Alcohol septal ablation (ASA) was first performed in 1994 as an alternative to septal myectomy in patients with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy and symptoms refractory to optimal medical therapy. Patient selection is based on careful individual evaluation of symptoms, associated comorbidities, and echocardiographic and angiographic parameters. Studies have shown that the clinical success of ASA in patients with provocable obstruction is comparable to that in patients with obstruction at rest. The use of myocardial contrast echocardiography as an adjunct to the procedure has yielded higher success rates despite lower infarct sizes, in turn reducing complication rates. The principal complication of the procedure is atrioventricular block, for which permanent pacing is required in approximately 10% of patients. Evidence from non-randomized trials and meta-analyses indicates that ASA is similar to myectomy with respect to hemodynamic and functional improvement and mortality. Surgery is often preferred in younger patients and in those with severe hypertrophy of the septum (e.g., ≥30 mm). ASA is usually selected for elderly patients and those with comorbid conditions that increase the risk of surgery.
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access
Maron MS et al (2006) Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is predominantly a disease of left ventricular outflow tract obstruction. Circulation 114(21):2232–2239PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sigwart U (1995) Non-surgical myocardial reduction for hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy. Lancet 346(8969):211–214PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorajja P et al (2008) Outcome of alcohol septal ablation for obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Circulation 118(2):131–139PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alam M, Dokainish H, Lakkis N (2006) Alcohol septal ablation for hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy: a systematic review of published studies. J Interv Cardiol 19(4):319–327PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gersh BJ et al (2011) ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation 2011;124(24):2761–96Google Scholar
Faber L, Seggewiss H, Gleichmann U (1998) Percutaneous transluminal septal myocardial ablation in hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy: results with respect to intraprocedural myocardial contrast echocardiography. Circulation 98(22):2415–2421PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhn H et al (2008) Percutaneous septal ablation of septal hypertrophy in hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy. Clin Res Cardiol 97(4):234–243PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrenz T et al (2005) Transcoronary ablation of septal hypertrophy does not alter ICD intervention rates in high risk patients with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 28(4):295–300PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagueh SF et al (2001) Comparison of ethanol septal reduction therapy with surgical myectomy for the treatment of hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy. J Am Coll Cardiol 38(6):1701–1706PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fifer MA (2007) Controversies in cardiovascular medicine. Most fully informed patients choose septal ablation over septal myectomy. Circulation 116(2):207–216; discussion 216PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar