Table 2 Ablation strategy and success rate of ablation block.

From: Safety and effectiveness of catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation in patients with mitral valve replacement mechanical versus bioprosthetic valves

 

Bioprosthetic MVR group

Mechanical MVR group

p value

Lesion set

 Circumferential PV isolation

21/21 (100%)

85/85 (100%)

1.000

 Mitral isthmus line

14/21 (66.7%)

56/85 (65.9%)

0.946

 LA Roofline

14/21 (66.7%)

67/85 (78.8%)

0.240

 Cavotricuspid isthmus line

17/21 (81.0%)

73/85 (85.9%)

0.572

 CFAEs

6/21 (28.6%)

8/85 (9.4%)

0.050

 Marshall

5/21 (23.8%)

10/85 (11.8%)

0.156

 CS

5/21 (23.8%)

30/85 (35.3%)

0.316

Bidirectional block achievement

 Circumferential PV isolation

21/21 (100%)

85/85 (100%)

1.000

 Mitral isthmus line

11/14 (78.6%)

39/56 (69.6%)

0.508

 LA roofline

12/14 (85.7%)

65/67 (97.0%)

0.273

 Cavotricuspid isthmus line

17/17 (100.0%)

69/73 (94.5%)

0.738

  1. PV, pulmonary veins, LA, left atrial, SVC, superior vena cava, CFAEs, complex fractionated atrial electrograms, CS, coronary sinus. p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.