Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Fluoroscopy-free Atrial Transseptal Puncture.
McCauley, Mark D; Patel, Nisarg; Greenberg, Scott J; Molina-Razavi, Joanna E; Safavi-Naeini, Payam; Razavi, Mehdi.
Afiliación
  • McCauley MD; Department of Medicine, Section of Cardiology, The University of Illinois at Chicago and the Jesse Brown VA Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, US.
  • Patel N; The Wright Center, Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, US.
  • Greenberg SJ; The Texas Heart Institute and Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, US.
  • Molina-Razavi JE; The Texas Heart Institute and Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, US.
  • Safavi-Naeini P; The Texas Heart Institute and Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, US.
  • Razavi M; The Texas Heart Institute and Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, US.
Eur J Arrhythm Electrophysiol ; 2(2): 57-61, 2016.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29862050
INTRODUCTION: Fluoroscopy is traditionally used in atrial transseptal puncture (TSP); however fluoroscopy exposes patient and physician to excess radiation. Here, we describe a feasibility study of a zero-fluoroscopy transseptal puncture (ZFTSP) technique utilising electroanatomical mapping (EAM) and intracardiac echo (ICE) in a small case series of patients undergoing ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF). We then compare this technique to other established ZFTSP techniques for paroxysmal AF ablation. METHODS: Seven patients received ZFTSP. An Acunav™ ICE catheter (Biosense Webster Inc., California, US) was placed in the right atrium, then an Agilis™ sheath (St. Jude Medical, Saint Paul, Minnesota, US) was established into the inferior vena cava. A ThermoCool® SmartTouch™ catheter (Biosense Webster Inc., California, US) was inserted through the Agilis to map the fossa ovalis. Mapping catheter exchange for dilator and needle allowed for facile ZFTSP. AF outcome, fluoroscopy times, and procedure times were compared with eight age-matched control patients. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in age, body mass index (BMI) or AF duration between the two groups and no immediate complications. ZFTSP procedure time was 183.9±33.7 minutes versus 293.13±129.9 minutes for TSP-only controls (p=0.05). Fluoroscopy time was 17.5±14.1 minutes in ZFTSP patients versus 73.4±50.3 minutes in controls (p=0.01). AF recurrence in ZFTSP patients was 14% versus 25% in controls. CONCLUSION: ZFTSP utilising ICE and EAM is safe, effective, and time-efficient. There is a small but significant reduction in radiation exposure to patient and physician by the use of this technique.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Eur J Arrhythm Electrophysiol Año: 2016 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Eur J Arrhythm Electrophysiol Año: 2016 Tipo del documento: Article