Comparison of two radiofrequency ablation devices for atrial fibrillation concomitant with a rheumatic valve procedure

Abstract. Background:. Perioperative and median-term follow-up outcomes have not been compared among procedures using radiofrequency ablation devices for permanent atrial fibrillation with concomitant rheumatic valve disease. We compared the sinus rhythm restoration efficacy of “non-irrigation” abla...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Qin Jiang, Sheng-Zhong Liu, Lu Jiang, Ke-Li Huang, Jing Guo, Sheng-Shou Hu, Li-Shao Guo
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer 2019-06-01
Series:Chinese Medical Journal
Online Access:http://journals.lww.com/10.1097/CM9.0000000000000276
id doaj-6555b2cf613945218812f831dd25a6e8
record_format Article
spelling doaj-6555b2cf613945218812f831dd25a6e82020-12-02T07:48:20ZengWolters KluwerChinese Medical Journal0366-69992542-56412019-06-01132121414141910.1097/CM9.0000000000000276201906200-00005Comparison of two radiofrequency ablation devices for atrial fibrillation concomitant with a rheumatic valve procedureQin JiangSheng-Zhong LiuLu JiangKe-Li HuangJing GuoSheng-Shou HuLi-Shao GuoAbstract. Background:. Perioperative and median-term follow-up outcomes have not been compared among procedures using radiofrequency ablation devices for permanent atrial fibrillation with concomitant rheumatic valve disease. We compared the sinus rhythm restoration efficacy of “non-irrigation” ablation forceps and an “irrigation” ablation device in patients with rheumatic valve disease undergoing a modified Cox maze radiofrequency ablation procedure due to permanent atrial fibrillation. Methods:. Data of 278 patients with rheumatic valve disease from the Cardiac Surgery Department of Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital who underwent the modified Cox maze radiofrequency ablation procedure between May 2013 and May 2017 were reviewed. The procedure was performed using “non-irrigation” ablation forceps (AtriCure, group A) in 149 patients and an “irrigation” ablation device (Medtronic, group M) in 129 patients. Data were collected prospectively, and follow-up was documented and compared between the groups. Results:. The radiofrequency procedure duration was 28.9 ± 3.8 min in group A and 29.5 ± 2.8 min in group M (t = 1.623, P = 0.106). The predicted radiofrequency time to the left atrium diameter was (Ya = 0.4964 X + 0.3762, R2 = 0.74) in group A and (Ym = 0.4331 X + 4.3563, R2 = 0.8435) in group M. The sinus rhythm (SR) conversion rate without use of anti-arrhythmic drugs was similarly good in groups A and M, with 75.2%, 72.5%, and 70.5% vs. 73.6%, 71.3%, and 69.8% at discharge, 6 and 12 months, respectively (F = 0.084, F = 0.046, F = 0.046, P > 0.05, respectively). Conclusion:. Two types of radiofrequency ablation devices characteristic of “non-irrigation” and “irrigation” bipolar ablation forceps were similarly efficient at SR restoration.http://journals.lww.com/10.1097/CM9.0000000000000276
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Qin Jiang
Sheng-Zhong Liu
Lu Jiang
Ke-Li Huang
Jing Guo
Sheng-Shou Hu
Li-Shao Guo
spellingShingle Qin Jiang
Sheng-Zhong Liu
Lu Jiang
Ke-Li Huang
Jing Guo
Sheng-Shou Hu
Li-Shao Guo
Comparison of two radiofrequency ablation devices for atrial fibrillation concomitant with a rheumatic valve procedure
Chinese Medical Journal
author_facet Qin Jiang
Sheng-Zhong Liu
Lu Jiang
Ke-Li Huang
Jing Guo
Sheng-Shou Hu
Li-Shao Guo
author_sort Qin Jiang
title Comparison of two radiofrequency ablation devices for atrial fibrillation concomitant with a rheumatic valve procedure
title_short Comparison of two radiofrequency ablation devices for atrial fibrillation concomitant with a rheumatic valve procedure
title_full Comparison of two radiofrequency ablation devices for atrial fibrillation concomitant with a rheumatic valve procedure
title_fullStr Comparison of two radiofrequency ablation devices for atrial fibrillation concomitant with a rheumatic valve procedure
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of two radiofrequency ablation devices for atrial fibrillation concomitant with a rheumatic valve procedure
title_sort comparison of two radiofrequency ablation devices for atrial fibrillation concomitant with a rheumatic valve procedure
publisher Wolters Kluwer
series Chinese Medical Journal
issn 0366-6999
2542-5641
publishDate 2019-06-01
description Abstract. Background:. Perioperative and median-term follow-up outcomes have not been compared among procedures using radiofrequency ablation devices for permanent atrial fibrillation with concomitant rheumatic valve disease. We compared the sinus rhythm restoration efficacy of “non-irrigation” ablation forceps and an “irrigation” ablation device in patients with rheumatic valve disease undergoing a modified Cox maze radiofrequency ablation procedure due to permanent atrial fibrillation. Methods:. Data of 278 patients with rheumatic valve disease from the Cardiac Surgery Department of Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital who underwent the modified Cox maze radiofrequency ablation procedure between May 2013 and May 2017 were reviewed. The procedure was performed using “non-irrigation” ablation forceps (AtriCure, group A) in 149 patients and an “irrigation” ablation device (Medtronic, group M) in 129 patients. Data were collected prospectively, and follow-up was documented and compared between the groups. Results:. The radiofrequency procedure duration was 28.9 ± 3.8 min in group A and 29.5 ± 2.8 min in group M (t = 1.623, P = 0.106). The predicted radiofrequency time to the left atrium diameter was (Ya = 0.4964 X + 0.3762, R2 = 0.74) in group A and (Ym = 0.4331 X + 4.3563, R2 = 0.8435) in group M. The sinus rhythm (SR) conversion rate without use of anti-arrhythmic drugs was similarly good in groups A and M, with 75.2%, 72.5%, and 70.5% vs. 73.6%, 71.3%, and 69.8% at discharge, 6 and 12 months, respectively (F = 0.084, F = 0.046, F = 0.046, P > 0.05, respectively). Conclusion:. Two types of radiofrequency ablation devices characteristic of “non-irrigation” and “irrigation” bipolar ablation forceps were similarly efficient at SR restoration.
url http://journals.lww.com/10.1097/CM9.0000000000000276
work_keys_str_mv AT qinjiang comparisonoftworadiofrequencyablationdevicesforatrialfibrillationconcomitantwitharheumaticvalveprocedure
AT shengzhongliu comparisonoftworadiofrequencyablationdevicesforatrialfibrillationconcomitantwitharheumaticvalveprocedure
AT lujiang comparisonoftworadiofrequencyablationdevicesforatrialfibrillationconcomitantwitharheumaticvalveprocedure
AT kelihuang comparisonoftworadiofrequencyablationdevicesforatrialfibrillationconcomitantwitharheumaticvalveprocedure
AT jingguo comparisonoftworadiofrequencyablationdevicesforatrialfibrillationconcomitantwitharheumaticvalveprocedure
AT shengshouhu comparisonoftworadiofrequencyablationdevicesforatrialfibrillationconcomitantwitharheumaticvalveprocedure
AT lishaoguo comparisonoftworadiofrequencyablationdevicesforatrialfibrillationconcomitantwitharheumaticvalveprocedure
_version_ 1724408119156539392