Short-term outcome of mitral valve replacement and atrial fibrillation ablation procedure for patients with mitral valve stenosis and atrial fibrillation
10.7507/1007-4848.201711034
- VernacularTitle:射频消融术联合二尖瓣置换术对二尖瓣狭窄合并心房颤动患者的近期效果分析
- Author:
XU Hao
1
;
YANG Yiren
1
;
MA Ning
1
;
ZHANG Xin
1
;
QIAO Chenhui
1
Author Information
1. Department of Cardiac Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, 450052, P.R.China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Ablation;
mitral valve stenosis;
atrial fibrillation
- From:
Chinese Journal of Clinical Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
2018;25(9):786-790
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To evaluate the short-term outcome and influence of atrial fibrillation ablation and mitral valve replacement for patients with mitral valve stenosis and atrial fibrillation. Methods Retrospective analysis was conducted for 44 patients with rheumatic mitral valve stenosis and atrial fibrillation who experienced mitral valve replacement with or without surgical atrial fibrillation ablation procedure in our hospital from January 2016 to June 2017. Eighteen patients experienced mitral valve replacement and surgical atrial fibrillation ablation procedure (a group 1), and the other 26 patients experienced mitral valve replacement without surgical atrial fibrillation ablation procedure (a group 2). In th group 1, there were 4 males and 14 females, aged 43-67 (55.67±7.56) years, and in the group 2 there were 6 males and 20 females, aged 40-72 (54.81±8.81) years. The patients’ data, preoperative echocardiography, surgery procedures, perioperative events, echocardiography and electrocardiogram at postoperative three months were collected to evaluate the short-term outcome and influence of surgical atrial fibrillation ablation procedure for those patients. Results There was no statistical difference in the operation duration (P=0.867) and ICU stay (P=0.550) between the two groups. But the group 1 had longer extracorporeal circulation duration (P=0.006) and aorta arrest duration (P=0.001) than the group 2. No patient died perioperatively and one patient from the group 1 experienced reoperation because of too much chest tube drainage. At three months after operation, echocardiography and electrocardiogram examination showed that 16 patients in the group 1 and 2 patients in the group 2 had sinus rhythm. There was no statistical difference between postoperative and preoperative examination about variation in left ventricle ejection fraction, pulmonary arterial systolic pressure, left atrial diameter and left ventricular end diastolic diameter between the two groups (all P>0.05). Conclusion Atrial fibrillation ablation does not increase the risk of mitral valve replacement for patients who have mitral valve stenosis and atrial fibrillation. The rate of converting to sinus rhythm is high, but additional atrial fibrillation ablation procedure does not have positive or negative influence on short-term recovery of cardiac structure and function after operation.
