af with mitral stenosis and rfa

[mbhakta]

I'm suffering from af with mitral stenosis. now I am in af taking diltiazem 60x3. my dr again suggested me for rfa radio frequency ablation. hr told me that chances of success is 60:40. but other cardiologists warn me that tha for left atrium is more risky and had complications. I am really confused.

af episodes now has become weekly event. due to diltiazem amiodarone heart rate comes to 70, buy still I feel kind of pounding or bobbling in my chest. don't know why. one junior dr see my ecg told that it is normal ecg with hr 71. he said that uneasiness might be due to diltiazem.

if any one can suggest or share experience of tha or af with mitral stenosis, it will be useful for me.

thanks all

wishing good day

[CDreamer]

Unfortunately as few of us are medically trained we would be unable to advise.

RFA is an invasive procedure & carries risks which will be complicated by your mitral stenosis so you must be advised by your consultant. RFA is less successful as we age and is not a cure and when successful may return in a few years as you heal. It can also take a long time to recover from the procedure - much, much longer than doctors will tell you.

AF feels uncomfortable & can be symptomatic but as RFA is done to relieve symptoms and as it doesn’t prolong life but improve quality of life, I would do your research & then consider this question - would I be better with taking the risks for the possible benefits - or stay as I am?

I’ve had 2 ablations 1st made me a lot worse 2nd gave me 3 years AF free but exacerbated an unknown, underlying condition which was far more disabling than AF - but I’m still glad I went for RFA.

Best wishes CD

[mbhakta in reply to CDreamer]

very nice to hear you from. valuable experience u shared. I want to know from patients like me. though my regular cardiologist is of view that first time it would be 60 percent success and second time it would as he is assuring me complete success. but no other cardiologist is of the same or similar views. of course dr's view will be final but here we are to share and enrich our experience.

I am 56 in mild mitral stenosis. seeing posts here about successful ablation, I hope that there may someone in cardiac condition.

thanks CDreamer.

[CDreamer in reply to mbhakta]

Just ask what they mean by ‘complete success’. The wounds caused by the burning may heal - which is why the AF returns several years later.

[mbhakta in reply to CDreamer]

that seems very likely. I've read somewhere in an article on different types of ablations. the writer, of course, specialist in this field, has written that in comparison of burning the tissues of atrium, cold treatment to them are more stable and durable. so I guess you're right. thanks CDreamer

[CDreamer in reply to mbhakta]

Cryoablation uses a balloon filled Gas which freezes the tissue around the pulmonary veins in one go - making it a much shorter procedure. Trouble is that many people find they need to have a RFA after to ‘touch up’ the tiny areas the balloon missed. There are others, like me, who cannot have cryoablation simply because I have 3 instead of 4 pulmonary veins as 2 are co-joined. The efficacy also depends upon the path the rogue electrical signals originate from - which is not known until 3D mapping of the heart can be done or during the procedure.

Definately worth discussing if you might be a suitable candidate as cryoablation can be as quick as 1-2 hours whereas both my ablations were 7+ Hours and that’s a long time to have to lie flat on a hard surface not moving - even though you will be sedated.

[mbhakta in reply to CDreamer]

oh, so well-informed you are. thanks. have u any idea about success rate of the cryo if it suits one