4.4 Article

Postoperative atrial fibrillation is not pulmonary vein dependent: Results from a randomized trial

期刊

HEART RHYTHM
卷 12, 期 4, 页码 699-705

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2015.01.014

关键词

Ablation; Bypass; Electrophysiology; Atrial fibrillation; Surgery

资金

  1. Medtronic
  2. Department of Surgery, Western University through an internal research grant

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND Although often short-Lived and self-limiting, postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) is a well-recognized postoperative complication of cardiac surgery and is associated with a 2-fold increase in cardiovascular mortality and morbidity. OBJECTIVE Our aim was to determine whether intraoperative bilateral pulmonary vein radiofrequency ablation decreases the incidence of POAF in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). METHODS A total of 175 patients undergoing CABG was prospectively randomized to undergo adjuvant bilateral radiofrequency pulmonary vein ablation in addition to CABG (group A; n = 89) or CABG alone (group B; n = 86). Intraoperative pulmonary vein isolation was confirmed by the inability to pace the heart via the pulmonary veins after ablation. All patients received postoperative beta-blocker. RESULTS There was no difference in the incidence of POAF in the treatment group who underwent adjuvant pulmonary vein ablation (group A; 37.1%) compared with the control group who did not (group B; 36.1 A)) (P = .887). There were no differences in postoperative inotropic support, antiarrhythmic drug use, need for oral anticoagulation, and complication rates. The mean Length of postoperative hospital stay was 8.2 +/- 6.5 days in the ablation group and 6.7 +/- 4.6 days in the control group (P < .001). CONCLUSION Adjuvant pulmonary vein isolation does not decrease the incidence of POAF or its clinical impact but increases the mean Length of stay in the hospital. The mechanism of POAF does not appear to depend on the pulmonary veins.

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

4.4
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