Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2011 Nov;32(2):137-46.
doi: 10.1007/s10840-011-9587-8. Epub 2011 May 26.

Conventional pulmonary vein isolation compared with the "box isolation" method: a randomized clinical trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Conventional pulmonary vein isolation compared with the "box isolation" method: a randomized clinical trial

Karuna Chilukuri et al. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2011 Nov.

Abstract

Purpose: Esophageal injury is a potential complication with radiofrequency ablation in the posterior wall of the left atrium (LA). The "box isolation" method isolates the posterior LA wall including the pulmonary veins without ablation on the posterior LA wall. This study compares the acute and long-term efficacy of the box isolation method with conventional circumferential pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for catheter ablation of AF.

Methods: Twenty-nine patients (age 60 ± 9 years, 62% male, 79% paroxysmal) with drug refractory AF underwent catheter ablation. Sixteen of the 29 patients (55%) underwent box isolation. Recurrence of AF was detected by checking the daily recorded rhythm strip on a portable home ECG monitor, irrespective of the symptoms. Mean follow-up duration was 10 ± 2 months.

Results: Complete isolation of the posterior LA using box isolation lesions was achieved in three of 16 (19%) patients. The other 13 patients underwent creation of additional lesions until all PVs were isolated. Of the 16 patients who underwent box isolation, four patients (25%) had complete success, six patients (38%) had improvement, and the remaining six patients (37%) had failure. Of the 13 patients who underwent the standard PV isolation, two patients (15%) had complete success, eight patients (62%) had improvement, and the remaining three patients (23%) had failure (p = 0.44).

Conclusion: In this pilot study, the efficacy of box isolation is similar to the circumferential PVI for catheter ablation of AF. Few patients achieved PVI with box method alone. Based on these results, we do not recommend the box isolation strategy.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01091597.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Am Heart J. 2005 Jan;149(1):112-20 - PubMed
    1. Heart Rhythm. 2007 Jun;4(6):816-61 - PubMed
    1. Am Heart J. 2002 Jun;143(6):984-90 - PubMed
    1. Circulation. 2006 Feb 7;113(5):626-33 - PubMed
    1. Heart Rhythm. 2009 Aug;6(8):1109-17 - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data