Phrenic nerve injury: An underrecognized and potentially preventable complication of pulmonary vein isolation using a wide-area circumferential ablation approach.

INTRODUCTION: Phrenic nerve injury (PNI) is a well-known, although uncommon, complication of pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) using radiofrequency energy. Currently, there is no consensus about how to avoid or minimize this injury. The purpose of this study was to determine how often the phrenic nerve, as identified using a high-output pacing, lies along the ablation trajectory of a wide-area circumferential lesion set. We also sought to determine if PVI can be achieved without phrenic nerve injury by modifying the ablation lesion set so as to avoid those areas where phrenic nerve capture (PNC) is observed. METHODS AND RESULTS: We prospectively enrolled 100 consecutive patients (age 61.7 ± 9.2 years old, 75 men) who underwent RF PVI using a wide-area circumferential ablation approach. A high-output (20 mA at 2 milliseconds) endocardial pacing protocol was performed around the right pulmonary veins and the carina where a usual ablation lesion set would be made. A total of 30% of patients had PNC and required modification of ablation lines. In the group of patients with PNC, the carina was the most common site of capture (85%) followed by anterior right superior pulmonary vein (RSPV) (70%) and anterior right inferior pulmonary vein (RIPV) (30%). A total of 25% of PNC group had capture in all 3 (RSPV, RIPV, and carina) regions. There was no difference in the clinical characteristics between the groups with and without PNC. RF PVI caused no PNI in either group. CONCLUSION: High output pacing around the right pulmonary veins and the carina reveals that the phrenic nerve lies along a wide-area circumferential ablation trajectory in 30% of patients. Modification of ablation lines to avoid these sites may prevent phrenic nerve injury during RF PVI.

State-of-the-art and emerging technologies for atrial fibrillation ablation.

Catheter ablation is an important treatment modality for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Although the superiority of catheter ablation over antiarrhythmic drug therapy has been demonstrated in middle-aged patients with paroxysmal AF, the role the procedure in other patient subgroups-particularly those with long-standing persistent AF-has not been well defined. Furthermore, although AF ablation can be performed with reasonable efficacy and safety by experienced operators, long-term success rates for single procedures are suboptimal. Fortunately, extensive ongoing research will improve our understanding of the mechanisms of AF, and considerable funds are being invested in developing new ablation technologies to improve patient outcomes. These technologies include ablation catheters designed to electrically isolate the pulmonary veins with improved safety, efficacy, and speed, catheters designed to deliver radiofrequency energy with improved precision, robotic systems to address the technological demands of the procedure, improved imaging and electrical mapping systems, and MRI-guided ablation strategies. The tools, technologies, and techniques that will ultimately stand the test of time and become the standard approach to AF ablation in the future remain unclear. However, technological advances are sure to result in the necessary improvements in the safety and efficacy of AF ablation procedures.