Catheter ablation for failed surgical maze: comparison of cut and sew vs. non-cut and sew maze.
J Interv Card Electrophysiol
; 55(2): 183-189, 2019 Aug.
Article
em En
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-30706254
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE:
To compare findings in patients undergoing atrial fibrillation(AF) and/or atrial flutter(AFl) ablation after failed cut and sew (CS) vs. non-cut and sew (NCS) surgical maze.METHODS:
We compared 10 patients with prior CS to 25 with prior NCS maze undergoing catheter ablation after failed maze.RESULTS:
Patient demographics Age 68.3 ± 8.7 CS vs. 68.2 ± 9.2 NCS(P = 0.977), male 70% CS vs. 72% NCS(P = 1.000), LA size 5.11 ± 0.60 cm CS vs. 4.54 ± 0.92 cm NCS(P = 0.096), sternotomy 100% CS vs. 64% of NCS(P = 0.036). Concomitant heart surgery in 100% CS and 68% NCS(P = 0.073). NCS used radiofrequency 84%, cryoablation 8%, microwave 4%, and ultrasound 4%. All maze operations targeted pulmonary vein (PV) isolation. The maze also targeted the mitral isthmus 100% CS vs. 36% NCS(P = 0.001) and the tricuspid isthmus 90% CS vs. 40% NCS (P = 0.018). Maze failure arrhythmia mechanism was AF 0% CS and 56% NCS (P = 0.0006). Nine CS pts failed for AFl and 1 for RA tachycardia. For NCS pts, 11 failed for AFl. CS isolated 94% of PVs and NCS isolated only 26% of PVs (P < 0.0005). At EPS, clinical and induced arrhythmias were ablated and non-isolated PVs were isolated. After final ablation, arrhythmia-free rates were 60% for CS and 52% for NCS (P = 0.723) after 2.99 ± 2.35 years.CONCLUSIONS:
After failed surgical maze, CS isolated nearly all PVs and NCS never isolated all PVs and the clinical rhythm was more frequently AF for NCS and AFl for CS. CS remains the surgical gold standard for durable PV isolation.Palavras-chave
Texto completo:
1
Base de dados:
MEDLINE
Assunto principal:
Veias Pulmonares
/
Fibrilação Atrial
/
Flutter Atrial
/
Ablação por Cateter
/
Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Cardíacos
Idioma:
En
Ano de publicação:
2019
Tipo de documento:
Article