| Summary: | Background: Recent studies investigating the implications of additional ablation guided by dormant pulmonary vein (PV) conduction testing using adenosine showed conflicting results, and the data about atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence after trigger site elimination in adenosine-induced AF are still lacking. Methods: Of 846 patients with paroxysmal AF (PAF) who underwent PV isolation (PVI), adenosine test after PVI was performed in 148 patients. Results: PVI was successfully achieved in 846 patients. We excluded 58 patients due to loss to the follow-up. A higher rate of AF recurrence was found in the group without adenosine test (136/644, 21%) compared to the group with adenosine test (20/144, 13%, log-rank P=0.047). In multivariate analysis model for AF freedom during the follow-up period, the only significant clinical predictor of AF freedom was adenosine test (hazard ratio [HR] 1.97; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.2â3.23; P=0.007).Among 148 patients with adenosine test, 114 (77%) patients showed neither dormant conductions nor AF-induced, 22 (15%) showed positive dormant conductions only, and 12 (8%) revealed adenosine-induced AF (6 of them also showed dormant conduction). After additional ablation in positive dormant conduction group and adenosine-induced AF group, AF recurrence was noted in 4/21 (19%) patients in positive dormant conduction group and 2/11 (18%) patients in adenosine-induced AF group, which was not different from that of patients in negative dormant conduction/ no AF-induced group (14/112, 12%, log-rank P=0.67). Conclusions: Adenosine test after PVI to confirm the absence of dormant conduction and triggers initiating AF is beneficial to improve the outcomes after catheter ablation of PAF. Keywords: Atrial fibrillation, Adenosine test, Dormant conduction, Adenosine-induced AF, Recurrence
|
|---|
