial (LA) fibrosis on late gadolinium enhanced (LGE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). We sought to determine pre-ablation, clinical characteristics that associate with the extent of LA fibrosis in patients undergoing catheter ablation for AF. Methods and Results Consecutive patients presenting for catheter ablation of AF were enrolled and underwent LGE-MRI prior to initial AF ablation. The extent of fibrosis as a percentage of total LA myocardium was calculated in all patients prior to ablation. The cohort was divided into quartiles based on the percentage of fibrosis. Of 60 patients enrolled in the cohort, 13 had <5% fibrosis (Group 1), 15 had 5-7% fibrosis (Group 2), 17 had 8-13% fibrosis (Group 3), and 15 had 14-36% fibrosis (Group 4). The extent of LA fibrosis was positively associated with time in continuous AF, and the presence of persistent or longstanding persistent AF. However, no statistically significant difference was observed in the presence of comorbid conditions, age, BMI, LA volume, or family history of AF among the four groups. After adjusting for diabetes and hypertension in a multivariable linear regression model, paroxysmal AF remained independently and negatively associated with the extent of fibrosis (-4.0 ± 1.8, P = 0.034). Conclusion The extent of LA fibrosis in patients undergoing AF ablation is associated with AF type and time in continuous AF. Our results suggest that the presence and duration of AF are primary determinants of increased atrial LGE.


2015 ◽  
Vol 79 (12) ◽  
pp. 2576-2583 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Antolini ◽  
Alessandro Brustio ◽  
Mara Morello ◽  
Federica Bongiovanni ◽  
Cristina Fornengo ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 66 (16) ◽  
pp. C177
Author(s):  
Xiaobo Liao ◽  
Yanzong Yang ◽  
Lianjun Gao ◽  
Yunlong Xia ◽  
Dong Chang ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document