Electrogram characteristics at successful cryoablation sites in slow-fast atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia

Cryoablation is a safe alternative to radiofrequency (RF) ablation for slow-fast atrioventricular reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT); however, optimal electrogram parameters for site selection remain unknown. We retrospectively investigated local electrograms for slow pathway (SP) modification in cryoabl...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of electrocardiology 2022-11, Vol.75, p.44-51
Hauptverfasser: Watanabe, Tomonori, Yokoyama, Yasuhiro, Hachiya, Hitoshi, Okuyama, Takafumi, Watanabe, Hiroaki, Yokota, Ayako, Kamioka, Masashi, Komori, Takahiro, Kabutoya, Tomoyuki, Imai, Yasushi, Kario, Kazuomi
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Cryoablation is a safe alternative to radiofrequency (RF) ablation for slow-fast atrioventricular reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT); however, optimal electrogram parameters for site selection remain unknown. We retrospectively investigated local electrograms for slow pathway (SP) modification in cryoablation. Forty-five consecutive patients with slow-fast AVNRT who underwent cryoablation using a 6-mm-tip catheter were enrolled. Electrogram parameters for sites of successful SP modification (success-sites) were investigated; these included the interval between atrial activation at His and the last deflection of SP potential, defined as the His(A)-SPP interval. In 8 patients, 3-dimensional mapping by multi-electrode catheter was performed pre-ablation for more detailed SP assessment. Twenty-seven of 45 patients had successful SP modification by 1 cycle of freeze-thaw-freeze cryoablation at a single site with a low amplitude and fragmented SP potential. Among a total of 76 cryoablation sites in all patients, the His(A)-SPP interval at success-sites (45 sites) was significantly longer than that at unsuccess-sites (31 sites) (86 ± 9 vs.78 ± 10 msec, p 
ISSN:0022-0736
1532-8430
DOI:10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2022.09.006