Literature DB >> 30556609

A multicentered evaluation of ablation at higher power guided by ablation index: Establishing ablation targets for pulmonary vein isolation.

Gurpreet Dhillon1, Syed Ahsan1, Shohreh Honarbakhsh1, Wei Lim1, Marco Baca1, Adam Graham1, Neil Srinivasan1, Vinit Sawhney1, Simon Sporton1, Richard J Schilling1, Anthony Chow1, Matthew Ginks2, Manav Sohal3,4, Mark M Gallagher3,4, Ross J Hunter1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) using high power delivered by SmartTouch Surround Flow (STSF) catheters guided by ablation index (AI) was evaluated in a multicenter registry.
METHODS: Patients with paroxysmal AF underwent PVI with STSF catheters using 30 W on the posterior wall and 40 W elsewhere. AI targets were 350 posterior walls and 450 elsewhere. Procedures were compared with controls using conventionally irrigated contact force-sensing catheters using conventional powers (25 W posterior wall and 30 W elsewhere) guided by force-time integral (no agreed targets). The waiting period of 30 minutes was observed before adenosine administration to assess acute pulmonary vein (PV) reconnection.
RESULTS: One hundred patients from four centers were included: 50 patients in the high power ablation index (HPAI) group and 50 controls. Procedure time was 22% shorter in the HPAI group (156 [133.8-179] vs 199 [178.5-227] minutes; P < 0.001). Duration of the radiofrequency application was 37% shorter in the HPAI group (27.2 [21.5-35.8] vs 43.2 [35.1-52.1] minutes; P < 0.001). Acute PV reconnection was reduced (28 of 200 [14%] vs 48 of 200 [24%] veins; P = 0.015). Reconnection was predicted by a largest interlesion distance greater than 6 mm, a lesion with impedance drop less than 2.5 Ω, contact force less than 6 g, or less than 68% of the regional AI target (all P < 0.001). Freedom from atrial arrhythmia at 1 year off antiarrhythmic drugs after a single procedure was 78% in the HPAI group vs 64% in the control group ( P = 0.186).
CONCLUSION: High-powered ablation guided by AI was safe and led to shorter procedure times with reduced acute PV reconnection compared with conventional ablation.
© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ablation index; atrial fibrillation; pulmonary vein isolation

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30556609     DOI: 10.1111/jce.13813

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol        ISSN: 1045-3873


  22 in total

1.  Meta-analysis comparing outcomes of high-power short-duration and low-power long-duration radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation.

Authors:  Dibbendhu Khanra; Abdul Hamid; Saurabh Deshpande; Anindya Mukherjee; Sanjiv Petkar; Mohammad Saeed; Indranill Basu-Ray
Journal:  Anatol J Cardiol       Date:  2022-01       Impact factor: 1.596

2.  Two years after pulmonary vein isolation guided by ablation index-a multicenter study.

Authors:  Pedro A Sousa; Luís Puga; Luís Adão; João Primo; Ziad Khoueiry; Ana Lebreiro; Paulo Fonseca; Philippe Lagrange; Luís Elvas; Lino Gonçalves
Journal:  J Arrhythm       Date:  2022-03-15

3.  Gains in Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Using a Standardized Workflow to Optimize Contact Force Technologies.

Authors:  Jose Osorio; Tina D Hunter; Rosemary S Bubien; Anil Rajendra; Joaquin Arciniegas; Gustavo Morales
Journal:  J Atr Fibrillation       Date:  2018-12-31

4.  Impact of local left atrial wall thickness on the incidence of acute pulmonary vein reconnection after Ablation Index-guided atrial fibrillation ablation.

Authors:  Mark J Mulder; Michiel J B Kemme; Amaya M D Hagen; Luuk H G A Hopman; Peter M van de Ven; Herbert A Hauer; Giovanni J M Tahapary; Marco J W Götte; Albert C van Rossum; Cornelis P Allaart
Journal:  Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc       Date:  2020-07-03

5.  Safety and Efficacy of High Power Shorter Duration Ablation Guided by Ablation Index or Lesion Size Index in Atrial Fibrillation Ablation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Xing Liu; Chun Gui; Weiming Wen; Yan He; Weiran Dai; Guoqiang Zhong
Journal:  J Interv Cardiol       Date:  2021-06-02       Impact factor: 2.279

6.  Characterizing clinical outcomes and factors associated with conduction gaps in VISITAG SURPOINT-guided catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation.

Authors:  Koichi Inoue; Nobuaki Tanaka; Yusuke Ikada; Akihiro Mizutani; Kazuhiko Yamamoto; Hana Matsuhira; Shinichi Harada; Masato Okada; Katsuomi Iwakura; Kenshi Fujii
Journal:  J Arrhythm       Date:  2021-05-07

7.  Radiofrequency ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in a patient with dextrocardia and interruption of the inferior vena cava: a case report.

Authors:  Xiaofeng Hu; Shaohui Wu; Mu Qin; Weifeng Jiang; Xu Liu
Journal:  Eur Heart J Case Rep       Date:  2021-05-19

8.  Comparison of high-power and conventional-power radiofrequency energy deliveries in pulmonary vein isolation using unipolar signal modification as a local endpoint.

Authors:  Koichiro Ejima; Satoshi Higuchi; Kyoichiro Yazaki; Shohei Kataoka; Daigo Yagishita; Miwa Kanai; Morio Shoda; Nobuhisa Hagiwara
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol       Date:  2020-05-15

9.  Safety and efficacy of the ThermoCool SmartTouch SurroundFlow catheter for atrial fibrillation ablation: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Chao-Feng Chen; Xiao-Fei Gao; Mei-Jun Liu; Chao-Lun Jin; Yi-Zhou Xu
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2019-11-19       Impact factor: 2.882

10.  Comparison of high-power short-duration and low-power long-duration radiofrequency ablation for treating atrial fibrillation: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Chao-Feng Chen; Jing Wu; Chao-Lun Jin; Mei-Jun Liu; Yi-Zhou Xu
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2020-10-27       Impact factor: 2.882

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.