• Axel Meissner, Martin Christ, Petra Maagh, Rolf Borchard, Marc van Bracht, Ingo Wickenbrock, Hans-Joachim Trappe, and Gunnar Plehn.
• Medizinische Klinik II, Schwerpunkte Kardiologie und Angiologie Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Hölkeskampring 40, 44625, Herne, Germany. axel.meissner@ruhr-universitaet-bochum.de
• Clin Res Cardiol. 2007 Nov 1;96(11):794-802.

ObjectivesThe ablation of common type atrial flutter is mainly performed by two approved techniques, whose efficacy and outcome in terms of quality of life have not been evaluated so far in a long-term follow-up study over years. A high proportion of patients suffer from coexistent atrial fibrillation, which may worsen the ablation result. The question arises whether one technique is more effective than the other when immediate ablation results, the occurrence of atrial fibrillation and the quality of life are compared. Considering these facts, it is reasonable to think about new ablation strategies for common type atrial flutter in the era of new concepts in catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation.MethodsIn a retrospective study we evaluated a detailed questionnaire in 132 patients who underwent ablation of common type between 1999 and 2004. Radiofrequency ablation was performed irrespective of coexistent atrial fibrillation either with an irrigated tip or the 8 mm tip electrode. Acute and long-term ablation outcome, and the associated quality of life, pre-, under- and post-ablation was compared in the two different ablation groups. Recurrent tachycardia were re-evaluated by 12 lead ECG analysis and assessed for both ablation groups.Results88 (67%) of the 132 patients contacted answered the questionnaire polling the perceived benefits of the procedure. Of the other 44 patients (33%); 4 (3%) had died, 7 (5.3%) had moved, 33 patients (25%) could not be included due to missing or incoherent answers. Independent of the ablation technique there was a high acute and long-term ablation success rate at about 95%. After a mean of 3 years of follow-up this benefit persists in spite of a high proportion of recurrent tachycardia, mainly atrial fibrillation (55/88 patients, 59.1%). Despite the occurrence of secondary tachycardia, there was a high significant long-term symptomatic benefit in the state of healthy and daily practice work, evaluated with a p-value of < 0.0005. The frequency of episodes and the symptom "tachycardia" were significantly reduced after effective ablation of common type atrial flutter, p-values of 0.003 and 0.002, respectively. Therefore the need for hospitalization was significant reduced (p = 0.001). Comparison of both approaches revealed that there was no significant difference related to the incidence and occurrence of atrial fibrillation.ConclusionsThe two mainly accepted and applied techniques for the ablation of common type atrial flutter show an excellent outcome under the aspect of ablation efficacy and quality of life in longterm follow-up. Three years after the ablation procedure the majority of patients consider the intervention beneficial. Despite the relatively high appearance of atrial fibrillation in the long-term follow-up this effect is still traceable.

29 keywords...

hide…