Minimally invasive surgical versus catheter ablation for the long-lasting persistent atrial fibrillation.
Minimally invasive surgical versus catheter ablation for the long-lasting persistent atrial fibrillation.
复制标题
微创手术与导管消融治疗长期持续性心房颤动
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0022122
复制
发表时间:
2011
期刊:
影响因子:
3.7
通讯作者:
Meng X
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
Wang J;Li Y;Shi J;Han J;Xu C;Ma C;Meng X
Objective To assess the efficacy of video-assisted minimally invasive surgical vs. catheter ablation for the long-standing persistent AF. Methods We performed a retrospective comparative analysis in a series of 166 long-standing persistent AF patients treated between 2006 and 2009 with either video-assisted minimally invasive ablation (83 patients), or catheter ablations (83 patients). The catheter group was screened using a ‘pair-matched case-control’ methodology in order to select appropriate statistical comparison candidates out of 169 long-standing persistent AF patients which were potentially suitable for surgery, but have been treated with catheter approaches in order to balance major prognostic factors between the two groups. Follow-up for all patients ranged from 1 to 3.6 years. Results No patient died postoperatively. One patient suffered from stroke in the surgical group but recovered before discharge. Freedom from AF was obtained in 59.0% and 74.7% during follow-up in the catheter group and the surgical group respectively (P = 0.047). Patients in the catheter group had a significantly higher rate of recurrent arrhythmia (P = 0.011, hazard ratio: 0.555, 95% CI: 0.354 to 0.872) compared with the surgically treated group. The freedom from antiarrhythmic drugs was 44.6% in the catheter group and 61.4% in the surgical group (P = 0.043). Conclusions The video-assisted minimally invasive ablation was safe and effective, and had an optimistic success rate for patients with long-standing persistent AF in our retrospective comparative study. Thus, further randomized studies addressing this issue seem to be justified.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子:
4.6
作者:
Mehall, John R.;Kohut, Robert M., Jr.;Wolf, Randall K.
通讯作者:
Wolf, Randall K.
影响因子:
24
作者:
Scharf, Christoph;Boersma, Lucas;Morady, Fred
通讯作者:
Morady, Fred
影响因子:
4.6
作者:
Li, Hui;Li, Yan;Meng, Xu
通讯作者:
Meng, Xu
影响因子:
1.6
作者:
Mikhaylov, Evgeny;Gureev, Sergey;Lebedev, Dmitry
通讯作者:
Lebedev, Dmitry
DOI:
10.1007/s10840-005-2492-2
发表时间:
2005-08-01
影响因子:
1.8
作者:
Scherlag, BJ;Nakagawa, H;Lazzara, R
通讯作者:
Lazzara, R