Why the study?
What are the procedural techniques, success rates, and complications of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with congenital heart disease?
What are the procedural techniques, success rates, and complications of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with congenital heart disease?
This review summarizes the procedural techniques, success rates, and complications of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with various types of congenital heart disease.
May inform ablation planning in congenital heart disease; leaves open prospective trials to standardize outcomes.
With improved surgical techniques and medical management for patients with congenital heart diseases, more patients are living longer and well into adulthood. This improved survival comes with a price of increased morbidity, mainly secondary to increased risk of tachyarrhythmias. One of the major arrhythmias commonly encountered in this subset of cardiac patients is AF. Similar to the general population, the risk of AF increases with advancing age, and is mainly secondary to the abnormal anatomy, abnormal pressure and volume parameters in the hearts of these patients and to the increased scarring and inflammation seen in the left atrium following multiple surgical procedures. Catheter ablation for AF has been shown to be a very effective treatment modality in patients with refractory AF. However, data and guidelines regarding catheter ablation in patients with congenital heart disease are not well established. This review will shed light on the procedural techniques, success rates and complications of AF catheter ablation in patients with different types of CHD, including atrial septal defects, tetralogy of Fallot, persistent left superior vena cava, heterotaxy syndrome and atrial isomerism, and Ebstein anomaly.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Refaat et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: