RESUMO
RESUMEN: Se presenta el caso clínico de un paciente que presenta un infarto del miocardio con trombolisis no exitosa y posterior implantación de 2 stents coronarios quien desarrolla, algunos días después, una tormenta eléctrica ventricular. Una ablación de la taquicardia se realizó bajo ECMO, con buen resultado. Se detalla la descripción del caso, revisa y discute el tema.
ABSTRAC: A patient with a myocardial infarction whom, following a failed thrombolisis and implantion of 2 stents developed a ventricular electrical storm and hemodynamic instability. A successful ablation of the tachycardia with the use of ECMO was performed. A full description is included, along with a discussion of the subject.
Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Cateterismo Cardíaco/instrumentação , Oxigenação por Membrana Extracorpórea , Ablação por Cateter , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/cirurgia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/mortalidade , Taquicardia Ventricular/cirurgia , Taquicardia Ventricular/mortalidade , Eletrocardiografia/métodosRESUMO
Introducción: la intervención de enfermería en pacientes sometidos a cateterismo cardiaco constituye el eje articular de las acciones de planeación, desarrollo y evaluación; lo que permite atender el proceso de aprendizaje. Objetivo: evaluar la relación entre el nivel de conocimiento y ansiedad de los pacientes sometido a cateterismo cardiaco, antes y después de aplicar una intervención educativa. Metodología: investigación con enfoque cuantitativo, descriptivo, transversal y exploratorio a 70 pacientes sometidos a cateterismo cardiaco por primera vez, se aplicaron dos instrumentos validados para medir el nivel de conocimiento y ansiedad con un Alfa de Cronbach de 0.90; la recolección fue en dos fases, pretest y postest, la primera antes de la cirugia; la segunda posterior al procedimiento y se compararon los resultados de ambos test en búsqueda de mejores resultados. Resultados: media de edad de 60 - 79 años; 68.6% hombres y 31.4% mujeres; el nivel de conocimientos del pretest fue de 52.9% regular y postest, excelente con un 50%; en cuanto a la ansiedad el pretest el 97.1% reportó grave, mientras que en el postest, el 80% reportó moderado. Conclusiones: el aporte de conocimientos por parte del personal de enfermería a través del rol educador, favorece a los pacientes que son sometidos a un cateterismo cardiaco, que se refleja en disminución de ansiedad e incremento de calidad de vida.
Introduction:The nursing intervention in patients undergoing cardiac catheterization constitutes the articular axis of planning, development and evaluation actions; which allows to attend the learning process. Objective: To evaluate the relationship between the level of knowledge and anxiety of the patient undergoing cardiac catheterization, before and after applying an educational intervention. Methodology: Investigation with a quantitative, descriptive, cross-sectional and exploratory approach to 70 patients undergoing cardiac catheterization for the first time. Two validated instruments were applied to measure the level of knowledge and anxiety with a Cronbach's Alpha of 0.90; the collection was in two phases, pre and post test, the first before surgery; the second after the procedure, the results of both tests were compared in search of better results. Results: Average age of 60-79 years, 68.6% men and 31.4% women; the level of knowledge of the pre-test was 52.9% regular and post-test, excellent with 50%; regarding anxiety, the pre-test 97.1% serious, post-test, 80% moderate. Conclusions: The contribution of knowledges by the nursing staff through the educator role, favors patients who undergo cardiac catheterization, which is reflected in the reduction of seniority and the increase in the quality of life.
Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Cateterismo Cardíaco/instrumentação , Capacitação Profissional , Recursos Humanos de Enfermagem/educação , Epidemiologia Descritiva , Estudos Transversais , MéxicoRESUMO
METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively compared 257 consecutive patients undergoing TAVR with self-expandable valves using either CON (n = 101) or COVL (n = 156) in four intermediate/low volume centers. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the groups. The 30-day incidence of new-onset LBBB (12.9% vs. 5.8%; p=0.05) and PPMI rate (17.8% vs. 6.4%; p=0.004) was significantly lower when using the COVL implantation view. There was no difference between the CON and COVL groups in 30-day incidence of death (4.9% vs. 2.6%), any stroke (0% vs. 0.6%), and the need for surgical aortic valve replacement (0% for both groups). CONCLUSION: Using the COVL view for implantation, we achieved a significant reduction of the LBBB and PPMI rate after TAVR in comparison with the traditional CON view, without compromising the TAVR outcomes when using self-expandable prostheses.
Assuntos
Estenose da Valva Aórtica , Valva Aórtica , Bloqueio de Ramo , Marca-Passo Artificial/estatística & dados numéricos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/terapia , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter , Idoso , Valva Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagem , Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagem , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Bloqueio de Ramo/etiologia , Bloqueio de Ramo/terapia , Cateterismo Cardíaco/instrumentação , Cateterismo Cardíaco/métodos , Desenho de Equipamento , Feminino , Próteses Valvulares Cardíacas , Humanos , Masculino , Avaliação de Processos e Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Cirurgia Assistida por Computador/instrumentação , Cirurgia Assistida por Computador/métodos , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter/efeitos adversos , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter/instrumentação , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter/métodosRESUMO
Background: One-catheter strategy, based in multipurpose catheters, allows exploring both coronary arteries with a single catheter. This strategy could simplify coronary catheterization and reduce the volume of contrast administration, by reducing radial spasm. To date, observational studies showed greater benefits regarding contrast consumption and catheterization performance than controlled trials. The aim of this work is to perform the first systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCT) to adequately quantify the benefits of one-catheter strategy, with multipurpose catheters, over conventional two-catheter strategy on contrast consumption, and catheterization performance. Methods: A search in PubMed, CINALH, and CENTRAL databases was conducted to identify randomized trials comparing one-catheter and two-catheter strategies. The primary outcome was volume of iodinated contrast administrated. Secondary endpoints, evaluating coronary catheterization performance included: arterial spasm, fluoroscopy time, and procedural time. Results: Five RCT were included for the final analysis, with a total of 1599 patients (802 patients with one-catheter strategy and 797 patients with two-catheter strategy). One-catheter strategy required less administration of radiological contrast (difference in means [DiM] [95% confidence interval (CI)]; -3.831 mL [-6.165 mL to -1.496 mL], p = 0.001) as compared to two-catheter strategy. Furthermore, less radial spasm (odds ratio [95% CI], 0.484 [0.363 to 0.644], p < 0.001) and less procedural time (DiM [95% CI], -72.471 s [-99.694 s to -45.249 s], p < 0.001) were observed in one-catheter strategy. No differences on fluoroscopy time were observed. Conclusions: One-catheter strategy induces a minimal reduction on radiological contrast administration but improves coronary catheterization performance by reducing arterial spasm and procedural time as compared to conventional two-catheter strategy.
Antecedentes: La estrategia de catéter único permite explorar ambas coronarias con un solo catéter. Nuestro objetivo es realizar la primera revisión sistemática y meta-análisis de ensayos clínicos aleatorizados para cuantificar adecuadamente los beneficios de la estrategia de catéter único, con catéteres multipropósito, sobre la estrategia convencional de dos catéteres. Métodos: Se realizó una búsqueda en PubMed, CINALH y CENTRAL, identificando ensayos aleatorizados que compararan estrategias de un catéter y dos catéteres. El resultado primario fue volumen de contraste administrado. Los secundarios, que evaluaron el rendimiento del cateterismo, incluyeron: espasmo radial, tiempo de fluoroscopia y de procedimiento. Resultados: Se incluyeron cinco ensayos, totalizando 1,599 pacientes (802 con estrategia de un catéter y 797 con estrategia de dos catéteres). La estrategia de catéter único requirió menos contraste (diferencia-de-medias; −3.831 mL [−6.165 mL a −1.496 mL], p = 0.001), presentando menos espasmo radial (odds ratio, 0.484 [0.363 a 0.644], p < 0.001) y menos tiempo de procedimiento (diferencia-de-medias; −72.471 s [−99.694 s a −45.249 s], p < 0.001). No hubo diferencias en el tiempo de fluoroscopia. Conclusiones: La estrategia de catéter único induce una reducción mínima en la administración de contraste, pero mejora el rendimiento del cateterismo al reducir el espasmo radial y el tiempo de procedimiento en comparación con la estrategia convencional.
Assuntos
Cateterismo Cardíaco/métodos , Cateteres Cardíacos , Angiografia Coronária/métodos , Cateterismo Cardíaco/instrumentação , Meios de Contraste/administração & dosagem , Angiografia Coronária/instrumentação , Vasos Coronários/diagnóstico por imagem , Fluoroscopia , Humanos , Artéria Radial , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como AssuntoRESUMO
Abstract Background: One-catheter strategy, based in multipurpose catheters, allows exploring both coronary arteries with a single catheter. This strategy could simplify coronary catheterization and reduce the volume of contrast administration, by reducing radial spasm. To date, observational studies showed greater benefits regarding contrast consumption and catheterization performance than controlled trials. The aim of this work is to perform the first systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCT) to adequately quantify the benefits of one-catheter strategy, with multipurpose catheters, over conventional two-catheter strategy on contrast consumption, and catheterization performance. Methods: A search in PubMed, CINALH, and CENTRAL databases was conducted to identify randomized trials comparing one-catheter and two-catheter strategies. The primary outcome was volume of iodinated contrast administrated. Secondary endpoints, evaluating coronary catheterization performance included: arterial spasm, fluoroscopy time, and procedural time. Results: Five RCT were included for the final analysis, with a total of 1599 patients (802 patients with one-catheter strategy and 797 patients with two-catheter strategy). One-catheter strategy required less administration of radiological contrast (difference in means [DiM] [95% confidence interval (CI)]; −3.831 mL [−6.165 mL to −1.496 mL], p = 0.001) as compared to two-catheter strategy. Furthermore, less radial spasm (odds ratio [95% CI], 0.484 [0.363 to 0.644], p < 0.001) and less procedural time (DiM [95% CI], −72.471 s [−99.694 s to −45.249 s], p < 0.001) were observed in one-catheter strategy. No differences on fluoroscopy time were observed. Conclusions: One-catheter strategy induces a minimal reduction on radiological contrast administration but improves coronary catheterization performance by reducing arterial spasm and procedural time as compared to conventional two-catheter strategy.
Resumen Antecedentes: La estrategia de catéter único permite explorar ambas coronarias con un solo catéter. Nuestro objetivo es realizar la primera revisión sistemática y meta-análisis de ensayos clínicos aleatorizados para cuantificar adecuadamente los beneficios de la estrategia de catéter único, con catéteres multipropósito, sobre la estrategia convencional de dos catéteres. Métodos: Se realizó una búsqueda en PubMed, CINALH y CENTRAL, identificando ensayos aleatorizados que compararan estrategias de un catéter y dos catéteres. El resultado primario fue volumen de contraste administrado. Los secundarios, que evaluaron el rendimiento del cateterismo, incluyeron: espasmo radial, tiempo de fluoroscopia y de procedimiento. Resultados: Se incluyeron cinco ensayos, totalizando 1,599 pacientes (802 con estrategia de un catéter y 797 con estrategia de dos catéteres). La estrategia de catéter único requirió menos contraste (diferencia-de-medias; −3.831 mL [−6.165 mL a −1.496 mL], p = 0.001), presentando menos espasmo radial (odds ratio, 0.484 [0.363 a 0.644], p < 0.001) y menos tiempo de procedimiento (diferencia-de-medias; −72.471 s [−99.694 s a −45.249 s], p < 0.001). No hubo diferencias en el tiempo de fluoroscopia. Conclusiones: La estrategia de catéter único induce una reducción mínima en la administración de contraste, pero mejora el rendimiento del cateterismo al reducir el espasmo radial y el tiempo de procedimiento en comparación con la estrategia convencional.
Assuntos
Humanos , Cateterismo Cardíaco/métodos , Angiografia Coronária/métodos , Cateteres Cardíacos , Fluoroscopia , Cateterismo Cardíaco/instrumentação , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Angiografia Coronária/instrumentação , Artéria Radial , Meios de Contraste/administração & dosagem , Vasos Coronários/diagnóstico por imagemRESUMO
Abstract Atrial fibrillation (AF) is an increasing health care problem associated with thromboembolic risk about 5% per year, with high mortality and morbidity when associated to stroke. Oral anticoagulants (OAC) are the treatment of choice for preventing ischemic stroke in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). However, these drugs are associated with an increased risk of serious complications such an intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). In this context percutaneous closure of the left atrial appendage (LAA) is an effective therapeutic alternative to OACs, with an increasing success rate. Novel devices might allow or facilitate the procedure in some anatomically and technically complicated cases. Two patients with a complex morphology of the LAA, in which the LAmbre (Lifetech Scientific [Shenzhen] Co. Ltd.) device was implanted with good technical and clinical results are presented.
Assuntos
Humanos , Feminino , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Fibrilação Atrial/terapia , Cateterismo Cardíaco/instrumentação , Apêndice Atrial/diagnóstico por imagem , Dispositivo para Oclusão Septal , Fibrilação Atrial/diagnóstico por imagem , Angiografia , Ecocardiografia , Cateterismo Cardíaco/métodos , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/prevenção & controleRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To demonstrate safety and efficacy of using different generations of softer Amplatzer™ devices for ventricular septal defect (VSD) closure to avoid serious complications at follow-up. BACKGROUND: Transcatheter closure of perimembranous ventricular septal defects (PmVSD) is a well-established procedure; however, it is associated with unacceptable incidence of complete heart block. Great advantages have been achieved by using softer devices for VSD transcatheter closure. The first and second generation of Amplatzer™ occluders (AVP II, ADO, and ADO II) seem to offer a safe and attractive alternative for this procedure. These devices can be delivered using either an arterial (retrograde) or venous (prograde) approach. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with congenital PmVSD who underwent transcatheter closure using ADO, ADO II, and AVP II devices were included. Primary end point was to determine efficacy and safety of these generations of devices and to determine the incidence of complications at follow-up (complete AV block and aortic/tricuspid/mitral regurgitation). One hundred and nineteen patients underwent VSD closure at a median age of 5 years (8 months-54 years). During the catheterization, there were only minor complications and at follow-up of 36 ± 25.7 months (up to 99 months), the closure rate was high of 98.3% and freedom from AV block was 100%. CONCLUSIONS: The use of softer Amplatzer™ devices is a good alternative to achieve PmVSD closure safely with no risk of AVB during the procedure or at midterm follow-up.
Assuntos
Cateterismo Cardíaco , Bloqueio Cardíaco , Comunicação Interventricular , Implantação de Prótese , Dispositivo para Oclusão Septal , Cateterismo Cardíaco/instrumentação , Cateterismo Cardíaco/métodos , Pré-Escolar , Segurança de Equipamentos , Feminino , Bloqueio Cardíaco/etiologia , Bloqueio Cardíaco/prevenção & controle , Comunicação Interventricular/fisiopatologia , Comunicação Interventricular/cirurgia , Humanos , Masculino , México/epidemiologia , Implantação de Prótese/efeitos adversos , Implantação de Prótese/métodos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Risco Ajustado , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Coronary angiography with two catheters is the traditional strategy for diagnostic coronary procedures. TIG I catheter permits to cannulate both coronary arteries, avoiding exchanging catheters during coronary angiography by transradial access. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of one-catheter strategy, by avoiding catheter exchange, on coronary catheterization performance and economic costs. METHODS: Transradial coronary diagnostic procedures conducted from January 2013 to June 2017 were collected. One-catheter strategy (TIG I catheter) and two-catheter strategy (left and right Judkins catheters) were compared. The volume of iodinated contrast administered was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints included radial spasm, procedural duration (fluoroscopy time) and exposure to ionizing radiation (dose-area product and air kerma). Direct economic costs were also evaluated. For statistical analyses, two-tailed p-values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: From a total of 1,953 procedures in 1,829 patients, 252 procedures were assigned to one-catheter strategy and 1,701 procedures to two-catheter strategy. There were no differences in baseline characteristics between the groups. One-catheter strategy required less iodinated contrast [primary endpoint; (60-105)-mL vs. 92 (64-120)-mL; p < 0.001] than the two-catheter strategy. Also, the one-catheter group presented less radial spasm (5.2% vs. 9.3%, p = 0.022) and shorter fluoroscopy time [3.9 (2.2-8.0)-min vs. 4.8 (2.9-8.3)-min, p = 0.001] and saved costs [149 (140-160)-/procedure vs. 171 (160-183)-/procedure; p < 0.001]. No differences in dose-area product and air kerma were detected between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: One-catheter strategy, with TIG I catheter, improves coronary catheterization performance and reduces economic costs compared to traditional two-catheter strategy in patients referred for coronary angiography.
Assuntos
Cateteres Cardíacos/economia , Angiografia Coronária/métodos , Idoso , Cateterismo Cardíaco/economia , Cateterismo Cardíaco/instrumentação , Cateterismo Cardíaco/métodos , Meios de Contraste , Angiografia Coronária/economia , Angiografia Coronária/instrumentação , Redução de Custos/economia , Feminino , Fluoroscopia , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Isquemia Miocárdica/diagnóstico por imagem , Artéria Radial/diagnóstico por imagem , Doses de Radiação , Radiação Ionizante , Estudos Retrospectivos , Espasmo , Fatores de TempoRESUMO
Abstract Background: Coronary angiography with two catheters is the traditional strategy for diagnostic coronary procedures. TIG I catheter permits to cannulate both coronary arteries, avoiding exchanging catheters during coronary angiography by transradial access. Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of one-catheter strategy, by avoiding catheter exchange, on coronary catheterization performance and economic costs. Methods: Transradial coronary diagnostic procedures conducted from January 2013 to June 2017 were collected. One-catheter strategy (TIG I catheter) and two-catheter strategy (left and right Judkins catheters) were compared. The volume of iodinated contrast administered was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints included radial spasm, procedural duration (fluoroscopy time) and exposure to ionizing radiation (dose-area product and air kerma). Direct economic costs were also evaluated. For statistical analyses, two-tailed p-values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: From a total of 1,953 procedures in 1,829 patients, 252 procedures were assigned to one-catheter strategy and 1,701 procedures to two-catheter strategy. There were no differences in baseline characteristics between the groups. One-catheter strategy required less iodinated contrast [primary endpoint; (60-105)-mL vs. 92 (64-120)-mL; p < 0.001] than the two-catheter strategy. Also, the one-catheter group presented less radial spasm (5.2% vs. 9.3%, p = 0.022) and shorter fluoroscopy time [3.9 (2.2-8.0)-min vs. 4.8 (2.9-8.3)-min, p = 0.001] and saved costs [149 (140-160)-€/procedure vs. 171 (160-183)-€/procedure; p < 0.001]. No differences in dose-area product and air kerma were detected between the groups. Conclusions: One-catheter strategy, with TIG I catheter, improves coronary catheterization performance and reduces economic costs compared to traditional two-catheter strategy in patients referred for coronary angiography.
Resumo Fundamento: A cineangiocoronariografia com dois cateteres é a estratégia tradicional para procedimentos coronarianos de diagnóstico. O cateter TIG I permite canular ambas as artérias coronárias, evitando a troca de cateteres durante a cineangiocoronariografia por acesso transradial. Objetivo: O objetivo deste estudo é avaliar o impacto da estratégia de um cateter, evitando a troca de cateter, no desempenho da coronariografia por cateterismo e nos seus custos econômicos. Métodos: Foram coletados os procedimentos diagnósticos coronarianos transradiais realizados entre janeiro de 2013 e junho de 2017. A estratégia de um cateter (cateter TIG I) e a estratégia de dois cateteres (cateteres coronários direito e esquerdo de Judkins) foram comparadas. O volume de contraste iodado administrado foi o endpoint primário. Os endpoints secundários eram espasmo radial, duração do procedimento (tempo de fluoroscopia) e exposição a radiações ionizantes (produto dose-área e kerma no ar). Os custos econômicos diretos também foram avaliados. Para as análises estatísticas, valores de p < 0,05 bicaudais foram considerados estatisticamente significativos. Resultados: De um total de 1.953 procedimentos em 1.829 pacientes, 252 procedimentos foram atribuídos à estratégia de um cateter e 1.701 procedimentos à estratégia de dois cateteres. Não houve diferenças nas características basais entre os grupos. A estratégia de um cateter exigiu menos contraste iodado [endpoint primário; (60-105) -mL vs. 92 (64-120) -mL; p < 0,001] em comparação com a estratégia de dois cateteres. Além disso, o grupo da estratégia de um cateter apresentou menos espasmo radial (5,2% vs. 9,3%, p = 0,022) e menor tempo de fluoroscopia [3,9 (2,2-8,0) -min vs. 4,8 (2,9-8,3) -min, p = 0,001] e economia de custos [149 (140-160)-€/procedimento vs. 171 (160-183) -€/procedimento; p < 0,001]. Não foram detectadas diferenças no produto dose-área e kerma no ar entre os grupos. Conclusões: A estratégia de um cateter, com cateter TIG I, melhora o desempenho da coronariografia por cateterismo e reduz os custos econômicos em comparação com a estratégia tradicional de dois cateteres em pacientes encaminhados para cineangiocoronariografia.
Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Angiografia Coronária/métodos , Cateteres Cardíacos/economia , Doses de Radiação , Radiação Ionizante , Espasmo , Fatores de Tempo , Fluoroscopia , Cateterismo Cardíaco/economia , Cateterismo Cardíaco/instrumentação , Cateterismo Cardíaco/métodos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Redução de Custos/economia , Angiografia Coronária/economia , Angiografia Coronária/instrumentação , Artéria Radial/diagnóstico por imagem , Isquemia Miocárdica/diagnóstico por imagem , Meios de ContrasteRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Atrial fibrillation (AFib) ablation is alternative treatment to drugs. Literature suggests that use of contact force (CF) catheter with higher power for short periods is effective and safe. METHODS/RESULTS: Retrospectively analyzed 76 patients undergoing the first ablation. Third five patients-group A: 27 (77%) paroxysmal AFib (PAFib) and 8 (23%) persistent AFib (PersAFib) who underwent ablation at the power of 30 W-17 mL/minute flow with a CF of 10-30 g for 30 seconds. Fourty one patients-group B: 28 (68.3%) PAFib and 13 (31.70%) PersAFib underwent ablation using 45 W on posterior wall with CF of 8/15 g, as well as 50-W anterior wall with CF of 10/20 g-35 mL/minute flow for 6 seconds. Pulmonary vein isolation in both groups and ablated. For patients not in the sinus, we performed cardioversion before ablation. No complications. Group A: Left atrial time 110 ± 29 minutes, total 148 ± 33.6 minutes, radiofrequency time (RF) 4558 ± 1998 seconds, X-ray 8.5 ± 3.5 minutes, and elevation of esophageal temperature (ET) in 26 (74.3%). group B: Left atrial time 70.7 ± 18.5 minutes ( P < .00001), total 106 ± 23 minutes ( P < .00001), RF 1909 ± 675.8 seconds ( P < .00001), X-ray 8.8 ± 6.6 minutes ( P = .221) and elevation of ET in 21 (51.20% - P = .0578). In 6 and 12 months follow-up, we had 9 (25.71%) and 11 (31.42%) recurrences in group A and 5 (12.19%) and 7 (17.07%) in group B ( P = .231 at 6 and P = .14 at 12 months), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: HPSD was safe, useful, and efficient compared with CT, and reduced procedural time and total RF time. HPSD may reduce esophageal injury because of lower heating rate and it may reduce the recurrence of atrial tachyarrythmias.