Key result
Selective pulmonary vein isolation had a comparable atrial fibrillation recurrence rate to empirical four pulmonary vein isolation (38.1% vs 25.7%, P=NS) but required shorter procedure times.
Why the study?
Does selective pulmonary vein isolation prevent atrial fibrillation recurrence compared to empirical four pulmonary vein isolation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation?
Population
77 patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation triggered from clearly and reproducibly defined…
Comparison
Selective or ipsilateral isolation of the… vs Empirical four pulmonary vein isolation (EmPVI)
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
mean 38.6 +/- 23.1 months
Authors
Loading...
Selective PV isolation showed comparable recurrence to empirical isolation in trigger-identified PAF; leaves open noninferiority in randomized trials.
Cohort (n=77)
Does selective pulmonary vein isolation prevent atrial fibrillation recurrence compared to empirical four pulmonary vein isolation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation?
Absolute Event Rate: 38.1% vs 25.7%
p-value: p=NS
Selective pulmonary vein isolation yields comparable long-term success rates to empirical four-vein isolation in paroxysmal AF patients with clearly documented triggers, while significantly reducing procedure and radiofrequency energy delivery times.
Pak et al. (2008) conducted a cohort in Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (n=77). Selective pulmonary vein isolation (SePVI) vs. Empirical four pulmonary vein isolation (EmPVI) was evaluated on Atrial fibrillation recurrence rate (p=NS). Selective pulmonary vein isolation had a comparable atrial fibrillation recurrence rate to empirical four pulmonary vein isolation (38.1% vs 25.7%, P=NS) but required shorter procedure times.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: