Why the study?
Does epicardial catheter ablation improve success rates in patients with accessory pathways refractory to endocardial ablation?
Does epicardial catheter ablation improve success rates in patients with accessory pathways refractory to endocardial ablation?
Epicardial catheter ablation provides an alternative approach for treating accessory pathways when standard endocardial ablation is unsuccessful.
May support epicardial ablation after endocardial failure; leaves open need for prospective trials.
Radiofrequency (RF) catheter ablation is the treatment of choice in patients with accessory pathways (APs) and Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome. Endocardial catheter ablation has limitations, including the inability to map and ablate intramural or subepicardial APs. Some of these difficulties can be overcome using an epicardial approach performed through the epicardial venous system or by percutaneous catheterisation of the pericardial space. When a suspected left inferior or infero-paraseptal AP is refractory to ablation or no early activation is found at the endocardium, a transvenous approach via the coronary sinus is warranted because such epicardial pathways can be in close proximity to the coronary venous system. Associated congenital abnormalities, such as right atrial appendage, right ventricle diverticulum, coronary sinus diverticulum and absence of coronary sinus ostium, may also hamper a successful outcome. Percutaneous epicardial subxiphoid approach should be considered when endocardial or transvenous mapping and ablation fails. Epicardial mapping may be successful. It can guide and enhance the effectiveness of endocardial ablation. The finding of no epicardial early activation leads to a more persistent new endocardial attempt. When both endocardial and epicardial ablation are unsuccessful, open-chest surgery is the only option to eliminate the AP.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sternick et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: