Clinical feasibility of pulmonary vein orifice pacing for the prediction of phrenic nerve injury during cryoballoon ablation of atrial fibrillation. (15th May 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Sano, Makoto; Urushida, Tsuyoshi; Matsukura, Gaku; Sakakibara, Tomoaki; Suwa, Kenichiro; Naruse, Yoshihisa; Ohtani, Hayato; Saotome, Masao; Maekawa, Yuichiro
• Is Part Of: Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology. Volume 30:Number 8(2019)
• Page Start: 1200
• Page End: 1206
• Publication Date: 2019-05-15
• Subjects: atrial fibrillation -- compound motor action potential -- cryoballoon -- phrenic nerve injury -- pulmonary vein orifice pacing; Blood vessels -- Physiology -- Periodicals; Electrophysiology -- Periodicals; Heart -- Physiology -- Periodicals; 612.1
• DOI: 10.1111/jce.13962
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1045-3873

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: Phrenic nerve (PN) injury is a well‐known complication of cryoballoon ablation (CBA) for pulmonary vein (PV) isolation in patients with atrial fibrillation. However, it is still insufficient to practically predict phrenic nerve injury (PNI) before freezing. We hypothesized that phrenic nerve capture (PNC) with phrenic nerve orifice pacing (PVOP) might be a surrogate sign of the close proximity of the PN, and that might predict PNI and changes in the compound motor action potential (CMAP) amplitude. Methods: Seventy patients (60 ± 12 years, male 80%, paroxysmal 56%) underwent PVOP with a 20‐electrode ring catheter before the CBA. The clinical outcome was the occurrence of transient and persistent PNI. In addition, the PV position and pacing threshold during PNC with PVOP, and changes in the CMAP amplitude were recorded. We compared these measurements between patients with and without PNC (PNC/non‐PNC group) with PVOP. Results: PNC with PVOP occurred in 39 (56%) patients and was localized only to the right superior PV. Transient PNI occurred in seven (10%) patients and permanent in none. The CMAP amplitude decreased significantly more in the PNC group (PNC 33% vs non‐PNC 16%, P = .027). PNC group had a higher risk of the composite outcome of transient PNI or ≥30% decrease in the CMAP amplitude (PNC 54% vs non‐PNC 13%; P < .001). Conclusions: This PVOP technique could be feasible and contribute to predicting transient PNI and CMAP amplitude reductions before cryoapplications. Further studies are necessary to elucidate the additional efficacy of PVOP over CMAP monitoring alone.