The impact of current strategy using intracardiac echocardiography, lesion index, and minimum substrate ablation on clinical outcomes after catheter ablation procedure for atrial fibrillation

Purpose We developed the intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) technique to minimize radiation exposure and other recent technology during ablation procedure for atrial fibrillation (AF). The aim of this study was to validate the impact of the current strategy using the recent technology for AF ablati...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of arrhythmia 2021-10, Vol.37 (5), p.1278-1286
Hauptverfasser: Kawaji, Tetsuma, Aizawa, Takanori, Hojo, Shun, Kushiyama, Akihiro, Yaku, Hidenori, Nakatsuma, Kenji, Kaneda, Kazuhisa, Kato, Masashi, Yokomatsu, Takafumi, Miki, Shinji
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Purpose We developed the intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) technique to minimize radiation exposure and other recent technology during ablation procedure for atrial fibrillation (AF). The aim of this study was to validate the impact of the current strategy using the recent technology for AF ablation on outcomes after procedure. Methods We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the current strategy in consecutive set of patients undergoing first‐time ablation for AF (N = 233) compared with the conventional strategy in earlier consecutive set of patients (N = 223). The current strategy included the technique of ICE to reduce radiation exposure, Ablation Index®‐guided pulmonary veins isolation, and minimum substrate ablation targeting only for induced AF. Outcome measures were radiation exposure, procedure time, in‐hospital adverse outcomes, and event‐free survival from tachyarrhythmias. Results Puncture‐to‐ablation time was slightly, but significantly increased in the current strategy than in the conventional strategy (48.0 minutes vs 44.7 minutes, P = .002), although total procedure time was significantly decreased in the current strategy (143.9 minutes vs 156.9 minutes, P 
ISSN:1880-4276
1883-2148
DOI:10.1002/joa3.12611