Why the study?
Mitral isthmus linear ablation is a common treatment for perimitral atrial flutter, but anterior septum linear ablation using robotic magnetic navigation has emerged as a novel approach requiring effectiveness evaluation.
Does anterior septum linear ablation improve acute success and long-term freedom from arrhythmia compared to mitral isthmus linear ablation in patients with perimitral atrial flutter?
Does anterior septum linear ablation improve acute success and long-term freedom from arrhythmia compared to mitral isthmus linear ablation in patients with perimitral atrial flutter?
Anterior septum linear ablation using robotic magnetic navigation yields higher acute success and long-term freedom from arrhythmia compared to mitral isthmus linear ablation for perimitral atrial flutter.
AS linear ablation with robotic navigation appears feasible for PMAFL; leaves open need for randomized trials versus mitral isthmus ablation.
Background. Perimitral atrial flutter (PMAFL) is one of the most common macro-reentrant left atrial tachycardias. Mitral isthmus (MI) linear ablation is a common strategy for the treatment of PMAFLs, and anterior septum (AS) linear ablation has emerged as a novel ablation approach. We aimed at assessing the effectiveness of AS linear ablation using robotic magnetic navigation for PMAFL ablation. Methods. In this retrospective study, a total of 36 consecutive patients presented with AFL as the unique arrhythmia or accompanied with atrial fibrillation (AF) who underwent catheter ablation were enrolled. Patients were classified into two groups according to the different ablation strategies, the MI line group (10 patients) and the AS line group (26 patients). Results. The clinical baseline characteristics of patients in the two groups were nearly identical. There were no significant differences in procedure time (148.7 ± 46.1 vs. 123.2 ± 30.1 min, P = 0.058 ) or radiofrequency ablation time (25.9 ± 11.4 vs. 23.5 ± 12.6 min) between the two groups. Fluoroscopy time was longer in the MI line group (8.0 ± 4.4 vs. 5.1 ± 2.7 min, P = 0.024 ), and the acute success rate was higher in the AS line group versus the MI line group (96.2% vs. 70%, P = 0.025 ). The long-term freedom from arrhythmia survival rate was higher in the AS line group (73%) than in the MI line group (40%) after a mean follow-up time of 37.4 months with a 3-month blanking period ( P = 0.049 ). Conclusions. AS linear ablation is an effective and safe strategy for PMAFL ablation using robotic magnetic navigation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dang et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: