Baseline characteristics
Table 1 shows the baseline clinical characteristics of the
present study patients. In this study, 130 patients (67% male, age 66 ±
12 years) who underwent an initial PVI with VGLA were analyzed. The mean
CHA2DS2-VASc score was 2.0 ± 1.5 and mean LA diameter 38.4 ± 6.1 mm.
The RIPV could not be electrically isolated in 4 patients, because of
prematurely terminating the VGLA due to the sudden failure of right
phrenic nerve capture, which persisted until the end of the procedure.
In all but those 4 patients, all PVs were successfully isolated. The LB
ruptured in 3 patients during the procedure, and 26 patients underwent
additional touch up RF ablation to achieve the PVI.
There were no significant differences in the age, gender, body mass
index (BMI), or comorbidities such as hypertension, diabetes, and a
history of congestive heart failure or a stroke between those with and
without LCPV. The LA diameter and LVEF were also comparable. Moreover,Table 2 shows the procedural characteristics of the present
study patients. The total procedure time and LB dwelling time in the LA
were significantly shorter in the patients with an LCPV. There was no
significant difference in the fluoroscopy time, number of ATP dormant
conduction sites, and adjunctive RF touch-up ablation between the two
groups. ATP dormant conduction was observed in 8 patients in the LSPV, 2
in the LIPV, 5 in the RSPV, 5 in the RIPV and none in the LCPV,
respectively.
In the present study, 11 patients (8.5%) had an LCPV
(LCPV ostium maximal diameter:
27.5 ± 4.9 mm, LCPV ostium minimal diameter:
17.7
± 3.5 mm, and LCPV ovality index:
0.44 ± 0.15). The mean length between the LCPV ostium and bifurcation
point of the superior and inferior PVs was 19.5 ± 3.4 mm. We could
electrically isolate the LCPVs at the ostium with the VGLA in 9
patients, whereas the superior and inferior branches of the LCPV were
isolated individually due to a large LCPV diameter in 2 patients. Those
2 patients had a significantly larger LCPV maximal ostium diameter than
the remaining 9 patients (34.8 ± 1.1 mm vs. 25.9 ± 3.8 mm, P = 0.01).