Comparison of anterior mitral line and mitral isthmus line for ablation of mitral annular flutter.

BACKGROUND: Mitral annular flutter (MAF) is the most common left atrial macro-reentrant arrhythmia following catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF). The best ablation approach for this arrhythmia remains unclear. METHODS: This single-center, retrospective study sought to compare the acute and long-term outcomes of patients with MAF treated with an anterior mitral line (AML) versus a mitral isthmus line (MIL). Acute ablation success, complication rates, and long-term arrhythmia recurrence were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Between 2015 and 2021, a total of 81 patients underwent ablation of MAF (58 with an AML and 23 with a MIL). Acute procedural success defined as bidirectional block was achieved in 88% of the AML and 91% of the MIL patients respectively (p = 1.0). One year freedom from atrial arrhythmias was 49.5% versus 77.5% and at 4 years was 24% versus 59.6% for AML versus MIL, respectively (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.38, confidence interval [CI]: 0.17-0.82, p = .009). Fewer patients in the MIL group had recurrent atrial flutter when compared to the AML group (HR: 0.32, CI: 0.12-0.83, p = .009). The incidence of recurrent AF, on the other side, was not different between both groups (21.7% vs. 18.9%; p = .76). There were no serious adverse events in either group. CONCLUSION: In this retrospective study of patients with MAF, a MIL compared to AML was associated with a long-term reduction in recurrent atrial arrhythmias driven by a reduction in macroreentrant atrial flutters.

Acute mitral isthmus block during catheter ablation with vein of Marshall ethanol infusion: Angiographic considerations.

BACKGROUND: Achieving bidirectional mitral isthmus block is still challenging. Conventional ablation methods involve radiofrequency applications on the endocardial aspect of the lateral mitral isthmus, and often epicardial applications inside the coronary sinus. AIM: To evaluate the impact of the systematic use of ethanol infusion in the vein of Marshall on the achievement of acute mitral isthmus block of additional epicardial component lesion. METHODS: We evaluated patients referred to two centres for long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation ablation or recurrent peri-mitral flutter. All patients had pulmonary vein isolation and mitral isthmus line using ethanol infusion in the vein of Marshall for the first procedure and additional radiofrequency ablation lesion if necessary. For redo procedures, additional ablations (atrial lines and complex fractionated atrial electrogram ablations, if needed) were also performed. RESULTS: We included 149 patients, and ethanol infusion in the vein of Marshall was not performed in 27 patients (18%). Among 122 patients, 115 had long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (94.2%) and seven had peri-mitral flutter (5.8%). The mean duration of continuous atrial fibrillation was 53 months before ablation. Acute bidirectional mitral isthmus block was obtained in 115 (94.2%) of the 122 patients who received ethanol infusion in the vein of Marshall (77% when considering the total population). The mean radiofrequency delivery time to obtain mitral isthmus block was 2.6minutes for the endocardial mitral isthmus radiofrequency ablation and 2.6minutes for the epicardial mitral isthmus radiofrequency ablation. Failure to obtain mitral isthmus block was associated with increased mitral isthmus length and left atrial dilation. No major complications related to ethanol infusion in the vein of Marshall were observed. CONCLUSION: Ethanol infusion in the vein of Marshall, when feasible (82%), was a safe approach to obtaining a high success rate (94%) of acute bidirectional endocardial and epicardial mitral isthmus block.

Temperature-controlled ablation of the mitral isthmus line using the novel DiamondTemp ablation system.

Background: The novel DiamondTemp™ (DT)-catheter (Medtronic®) was designed for high-power, short-duration ablation in a temperature-controlled mode. Aim: To evaluate the performance of the DT-catheter for ablation of the mitral isthmus line (MIL) using two different energy dosing strategies. Materials and methods: Twenty patients with recurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF) and/or atrial tachycardia (AT) following pulmonary vein (PV) isolation were included. All patients underwent reisolation of PVs in case of electrical reconnection and ablation of a MIL using the DT-catheter. Application durations of 10 (group A, n = 10) or 20 s (group B, n = 10) were applied. If bidirectional block was not reached with endocardial ablation, additional ablation from within the coronary sinus (CS) was conducted. Results: In 19/20 (95%) patients, DT ablation of the MIL resulted in bidirectional block. Mean procedure and fluoroscopy time, and dose area product did not differ significantly between the two groups. In group B, fewer radiofrequency applications were needed to achieve bidirectional block of the MIL when compared to group A (26 ± 12 vs. 42 ± 17, p = 0.04). Ablation from within the CS was performed in 8/10 patients (80%) of group A and in 5/10 (50%) patients of group B (p = 0.34). No major complication occurred. Conclusion: Mitral isthmus line ablation with use of the DT-catheter is highly effective and safe. Longer radiofrequency-applications appear to be favorable without compromising safety.

Change in Atrial Activation Patterns During Narrow Complex Tachycardia: What Is the Mechanism?

A change in the coronary sinus (CS) activation pattern from an eccentric to a concentric pattern during the ablation of an orthodromic reciprocating tachycardia might falsely suggest the presence of a second (septal) accessory pathway (AP) during tachycardia or the successful ablation of the left lateral AP under ventricular pacing despite persistent and unaffected AP conduction. Complete or partial intra-atrial block should be suspected when an abrupt change in the atrial activation sequence is noted during catheter ablation at the posterolateral and lateral aspects of the mitral annulus. The correct anatomical position of the CS catheter plays a vital role in the differential diagnosis of this situation.

Endocardial and epicardial activation maps for three-dimensional perimitral flutter using a three-dimensional mapping system: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Perimitral flutter (PMF) is a macro-reentrant tachycardia, and mitral isthmus (MI) linear ablation is considered to be the preferable mode of treatment. Additionally, PMF can sometimes develop via epicardial connections, including coronary sinus and vein of Marshall. However, there are no reports of three-dimensional (3D) atrial tachycardia (AT) via the intramural tissue. CASE SUMMARY: A 78-year-old man underwent catheter ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and AT, including pulmonary vein isolation, left atrial posterior wall isolation, superior vena cava isolation, and MI linear ablation in a total of four procedures. However, AT reoccurred, and he underwent a 5th procedure for AT. Although the MI block line was complete in both the endocardial and epicardial voltage maps, AT indicated PMF. The total activation time did not cover all phases of tachycardia cycle length due to the conduction pathway through the intramural muscle/bundles that could not be mapped with the addition of epicardial mapping. The tachycardia was terminated by ablation at the mitral valve annulus in the 2 o'clock position, where the bundles might have been attached. DISCUSSION: Both endocardial and epicardial activation maps indicated 3D-PMF, whose circuit included the intramural muscle and bundles in a tachycardia circuit. It is necessary to recognize AT, which is involved via intramural tissues.

Single-loop bi-atrial tachycardia with presumed conduction block across an anteroseptal mitral ablation line: A case report: Bi-AT after septal mitral isthmus ablation.

A 64-year-old man with no previous medical history underwent catheter ablation (CA) by right pulmonary vein isolation and creation of an anteroseptal mitral isthmus (MI) line for peri-mitral atrial flutter. Since atrial tachycardia (AT) recurred with palpitation 4 months later, a second CA session was performed. Although the differential pacing method appeared to confirm the conduction block across the MI line previously created, single-loop bi-atrial AT (Bi-AT) involving both atria through the septum was induced. When the upper septum of the right atrium was ablated, Bi-AT was terminated. Of note, the time from the onset of the P-wave to activation of the left atrial appendage increased after the ablation compared to before. Learning objective: The anteroseptal mitral isthmus line between the right superior pulmonary vein and the septal mitral annulus is an effective therapy for peri-mitral atrial flutter. However, there are some problems such as difficulty in assessing the bidirectional block of this line and the occurrence of bi-atrial tachycardia via the Bachmann bundle. Further investigation needs to clarify whether conduction block of this interatrial bundle is an appropriate endpoint, as the clinical impacts of conduction delay of left atrial appendage remain uncertain. .

Septal Versus Lateral Mitral Isthmus Ablation for Treatment of Mitral Annular Flutter.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare efficacy and safety of the septal mitral isthmus line (SMIL) with that of the lateral mitral isthmus line (LMIL) for treatment of mitral annular flutter (MAF). BACKGROUND: MAF is the most common left atrial macro-re-entrant organized atrial tachycardia (OAT) occurring after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. The 2 most common lesion sets for treating MAF include linear ablation from the anteroseptal mitral annulus to the right superior pulmonary vein (SMIL) and from the lateral mitral annulus to left inferior pulmonary vein (LMIL). METHODS: The study included all mitral isthmus ablations performed at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania in 2016 and 2017. Acute procedural results and long-term arrhythmia-free survival were compared between groups. RESULTS: Of 114 total MILs, conduction block was achieved across 73 (93.6%) SMILs compared with 29 (80.6%) LMILs (p = 0.05). Although the length of the SMIL was longer (48.9 ± 12.8 cm vs. 38.7 ± 12.8 cm; p = 0.001), time required to achieve block was shorter (25.2 ± 15.9 min vs. 36.6 ± 21.3 min; p = 0.03). Coronary sinus ablation was required in 58.3% of LMILs due to inability to achieve conduction block with left atrial ablation alone. In multivariate analysis, only failure to achieve acute MIL block remained significantly associated with subsequent OAT recurrence (hazard ratio: 6.39; 95% confidence interval: 1.37 to 29.9; p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The SMIL requires less time to complete and more frequently results in acute MIL block than the LMIL. Additionally, ablation is rarely required outside the left atrium. Failure to achieve acute MIL block is strongly associated with subsequent OAT recurrence.

A clinical study on the electrophysiological characteristics of patients without recurrence after ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: The electrophysiological characteristics of patients without recurrence after ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) have not been systematically determined. This study compared the electrophysiological characteristics in patients with and without recurrence of AF after persistent AF ablation. METHODS: Forty-five patients without recurrence of AF after persistent AF ablation were enrolled to assess electrophysiological characteristics including pulmonary vein (PV) reconnection, the mitral isthmus (MI) line and the roof line reconduction. Ninety-five patients with recurrence of AF after ablation were used as the control group. RESULTS: Among patients without recurrence, recovery of PV conduction was observed in 37 of 45 (82.2%) patients: 3/45 (6.7%) reconnection in 4 veins, 7/45 (15.6%) in 3 veins, 11/45 (24.4%) in 2 veins, and 16/45 (35.6%) in 1 vein. No significant differences were seen in the proportion of patients with PV reconnection compared to patients with recurrence (p>0.05). Among patients without recurrence, the MI line reconduction was observed in 3/45 (6.7%) patients; the roof line conduction was observed in 5/45 (11.1%) patients. In comparison, patients with clinical recurrence of AF had recovery of the MI line conduction in 27/95 (28.4%) and recovery of the roof line conduction in 26/95 (27.4%). Significant differences were seen between these two groups (6.7% vs 28.4%, p=0.004; 11.1% vs 27.4%, p=0.031). CONCLUSION: Although a high incidence of PV reconnection was similarly observed in patients with and without recurrence of AF, a lower incidence of lines reconduction was observed in patients without recurrence of AF.

Comparison of the anterior and posterior mitral isthmus ablation lines in patients with perimitral annulus flutter or persistent atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation of left atrial linear lesions is an effective treatment option for perimitral flutter and is often used as a substrate modification approach for persistent atrial fibrillation. The two most popular mitral isthmus lines are those of the anterior or the posterior mitral isthmus. A comparison of these two mitral isthmus ablation approaches is still pending. METHODS: Patients undergoing catheter ablation either at the anterior or the posterior mitral isthmus were included. Procedural success, conduction block, procedure durations, complications, and the necessity of a coronary sinus ablation were analyzed. RESULTS: We investigated 80 consecutive patients, 40 (50%) with an anterior and 40 (50%) with a posterior mitral isthmus line. Twenty (25.0%) patients had perimitral annulus flutter; the remainder of the patients had persistent atrial fibrillation. Bidirectional conduction block was achieved in the same proportion in the anterior group (36; 90.0%) as it was in the posterior group (30; 75.0%) (statistically insignificant). Duration of procedure (18 ± 12 vs. 34 ± 24 min, p = 0.001), radiofrequency application (11 ± 7 vs. 18 ± 11 min, p = 0.004), and fluoroscopy (2 ± 2 vs. 8 ± 8 min, p < 0.001) values were all significantly lower in the anterior group. Only patients in the posterior line group had to be ablated via the coronary sinus 24 (60.0 %). CONCLUSIONS: Ablation at the anterior mitral isthmus shows the same success rate as the posterior mitral isthmus does. Catheter ablation at the anterior mitral isthmus is associated with significantly shorter procedure durations without the need of a coronary sinus ablation.

Transthoracic epicardial ablation of mitral isthmus for treatment of recurrent perimitral flutter.

BACKGROUND: Perimitral flutter (PMF) is a common form of left atrial tachycardia after atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. The mitral isthmus (MI) is the standard ablation target. However, in some cases bidirectional block cannot be achieved. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe the first experience using a transthoracic epicardial (TTE) approach to treat recurrent PMF after prior unsuccessful ablation. METHODS: This is a case series of four patients with recurrence of highly symptomatic drug-refractory PMF (all male, median age 55 years, 3/4 hypertensive, 2/4 persistent AF, median AF period 24 months). Three patients presented with PMF-related tachymyocardiopathy. TTE ablation of MI was performed after a median of two prior endocardial MI and coronary sinus ablation attempts, using an open-tip 3.5-mm irrigated catheter (40 W, 45ºC). Persistent bidirectional block was assessed by activation mapping and differential pacing and was achieved in all patients. RESULTS: No PMF recurrence was observed after median follow-up of 18 months (range 15-22 months; two patients without antiarrhythmic drugs and two with previously ineffective amiodarone). Left ventricular function normalized in all three patients with tachycardiomyopathy. There were no complications related to TTE approach. CONCLUSION: The present study is the first to report the feasibility of a TTE approach for highly symptomatic PMF refractory to endocardial and coronary sinus MI ablation.