Catheter ablation of idiopathic outflow tract ventricular arrhythmias with low intraprocedural burden guided by pace mapping.

Richard Bennett, Timothy Campbell, Yasuhito Kotake, Samual Turnbull, Ashwin Bhaskaran, Kasun De Silva, Geoffrey Lee, Jonathan Kalman, Saurabh Kumar
Author Information
  1. Richard Bennett: Department of Cardiology, Westmead Hospital, Westmead Applied Research Centre, University of Sydney, Westmead, Australia.
  2. Timothy Campbell: Department of Cardiology, Westmead Hospital, Westmead Applied Research Centre, University of Sydney, Westmead, Australia.
  3. Yasuhito Kotake: Department of Cardiology, Westmead Hospital, Westmead Applied Research Centre, University of Sydney, Westmead, Australia.
  4. Samual Turnbull: Department of Cardiology, Westmead Hospital, Westmead Applied Research Centre, University of Sydney, Westmead, Australia.
  5. Ashwin Bhaskaran: Department of Cardiology, Westmead Hospital, Westmead Applied Research Centre, University of Sydney, Westmead, Australia.
  6. Kasun De Silva: Department of Cardiology, Westmead Hospital, Westmead Applied Research Centre, University of Sydney, Westmead, Australia.
  7. Geoffrey Lee: Department of Cardiology, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
  8. Jonathan Kalman: Department of Cardiology, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
  9. Saurabh Kumar: Department of Cardiology, Westmead Hospital, Westmead Applied Research Centre, University of Sydney, Westmead, Australia.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There are limited data comparing ablation outcomes in patients with low intraprocedural burden of ventricular arrhythmias (VA) undergoing a pace mapping (PM)-guided strategy vs those with high burden guided by standard activation mapping strategy (non-PM).
OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine if catheter ablation-guided by PM of low-intraprocedural-burden idiopathic outflow tract VA would be noninferior compared to non-PM-guided ablation.
METHODS: Outcomes of catheter ablation of idiopathic outflow tract VA in 22 patients with a low burden of intraprocedural VA using PM-guided ablation were compared to 44 patients with a high burden of intraprocedural VA undergoing ablation using standard techniques.
RESULTS: Sixty-six patients were included (age 46.5 ± 14.8 years; 68% female, left ventricular ejection fraction 59% ± 5%). Within the PM group, 24-hour preprocedure premature ventricular complex (PVC) burden was 9.5% (interquartile range [IQR] 4%-13.8%), number of pace maps 33.6 ± 18.5, surface area of ≥95% pace map correlation 1.9 ± 1.2 cm, with best pace map correlation 96% (IQR 92%-97%). Within the non-PM group, 24-hour preprocedure PVC burden was 13.5% (IQR 6.6%-30%), earliest activation time -33.7 ± 9.9 ms. Procedural duration, general anesthesia administration, fluoroscopy dose, and complications were all comparable. Following final procedure, 24-hour VA burden (PM 0% [IQR 0-2.4%] vs non-PM 0% [IQR 0-4.2%], = .98), along with VA-free survival at 6-month follow-up (PM 77% vs non-PM 71%,  = .77), were both comparable.
CONCLUSION: In patients with low intraprocedural burden of outflow tract VA, PM-guided catheter ablation can accurately identify the VA site of origin, leading to outcomes comparable to those achieved with standard ablation techniques.

Keywords

References

  1. Heart Rhythm. 2018 Jan;15(1):38-45 [PMID: 28800949]
  2. Heart Rhythm. 2016 Jan;13(1):72-7 [PMID: 26325532]
  3. Am J Cardiol. 1997 Feb 1;79(3):309-14 [PMID: 9036750]
  4. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2019 Nov;30(11):2326-2333 [PMID: 31424129]
  5. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2020 Feb;31(2):417-422 [PMID: 31868258]
  6. J Arrhythm. 2020 Jan 03;36(1):1-58 [PMID: 32071620]
  7. Europace. 2015 Oct;17(10):1571-9 [PMID: 25840288]
  8. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2014 Oct;25(10):1088-92 [PMID: 24841954]
  9. Heart Rhythm. 2008 Mar;5(3):339-44 [PMID: 18313589]
  10. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2018 Dec;29(12):1664-1671 [PMID: 30176074]
  11. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2018 Apr;51(3):271-277 [PMID: 29478174]
  12. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2008 Dec;1(5):354-62 [PMID: 19808430]
  13. J Comp Eff Res. 2020 Apr;9(5):375-385 [PMID: 32134325]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0ablationburdenVApatientsintraproceduralpacePMtract±lowventricularmappingnon-PMoutflow9vsstandardcatheteridiopathic5%24-hourcomparableoutcomesarrhythmiasundergoingstrategyhighguidedactivationcomparedusingPM-guidedtechniques5WithingrouppreprocedurePVC6mapcorrelation1IQR0%[IQRCatheterBACKGROUND:limiteddatacomparing-guidedOBJECTIVE:soughtdetermineablation-guidedlow-intraprocedural-burdennoninferiornon-PM-guidedMETHODS:Outcomes2244RESULTS:Sixty-sixincludedage46148years68%femaleleftejectionfraction59%prematurecomplexinterquartilerange[IQR]4%-138%numbermaps3318surfacearea≥95%2cmbest96%92%-97%136%-30%earliesttime-337msProceduraldurationgeneralanesthesiaadministrationfluoroscopydosecomplicationsFollowingfinalprocedure0-24%]0-42%]=98alongVA-freesurvival6-monthfollow-up77%71% =77CONCLUSION:canaccuratelyidentifysiteoriginleadingachievedIdiopathicOutflowPaceVentriculararrhythmia

Similar Articles

Cited By