4.2 Article

Localization of Left Atrial Ganglionated Plexi in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

期刊

JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY
卷 20, 期 10, 页码 1186-1189

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8167.2009.01515.x

关键词

atrial fibrillation; autonomic nervous system; ganglionated plexus; ablation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Localization of Left Atrial GP in Patients with AF. Background. The intrinsic cardiac autonomic nervous system (ICANS), which forms a neural network, has been shown to be a critical element responsible for the initiation and maintenance of atrial fibrillation (AF). We developed a technique to localize and ablate the ganglionated plexi (GP), which serves as the integration centers of the ICANS. Method. The four major atrial GP are localized by delivering high frequency stimulation (HFS; 20 Hz, 10-150 V, 1-10 ms pulse width) to atrial tissue where GP are presumed to be located. Sites showing a parasympathetic response, which is arbitrarily defined as >= 50% increase in mean R-R interval during AF, was assigned as a GP site. Radiofrequency current is then applied to that site to eliminate the parasympathetic response. All patients received ablation of the four major atrial GP, followed by pulmonary vein antrum ablation. Results. Our preliminary results showed that all the four major atrial GP can be identified in the vast majority of patients. The parasympathetic response can be eliminated by applying radiofrequency current. In the first 83 patients, the percent of patients free of symptomatic AF or atrial tachycardia after a single ablation procedure was 80% at 12 months and 86% at a mean follow-up of 22 months. Conclusion. These results indicate additional benefits of GP ablation to PV antrum ablation and improvement with time, particularly >= 12 months after ablation. We postulate that this late benefit may result from destruction of the autonomic neurons in the GP that cannot regenerate. (J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol, Vol. 20, pp. 1186-1189, October 2009)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据