AIMS: This study aimed to evaluate feasibility and safety as well as 1-year clinical outcome of pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) using a unique radiofrequency ablation catheter ("Thermocool SmartTouch SurroundFlow"; STSF) incorporating both, contact force (CF) sensing technology and enhanced tip irrigation with 56 holes, in one device. METHODS: A total of 110 patients suffering from drug-refractory atrial fibrillation underwent wide area circumferential PVI using either the STSF ablation catheter (75 consecutive patients, study group) or a CF catheter with conventional tip irrigation ("Thermocool SmartTouch", 35 consecutive patients, control group). For each ablation lesion, a target CF of ≥ 10-39 g and a force time integral (FTI) of > 400 g s was targeted. RESULTS: Acute PVI was achieved in all patients with target CF obtained in > 85% of ablation points when using either device. Mean procedure time (131.3 ± 33.7 min in the study group vs. 133.0 ± 42.0 min in the control group; p = 0.99), mean fluoroscopy time (14.0 ± 6 vs. 13.5 ± 6.6 min; p = 0.56) and total ablation time were not significantly different (1751.0 ± 394.0 vs. 1604.6 ± 287.8 s; p = 0.2). However, there was a marked reduction in total irrigation fluid delivery by 51.7% (265.52 ± 64.4 vs. 539.6 ± 118.2 ml; p < 0.01). The Kaplan-Meier estimate 12-month arrhythmia-free survival after the index procedure following a 3-month blanking period was 79.9% (95% CI 70.4%, 90.4%) for the study group and 66.7% for the control group (95% CI 50.2%, 88.5%). This finding did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.18). Major complications occurred in 2/75 patients (2.7%; one pericardial tamponade and one transient ischemic attack) in the study group and no patient in the control group (p = 18). CONCLUSION: PVI using the STSF catheter is safe and effective and results in beneficial 1-year clinical outcome. The improved tip irrigation leads to a significant reduction in procedural fluid burden.
AIMS: This study aimed to evaluate feasibility and safety as well as 1-year clinical outcome of pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) using a unique radiofrequency ablation catheter ("Thermocool SmartTouch SurroundFlow"; STSF) incorporating both, contact force (CF) sensing technology and enhanced tip irrigation with 56 holes, in one device. METHODS: A total of 110 patients suffering from drug-refractory atrial fibrillation underwent wide area circumferential PVI using either the STSF ablation catheter (75 consecutive patients, study group) or a CF catheter with conventional tip irrigation ("Thermocool SmartTouch", 35 consecutive patients, control group). For each ablation lesion, a target CF of ≥ 10-39 g and a force time integral (FTI) of > 400 g s was targeted. RESULTS: Acute PVI was achieved in all patients with target CF obtained in > 85% of ablation points when using either device. Mean procedure time (131.3 ± 33.7 min in the study group vs. 133.0 ± 42.0 min in the control group; p = 0.99), mean fluoroscopy time (14.0 ± 6 vs. 13.5 ± 6.6 min; p = 0.56) and total ablation time were not significantly different (1751.0 ± 394.0 vs. 1604.6 ± 287.8 s; p = 0.2). However, there was a marked reduction in total irrigation fluid delivery by 51.7% (265.52 ± 64.4 vs. 539.6 ± 118.2 ml; p < 0.01). The Kaplan-Meier estimate 12-month arrhythmia-free survival after the index procedure following a 3-month blanking period was 79.9% (95% CI 70.4%, 90.4%) for the study group and 66.7% for the control group (95% CI 50.2%, 88.5%). This finding did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.18). Major complications occurred in 2/75 patients (2.7%; one pericardial tamponade and one transient ischemic attack) in the study group and no patient in the control group (p = 18). CONCLUSION: PVI using the STSF catheter is safe and effective and results in beneficial 1-year clinical outcome. The improved tip irrigation leads to a significant reduction in procedural fluid burden.
Entities:
Keywords:
Atrial fibrillation; Catheter ablation; Contact force
Authors: Andrea Natale; Vivek Y Reddy; George Monir; David J Wilber; Bruce D Lindsay; H Thomas McElderry; Charan Kantipudi; Moussa C Mansour; Daniel P Melby; Douglas L Packer; Hiroshi Nakagawa; Baohui Zhang; Robert B Stagg; Lee Ming Boo; Francis E Marchlinski Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2014-08-19 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Vivek Y Reddy; Dipen Shah; Josef Kautzner; Boris Schmidt; Nadir Saoudi; Claudia Herrera; Pierre Jaïs; Gerhard Hindricks; Petr Peichl; Aude Yulzari; Hendrik Lambert; Petr Neuzil; Andrea Natale; Karl-Heinz Kuck Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2012-07-20 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Steven E Williams; James Harrison; Henry Chubb; Lars Ølgaard Bloch; Niels Peter Andersen; Høgni Dam; Rashed Karim; John Whitaker; Jaswinder Gill; Michael Cooklin; C Aldo Rinaldi; Kawal Rhode; Matthew Wright; Tobias Schaeffter; Won Yong Kim; Henrik Jensen; Reza Razavi; Mark D O'Neill Journal: JACC Clin Electrophysiol Date: 2015-08-20
Authors: Thomas J Buist; Ahmet Adiyaman; Jaap Jan J Smit; Anand R Ramdat Misier; Arif Elvan Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2018-02-06 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Saumil R Oza; Tina D Hunter; Angelo B Biviano; Gopi Dandamudi; Bengt Herweg; Anshul M Patel; Scott J Pollak; Huijian Wang; Robert S Fishel Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2014-04-09
Authors: Tobias Plenge; Jan-Hendrik van den Bruck; Jakob Lüker; Arian Sultan; Daniel Steven Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2019-07-19 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Thomas Fink; Andreas Metzner; Stephan Willems; Lars Eckardt; Hüseyin Ince; Johannes Brachmann; Stefan G Spitzer; Thomas Deneke; Claus Schmitt; Matthias Hochadel; Jochen Senges; Andreas Rillig Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2019-04-05 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Andrea Natale; George Monir; Anshul M Patel; Robert S Fishel; Francis E Marchlinski; M Craig Delaughter; Charles A Athill; Daniel P Melby; Mario D Gonzalez; Ramesh Hariharan; Brett Gidney; Tiffany Tan; Larry A Chinitz Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2020-05-27 Impact factor: 1.900