Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Conventional pulmonary vein isolation compared with the “box isolation” method: a randomized clinical trial
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Conventional pulmonary vein isolation compared with the “box isolation” method: a randomized clinical trial
Do you wish to request the book?
Conventional pulmonary vein isolation compared with the “box isolation” method: a randomized clinical trial
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Conventional pulmonary vein isolation compared with the “box isolation” method: a randomized clinical trial
2011
Overview
Purpose
Esophageal injury is a potential complication with radiofrequency ablation in the posterior wall of the left atrium (LA). The “box isolation” method isolates the posterior LA wall including the pulmonary veins without ablation on the posterior LA wall. This study compares the acute and long-term efficacy of the box isolation method with conventional circumferential pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for catheter ablation of AF.
Methods
Twenty-nine patients (age 60±9 years, 62% male, 79% paroxysmal) with drug refractory AF underwent catheter ablation. Sixteen of the 29 patients (55%) underwent box isolation. Recurrence of AF was detected by checking the daily recorded rhythm strip on a portable home ECG monitor, irrespective of the symptoms. Mean follow-up duration was 10±2 months.
Results
Complete isolation of the posterior LA using box isolation lesions was achieved in three of 16 (19%) patients. The other 13 patients underwent creation of additional lesions until all PVs were isolated. Of the 16 patients who underwent box isolation, four patients (25%) had complete success, six patients (38%) had improvement, and the remaining six patients (37%) had failure. Of the 13 patients who underwent the standard PV isolation, two patients (15%) had complete success, eight patients (62%) had improvement, and the remaining three patients (23%) had failure (
p
=0.44).
Conclusion
In this pilot study, the efficacy of box isolation is similar to the circumferential PVI for catheter ablation of AF. Few patients achieved PVI with box method alone. Based on these results, we do not recommend the box isolation strategy.
Publisher
Springer US,Springer Nature B.V
Subject
/ Aged
/ Atrial Fibrillation - diagnosis
/ Atrial Fibrillation - mortality
/ Atrial Fibrillation - surgery
/ Catheter Ablation - adverse effects
/ Electrocardiography - methods
/ Electroencephalography - methods
/ Female
/ Humans
/ Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted
/ Male
/ Medicine
/ Postoperative Complications - mortality
