Key result
Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation significantly increased postprandial bradygastria from 10.4% to 21.2% immediately after the procedure, an effect not observed in patients undergoing ablation for supraventricular tachycardia.
Why the study?
Does radiofrequency catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation cause impairment of gastric myoelectrical activity compared to ablation for non-AF conditions?
Population
32 consecutive patients undergoing electrophysiological study/ablation therapy, comprising 16 patients with…
Comparison
Radiofrequency catheter ablation for atrial… vs Radiofrequency catheter ablation for non-AF…
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
3 months for EGG, 18 ± 3 months for clinical recurrence
Authors
Loading...
Radiofrequency catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation can cause transient gastric dysrhythmias and dyspepsia, likely due to periesophageal vagal plexus damage, highlighting the need for careful energy application on the posterior left atrial wall.
Cohort (n=32)
No
Does radiofrequency catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation cause impairment of gastric myoelectrical activity compared to ablation for non-AF conditions?
Absolute Event Rate: 21.2% vs 10.4%
p-value: p=0.01
Radiofrequency catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation can cause transient gastric dysrhythmias and dyspepsia, likely due to periesophageal vagal plexus damage, highlighting the need for careful energy application on the posterior left atrial wall.
Lo et al. (2013) conducted a cohort in Atrial fibrillation and paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia (n=32). Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation vs. Baseline (pre-ablation) and catheter ablation of paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia was evaluated on Postprandial bradygastria percentage immediately after ablation (p=0.01). Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation significantly increased postprandial bradygastria from 10.4% to 21.2% immediately after the procedure, an effect not observed in patients undergoing ablation for supraventricular tachycardia.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: