Feasibility and safety of cavotricuspid isthmus ablation using exclusive intracardiac echocardiography guidance: a proof-of-concept, observational trial

IntroductionCatheter ablation is the preferred treatment for typical atrial flutter (AFl), but it can be challenging due to anatomical abnormalities. The use of 3D electroanatomical mapping systems (EAMS) has reduced fluoroscopy exposure during AFl ablation. Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) has also shown benefits in reducing radiation exposure during AFl ablation. However, there is a lack of evidence on the feasibility of ICE-guided, zero-fluoroscopy AFl ablation without the use of EAMS.MethodsIn this prospective study, we enrolled 80 patients with CTI-dependent AFl. The first 40 patients underwent standard fluoroscopy + ICE-guided ablation (Standard ICE group), while the other 40 patients underwent zero-fluoroscopy ablation using only ICE (Zero ICE group). Procedure outcomes, including acute success, procedure time, fluoroscopy time, radiation dose, and complications, were compared between the groups.ResultsThe acute success rate was 100% in both groups. Out of the 40 cases, the zero-fluoroscopy strategy was successfully implemented in 39 cases (97.5%) in the Zero ICE group. There were no significant differences in procedure time [55.5 (46.5; 66.8) min vs. 51.5 (44.0; 65.5), p = 0.50] and puncture to first ablation time [18 (13.5; 23) min vs. 19 (15; 23.5) min, p = 0.50] between the groups. The Zero ICE group had significantly lower fluoroscopy time [57 (36.3; 90) sec vs. 0 (0; 0) sec, p < 0.001] and dose [3.17 (2.27; 5.63) mGy vs. 0 (0; 0) mGy, p < 0.001] compared to the Standard ICE group. Total ablation time was longer in the Standard ICE group [597 (447; 908) sec vs. 430 (260; 750), p = 0.02], but total ablation energy [22,458 (14,836; 31,116) Ws vs. 17,043 (10,533; 29,302) Ws, p = 0.10] did not differ significantly. First-pass bidirectional conduction block of the CTI and acute reconnection rates were similar between the groups. No complications or recurrences were observed during the follow-up period.ConclusionOur study suggests that zero-fluoroscopy CTI ablation guided solely by ICE for AFl is feasible and safe. Further investigation is warranted for broader validation

Zero fluoroscopy catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

IntroductionCatheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most frequently performed cardiac ablation procedure worldwide. The majority of ablations can now be performed safely with minimal radiation exposure or even without the use of fluoroscopy, thanks to advances in 3-dimensional electroanatomical mapping systems and/or intracardiac echocardiography. The aim of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness of zero fluoroscopy (ZF) versus non-zero fluoroscopy (NZF) strategies for AF ablation procedures.MethodsElectronic databases were searched and systematically reviewed for studies comparing procedural parameters and outcomes of ZF vs. NZF approaches in patients undergoing catheter ablation for AF. We used a random-effects model to derive the mean difference (MD) and risk ratios (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI).ResultsOur meta-analysis included seven studies comprising 1,593 patients. The ZF approach was found to be feasible in 95.1% of patients. Compared to the NZF approach, the ZF approach significantly reduced procedure time [mean difference (MD): −9.11 min (95% CI: −12.93 to −5.30 min; p < 0.01)], fluoroscopy time [MD: −5.21 min (95% CI: −5.51 to −4.91 min; p < 0.01)], and fluoroscopy dose [MD: −3.96 mGy (95% CI: −4.27 to −3.64; p < 0.01)]. However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of total ablation time [MD: −104.26 s (95% CI: −183.37 to −25.14; p = 0.12)]. Furthermore, there was no significant difference in the acute [risk ratio (RR): 1.01, 95% CI: 1.00–1.02; p = 0.72] and long-term success rates (RR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.90–1.03; p = 0.56) between the ZF and NZF methods. The complication rate was 2.76% in the entire study population and did not differ between the groups (RR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.41–2.15; p = 0.89).ConclusionThe ZF approach is a feasible method for AF ablation procedures. It significantly reduces procedure time and radiation exposure without compromising the acute and long-term success rates or complication rates

The Influence of Different Multipolar Mapping Catheter Types on Procedural Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Pulmonary Vein Isolation for Atrial Fibrillation

(1) Background: During pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for atrial fibrillation (AF), multipolar mapping catheters (MMC) are often used. We aimed to compare the procedural outcomes of two MMCs, specifically a circular-shaped and a five-spline-shaped MMC. (2) Methods: We enrolled 70 consecutive patients in our prospective, observational trial undergoing PVI procedures for paroxysmal AF. The initial 35 patients underwent PVI procedures with circular-shaped MMC guidance (Lasso Group), and the procedures for the latter 35 cases were performed using five-spline-shaped MMC (PentaRay Group). (3) Results: No significant differences were identified between the two groups in total procedure time (80.2 ± 17.7 min vs. 75.7 ± 14.8 min, p = 0.13), time from femoral vein puncture to the initiation of the mapping (31.2 ± 7 min vs. 28.9 ± 6.8, p = 0.80), mapping time (8 (6; 13) min vs. 9 (6.5; 10.5) min, p = 0.73), duration between the first and last ablation (32 (30; 36) min vs. 33 (26; 40) min, p = 0.52), validation time (3 (2; 4) min vs. 3 (1; 5) min, p = 0.46), first pass success rates (89% vs. 91%, p = 0.71), left atrial dwelling time (46 (37; 53) min vs. 45 (36.5; 53) min, p = 0.56), fluoroscopy data (time: 150 ± 71 s vs. 143 ± 56 s, p = 0.14; dose: 6.7 ± 4 mGy vs. 7.4 ± 4.4 mGy, p = 0.90), total ablation time (1187 (1063; 1534) s vs. 1150.5 (1053; 1393.5) s, p = 0.49), the number of ablations (78 (73; 93) vs. 83 (71.3; 92.8), p = 0.60), and total ablation energy (52,300 (47,265; 66,804) J vs. 49,666 (46,395; 56,502) J, p = 0.35). (4) Conclusions: This study finds comparable procedural outcomes bet-ween circular-shaped and five-spline-shaped MMCs for PVI in paroxysmal AF, supporting their interchangeability in clinical practice for anatomical mapping

Table2_Feasibility and safety of cavotricuspid isthmus ablation using exclusive intracardiac echocardiography guidance: a proof-of-concept, observational trial.docx

IntroductionCatheter ablation is the preferred treatment for typical atrial flutter (AFl), but it can be challenging due to anatomical abnormalities. The use of 3D electroanatomical mapping systems (EAMS) has reduced fluoroscopy exposure during AFl ablation. Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) has also shown benefits in reducing radiation exposure during AFl ablation. However, there is a lack of evidence on the feasibility of ICE-guided, zero-fluoroscopy AFl ablation without the use of EAMS.MethodsIn this prospective study, we enrolled 80 patients with CTI-dependent AFl. The first 40 patients underwent standard fluoroscopy + ICE-guided ablation (Standard ICE group), while the other 40 patients underwent zero-fluoroscopy ablation using only ICE (Zero ICE group). Procedure outcomes, including acute success, procedure time, fluoroscopy time, radiation dose, and complications, were compared between the groups.ResultsThe acute success rate was 100% in both groups. Out of the 40 cases, the zero-fluoroscopy strategy was successfully implemented in 39 cases (97.5%) in the Zero ICE group. There were no significant differences in procedure time [55.5 (46.5; 66.8) min vs. 51.5 (44.0; 65.5), p = 0.50] and puncture to first ablation time [18 (13.5; 23) min vs. 19 (15; 23.5) min, p = 0.50] between the groups. The Zero ICE group had significantly lower fluoroscopy time [57 (36.3; 90) sec vs. 0 (0; 0) sec, p ConclusionOur study suggests that zero-fluoroscopy CTI ablation guided solely by ICE for AFl is feasible and safe. Further investigation is warranted for broader validation.</p

Table1_Feasibility and safety of cavotricuspid isthmus ablation using exclusive intracardiac echocardiography guidance: a proof-of-concept, observational trial.docx

IntroductionCatheter ablation is the preferred treatment for typical atrial flutter (AFl), but it can be challenging due to anatomical abnormalities. The use of 3D electroanatomical mapping systems (EAMS) has reduced fluoroscopy exposure during AFl ablation. Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) has also shown benefits in reducing radiation exposure during AFl ablation. However, there is a lack of evidence on the feasibility of ICE-guided, zero-fluoroscopy AFl ablation without the use of EAMS.MethodsIn this prospective study, we enrolled 80 patients with CTI-dependent AFl. The first 40 patients underwent standard fluoroscopy + ICE-guided ablation (Standard ICE group), while the other 40 patients underwent zero-fluoroscopy ablation using only ICE (Zero ICE group). Procedure outcomes, including acute success, procedure time, fluoroscopy time, radiation dose, and complications, were compared between the groups.ResultsThe acute success rate was 100% in both groups. Out of the 40 cases, the zero-fluoroscopy strategy was successfully implemented in 39 cases (97.5%) in the Zero ICE group. There were no significant differences in procedure time [55.5 (46.5; 66.8) min vs. 51.5 (44.0; 65.5), p = 0.50] and puncture to first ablation time [18 (13.5; 23) min vs. 19 (15; 23.5) min, p = 0.50] between the groups. The Zero ICE group had significantly lower fluoroscopy time [57 (36.3; 90) sec vs. 0 (0; 0) sec, p ConclusionOur study suggests that zero-fluoroscopy CTI ablation guided solely by ICE for AFl is feasible and safe. Further investigation is warranted for broader validation.</p

Video1_Feasibility and safety of cavotricuspid isthmus ablation using exclusive intracardiac echocardiography guidance: a proof-of-concept, observational trial.avi

IntroductionCatheter ablation is the preferred treatment for typical atrial flutter (AFl), but it can be challenging due to anatomical abnormalities. The use of 3D electroanatomical mapping systems (EAMS) has reduced fluoroscopy exposure during AFl ablation. Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) has also shown benefits in reducing radiation exposure during AFl ablation. However, there is a lack of evidence on the feasibility of ICE-guided, zero-fluoroscopy AFl ablation without the use of EAMS.MethodsIn this prospective study, we enrolled 80 patients with CTI-dependent AFl. The first 40 patients underwent standard fluoroscopy + ICE-guided ablation (Standard ICE group), while the other 40 patients underwent zero-fluoroscopy ablation using only ICE (Zero ICE group). Procedure outcomes, including acute success, procedure time, fluoroscopy time, radiation dose, and complications, were compared between the groups.ResultsThe acute success rate was 100% in both groups. Out of the 40 cases, the zero-fluoroscopy strategy was successfully implemented in 39 cases (97.5%) in the Zero ICE group. There were no significant differences in procedure time [55.5 (46.5; 66.8) min vs. 51.5 (44.0; 65.5), p = 0.50] and puncture to first ablation time [18 (13.5; 23) min vs. 19 (15; 23.5) min, p = 0.50] between the groups. The Zero ICE group had significantly lower fluoroscopy time [57 (36.3; 90) sec vs. 0 (0; 0) sec, p ConclusionOur study suggests that zero-fluoroscopy CTI ablation guided solely by ICE for AFl is feasible and safe. Further investigation is warranted for broader validation.</p