|
|
||||||||||
|
J Am Coll Cardiol, 2000; 35:458-462 © 2000 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation |











* Electrophysiology Section of MCP Hahnemann University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
b the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA,zcnyx
Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology at the University of Pennsylvania Health Systems, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
Manuscript received July 23, 1998; revised manuscript received August 17, 1999, accepted October 18, 1999.
Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. Francis Marchlinski, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Spruce Street, 9 Founders, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104
Marchlin{at}mail.med.upenn.edu
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
To determine whether catheter ablation is safe and effective in patients over the age of 80.
BACKGROUND
There is a tendency to withhold invasive therapy in the elderly until it has been proven safe and effective.
METHODS
Over a two-year period from February 1, 1996 to February 1, 1998, 695 consecutive patients underwent 744 catheter ablation procedures of supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmias. These patients were divided into three groups based on age:
80 years, 60 to 79 years and <60 years. Acute ablation success, using standard criteria and complication rates for these three groups were determined.
RESULTS
There were 37 patients
80 years, 275 patients 60 to 79 years and 383 patients <60 years old. The overall acute ablation success rate for the entire group was 95% with no difference in rates among the three groups (97%,
80 years; 94%, 6079 years; 95%, <60 years). The percentage of patients undergoing His bundle ablation was greatest in the
80-year-old group (43% vs. 19% vs. 2%, p < 0.01), and the percentage of patients undergoing accessory pathway ablation was greatest in the <60-year-old patients (0% vs. 4% vs. 25%, p < 0.01). The overall complication rate for the entire group was 2.6%, and there was only one major/life-threatening complication. There was no difference in complication rates among the groups (0%,
80 years; 2.2%, 60 to 79 years; 3.1%, <60 years). Based on the sample size, the 95% confidence interval is 0% to 7.8% for an adverse event in the octogenarian.
CONCLUSIONS
Catheter ablative therapy for the arrhythmias attempted in the very elderly appears to be effective with low risk. Ablation results appear to be comparable with those noted in younger patients.
| ||||||||||||||
| Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
80, 60 to 79 and <60 years. We classified the ablation types depending upon the arrhythmias initiated using standard electrophysiologic techniques and definitions. The arrhythmia types include: AV nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT) both typical and atypical, AV reentrant tachycardia involving an AP either concealed or manifest, atrial flutter including clockwise or counterclockwise right atrial flutter, atrial tachycardia including inappropriate sinus tachycardia and focal or macroreentrant atrial tachycardia, atrial fibrillation with His bundle ablation or AV node modification for ventricular rate control and ventricular tachycardia (VT) in patients with and without structural heart disease.
Ablation procedures were performed using standard mapping and ablative techniques that have been previously described (8,9). With the exception of atrial flutter, radiofrequency energy was applied through the 4 mm tip of the ablation catheter. For atrial flutter, an 8 mm tip catheter was used for most procedures. Radiofrequency energy was typically delivered at a power necessary to achieve an impedance drop of 4 to 10 ohms or temperature increase from 50° to 65°C. Radiofrequency energy was applied from 30 s to 2 minutes during continuous electrocardiographic and intermittent fluoroscopic monitoring. Additional monitoring using intracardiac echocardiographic imaging or nonfluoroscopic magnetic imaging (CARTO-Biosense, New Brunswick, New Jersey) was used in 27 and 57 patients, respectively.
Patients were brought routinely to the electrophysiology laboratory in the postabsorptive state. Conscious sedation was administered with continuous monitoring of blood pressure, oxygen saturation and body surface electrocardiogram. Detailed electrophysiologic evaluation was performed using standard stimulation and recording techniques to establish the correct diagnosis and identify the appropriate site for ablation. Acute ablation success was defined based on arrhythmia type as follows: AVNRTinability to initiate more than single AV node "echoes" with and without isoproterenol; atrial tachycardiainability to reinitiate after radiofrequency energy application; sinus node ablation for inappropriate sinus tachycardiadecrease (>30 beats/min) in maximum heart rate on isoproterenol and change in P wave morphology in lead 3 to an inverted or flattened P wave; atrioventricular reentryabsence of antegrade and retrograde conduction over the AP with and without isoproterenol; atrial flutterconduction block through the inferior vena cava tricuspid valve (IVC-TV) isthmus as determined by HALO or CARTO recordings or His-coronary sinus (CS) reversal (10); His bundle ablationcomplete heart block. One patient underwent AV modification for rate control of atrial fibrillation and demonstrated a decrease in the mean ventricular response to atrial fibrillation to <100 beats/min on isoproterenol. Ventricular tachcardiainability to reinitiate targeted tachycardia morphology. Programmed stimulation was also performed on isoproterenol in patients without structural heart disease.
Thirty-five patients (9%) underwent ablation of two arrhythmia types (i.e., AVNRT and AP) at the same or two different procedures. These patients were counted once in each type of ablation procedure.
Complications. Complications were grouped into three categories according to the seriousness or permanence of the event.
Events that did not result in early termination/failure of the procedure, patient compromise or prolonged hospitalization were not included in analysis. Examples of such events include transient hypotension that responded to fluid resuscitation and minor vagal reaction.
Statistical analysis. Results are presented as mean ± SD where appropriate. Success rates and incidence of complications were compared using 2 x 3 contingency table with a p value <0.05 considered significant. The one-sided, 95% binomial confidence interval for an adverse event in the octogenarian was also determined. Finally, we performed a post hoc analysis to determine the power to detect an increase in risk of complications in octogenarians of greater than 10% when compared with the risk identified in the population <80 years of age.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
80 year age group (p = <0.01). The
80 year age group underwent significantly more His bundle ablations (43%) than either the 60 to 79 year group (19%) or the <60 age group (2%), p = <0.01. Only a small number of patients in the >80 age group underwent ablation procedures for atrial tachycardia, VT and APs.
|
|
|
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Comparison with previous studies. Patients in this analysis were separated into three age groups to permit a closer comparison with previous reports in which the influence of age on outcome with catheter ablation was assessed. Epstein et al. (14) reported on the outcome of 68 patients over the age of 70. The number of patients over 80 was not stated, but the mean age ranged from 72 to 77 years depending on the arrhythmia type. These investigators noted that success rates for ablative therapy were also comparable with those reported in younger patients. Of note, similar to our experience, all nine of their elderly patients undergoing radiofrequency ablation of accessory pathways were less than 80 years. Chen et al. (15) also reported on the influence of age on outcome with ablative therapy for AP and AV nodal reentrant tachycardia ablation. Importantly, this study demonstrated comparable success rates in younger and older (>65 years old, mean age 69 years) patients. Our results support the previous reports and suggest that success of ablative therapy for the described arrhythmias should be anticipated even when the procedure is performed on the very elderly.
Complications.
Our complication rate of 18 out of 695 (2.6%) patients and 18 out of 744 (2.4%) procedures is low and is comparable with the incidence of complications reported in other large series. Indeed, in our experience the risk of life threatening complications was extremely low (Table 4). Only one patient (0.2%), age 59, experienced a stroke with residual right arm weakness following an ablation for VT in the setting of chronic coronary artery disease. Transatrial placement of the catheter was required because of the extent of peripheral vascular disease, and it is believed that thrombus associated with a transient impedance rise during radiofrequency energy delivery was jettisoned free when removing the catheter through the transseptal sheath at the end of the ablation procedure. No other patient experienced death, myocardial infarction, valve disruption, heart block or pulmonary emboli. Our findings corroborate the low risk of the catheter ablative procedure for right sided ablative procedures in the elderly population (60 to 79 years) and extend the results even in the very elderly (
80). The two previous reports that addressed efficacy and risk associated with catheter ablative therapy in the elderly suggested a higher risk of ablative procedures for accessory pathways. They noted complications in 2 of 9 (22%) and 4 of 29 (14%) elderly patients with left sided accessory pathway ablations. Of note, only one of the 20 left sided procedures in the 60 to 79 year range and none of the four left sided procedures in the patients
80 years experienced a serious complication. A single patient developed a pericardial effusion. Despite the low complication rate observed, a cautious approach must be taken in the elderly patient undergoing left sided ablative procedures. Vascular access is frequently difficult and vigilance is required to minimize thromboembolic and cardiac perforation risks.
Study limitations.
The major limitation of this study is related to the limited sample size of patients who were very elderly who underwent ablation procedures for elimination of atrial tachycardia, VT and AP. Thus, we need to refrain from generalizing and indicating that ablative therapy is effective and safe for all arrhythmia types in the very elderly until more data are available for assessing efficacy and risk in arrhythmias that occur less frequently in the elderly. In addition, because of the relatively small number of patients who were
80 years of age, one should be cautious about concluding that there is no ablation risk in the octogenarian. In fact, the power calculation of 61% for detecting an increased complication risk to >10% suggests that the sample size with respect to the number of octogenarians represents a limitation of the study. Importantly, however, confidence interval results have been reported to be a better reflection of the precision of a study than the post hoc power analysis (16). Based on the sample size, the 95% confidence interval is 0% to 7.8% for an adverse event in the octogenarian. Therefore, at the very least, we can indicate with confidence that the complication rate is likely to be less than 7.8% for octogenarians undergoing the described ablation procedures based on our study results.
Conclusions. Catheter ablation for arrhythmia syndromes that are common in the very elderly can be performed with efficacy and risk profiles that are similar to those observed in younger patients. Our results suggest that catheter ablative therapy in the elderly for atrial flutter, AV nodal reentry and atrial-ventricular junction ablation for rapid ventricular response to atrial fibrillation should probably be considered as an appropriate therapeutic option. The strategy used for these arrhythmias should be independent of age. In fact, given the potential for greater intolerance to drug therapy coupled with the documented tendency for increased frequency and severity with the arrhythmia episodes that occur with aging, ablative therapy should be considered the initial treatment of choice for many patients.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
N. Dagres, C. Piorkowski, H. Kottkamp, D. Th. Kremastinos, and G. Hindricks Contemporary catheter ablation of arrhythmias in geriatric patients: patient characteristics, distribution of arrhythmias, and outcome Europace, July 1, 2007; 9(7): 477 - 480. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. G. Diab and M. J. Earley Ablation of supraventricular tachycardia in a 96 year old Age Ageing, May 1, 2007; 36(3): 346 - 348. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Kihel, A. D. Costa, A. Kihel, C. Romeyer-Bouchard, J. Thevenin, R. Gonthier, B. Samuel, and K. Isaaz Long-term efficacy and safety of radiofrequency ablation in elderly patients with atrioventricular nodal re-entrant tachycardia Europace, June 1, 2006; 8(6): 416 - 420. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Loh and G Breithardt 'Slow pathway' ablation in patients with atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia: do we understand what we are doing? Eur. Heart J., January 1, 2001; 22(1): 19 - 21. [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | SUBSCRIPTIONS | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | CARDIOSOURCE | SEARCH | HELP | FEEDBACK |