Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
An impact of superior vena cava isolation in non‐paroxysmal atrial fibrillation patients with low voltage areas
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?
An impact of superior vena cava isolation in non‐paroxysmal atrial fibrillation patients with low voltage areas
Do you wish to request the book?
An impact of superior vena cava isolation in non‐paroxysmal atrial fibrillation patients with low voltage areas
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
An impact of superior vena cava isolation in non‐paroxysmal atrial fibrillation patients with low voltage areas
2021
Overview
Background This study aimed to investigate the correlation between left atrial low‐voltage areas (LVAs) and an arrhythmogenic superior vena cava (SVC) and the impact on the efficacy of an empiric SVC isolation (SVCI) along with a pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) of non‐paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (non‐PAF) with or without LVAs. Methods We retrospectively enrolled 153 consecutive patients with non‐PAF who underwent a PVI alone (n = 51) or empiric PVI plus an SVCI (n = 102). Left atrial voltage maps were constructed during sinus rhythm to identify the LVAs (<0.5 mV). An arrhythmogenic SVC was defined as firing from the SVC and an SVC associated with the maintenance of AF‐like rapid SVC activity. Results An arrhythmogenic SVC and LVAs were identified in 28% and 65% of patients with a PVI alone and 36% and 73% of patients with a PVI plus SVCI, respectively (P = .275 and P = .353). In the multivariate analysis a female gender, higher pulmonary artery systolic pressure (PAPs), and arrhythmogenic SVC were associated with the presence of LVAs. In the PVI plus SVCI strategy, there was no significant difference in the atrial tachyarrhythmia/AF‐free survival between the patients with and without LVAs after initial and multiple sessions (50% vs. 61%; P = .386, 73% vs. 79%; P = .530), however, differences were observed in the PVI alone group (27% vs. 61%; P = .018, 49% vs. 78%; P = .046). Conclusions The presence of LVAs was associated with an arrhythmogenic SVC. An SVCI may have the potential to compensate for an impaired outcome after a PVI in non‐PAF patients with LVAs. The LVAs was associated with an arrhythmogenic SVC in non‐PAF patients. An SVCI compensated for an impaired outcome after PVI in non‐PAF patients with LVAs.
Publisher
John Wiley & Sons, Inc,John Wiley and Sons Inc,Wiley
