Why the study?
In patients with atrial fibrillation and bilateral common ostium in the inferior pulmonary veins, standard bilateral circumferential pulmonary vein isolation increases the risk of esophageal injury, and no established ablation strategy exists.
Does a single-ring ablation approach prevent atrial fibrillation recurrence and avoid esophageal injury in a patient with bilateral common ostium in the inferior pulmonary veins?
Does a single-ring ablation approach prevent atrial fibrillation recurrence and avoid esophageal injury in a patient with bilateral common ostium in the inferior pulmonary veins?
A single-ring ablation approach successfully treated atrial fibrillation without esophageal injury in a patient with a bilateral common ostium in the inferior pulmonary veins.
Supports single-ring ablation feasibility without esophageal injury in rare anatomy; hypothesis-generating for AF prevention.
Pulmonary vein anatomical variations are frequently observed in atrial fibrillation patients undergoing catheter ablation. However, when it comes to patients with atrial fibrillation and bilateral common ostium in the inferior pulmonary veins, using a bilateral circumferential pulmonary vein isolation approach during catheter ablation heightens the risk of esophageal injury. At present, there is no established standard catheter ablation strategy for such cases. A 47-year-old female with atrial fibrillation underwent catheter ablation. Prior to the procedure, a left atrial computed tomography angiography indicated a common ostium of the left and right inferior pulmonary veins. During mapping, a low-voltage area was found in the patient's left atrial posterior wall. To avoid esophageal injury and effectively isolate both pulmonary veins and the low-voltage area with minimal ablation points, we used a single-ring ablation approach. In a 12 month follow-up, the patient had no atrial fibrillation recurrence.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wei et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: