Comparison of Conventionally Performed and Intracardiac Echocardiography Guided Catheter Ablation of Atrioventricular Node in Patients with Permanent Atrial Fibrillation-A Retrospective Single-Center Study.

Background: Atrioventricular node (AVN) ablation is an effective treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF) with uncontrolled ventricular rates despite maximal pharmacological treatment. Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) can help with visualizing structures, positioning catheters, and guiding the ablation procedure. We compared only fluoroscopy-guided and ICE-guided AVN ablation regarding patients with permanent AF. Methods: Sixty-two consecutive patients underwent AVN ablation were enrolled in our retrospective single-center study (ICE group: 28 patients, Standard group: 34 patients). Procedural data, acute and long-term success rate, and complications were analyzed. Results: ICE guidance for AVN ablation significantly reduced fluoroscopy time (0.30 [0.06; 0.85] min vs. 7.95 [3.23; 6.59] min, p < 0.01), first-to-last ablation time (4 [2; 16.3] min vs. 26.5 [2.3; 72.5] min, p = 0.02), and in-procedure time (40 [34; 55] min vs. 60 [45; 110], p = 0.02). There was no difference in either the total ablation time (199 [91; 436] s vs. 294 [110; 659] s, p = 0.22) or in total ablation energy (8272 [4004; 14,651] J vs. 6065 [2708; 16,406] J, p = 0.28). The acute success rate was similar (ICE: 100% vs. Standard: 94%, p = 0.49) between the groups. Conclusions: In our retrospective trial, ICE-guided AVN ablation reduced fluoroscopy time, procedure time, and first-to-last ablation time. There was no difference in ablation time, total ablation energy, acute and long-term success, and complication rate.

Initial experience with zero-fluoroscopy pulmonary vein isolation in patients with atrial fibrillation: single-center observational trial.

Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) stands as a widely practiced cardiac ablation procedure on a global scale, conventionally guided by fluoroscopy. The concurrent application of electroanatomical mapping systems (EAMS) and intracardiac echocardiography offers a means to curtail radiation exposure. This study aimed to compare procedural outcomes between conventional and our initial zero-fluoroscopy cases in patients with paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation (AF), undergoing point-by-point PVI. Our prospective observational study included 100 consecutive patients with AF who underwent point-by-point radiofrequency PVI. The standard technique was used in the first 50 cases (Standard group), while the fluoroless technique was used in the subsequent 50 patients (Zero group). The zero-fluoroscopy approach exhibited significantly shorter procedural time (59.6 ± 10.7 min vs. 74.6 ± 13.2 min, p < 0.0001), attributed to a reduced access time (17 [16; 20] min vs. 31 [23; 34.5] min, p < 0.001). Comparable results were found for the number of RF applications, total ablation energy, and left atrial dwelling time. In the Zero group, all procedures were achieved without fluoroscopy, resulting in significantly lower fluoroscopy time (0 [0; 0] sec vs. 132 [100; 160] sec, p < 0.0001) and dose (0 [0; 0] mGy vs. 4.8 [4.1; 8.2] mGy, p < 0.0001). The acute success rate was 100%, with no major complications. Zero-fluoroscopy PVI is feasible, safe, and associated with shorter procedure times compared to the standard approach, even in cases without prior experience in zero-fluoroscopy PVI.

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.

Electroanatomical Mapping System-Guided vs. Intracardiac Echocardiography-Guided Slow Pathway Ablation: A Randomized, Single-Center Trial.

Radiofrequency (RF) catheter ablation is an effective treatment option for targeting the slow pathway (SP) in atrioventricular nodal reentry tachycardia (AVNRT). Previous data suggested that using intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) guidance could improve procedural outcomes when compared to using fluoroscopy alone. In this prospective study, we aimed to compare the effectiveness of an electroanatomical mapping system (EAMS)-guided approach with an ICE-guided approach for SP ablation. Eighty patients undergoing SP ablation for AVNRT were randomly assigned to either the ICE-guided or EAMS-guided group. If the procedural endpoint was not achieved after 8 RF applications; patients were allowed to crossover to the ICE-guided group. The ICE-guided approach reduced the total procedure time (61.0 (56.0; 66.8) min vs. 71.5 (61.0; 80.8) min, p < 0.01). However, the total fluoroscopy time was shorter (0 (0-0) s vs. 83.5 (58.5-133.25) s, p < 0.001) and the radiation dose was lower (0 (0-0) mGy vs. 3.3 (2.0-4.7) mGy, p < 0.001) with EAMS-guidance. The ICE-guided group had a lower number of RF applications (4 (3-5) vs. 5 (3.0-7.8), p = 0.03) and total ablation time (98.5 (66.8-186) s vs. 136.5 (100.5-215.8) s, p = 0.02). Nine out of 40 patients (22.5%) in the EAMS-guided group crossed over to the ICE-guided group, and they were successfully treated with similar RF applications in terms of number, time, and energy compared to the ICE-guided group. There were no recurrences during the follow-up period. In conclusion, the utilization of ICE guidance during SP ablation has demonstrated notable reductions in procedural time and RF delivery when compared to procedures guided by EAMS. In challenging cases, an early switch to ICE-guided ablation may be the optimal choice for achieving successful treatment.

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

Introduction: Catheter 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. Methods: In 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. Results: The 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. Conclusion: Our study suggests that zero-fluoroscopy CTI ablation guided solely by ICE for AFl is feasible and safe. Further investigation is warranted for broader validation.

Intracardiac Echocardiography Guidance Improves Procedural Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Cavotricuspidal Isthmus Ablation for Typical Atrial Flutter.

Atrial flutter (AFL) represents a prevalent variant of supraventricular tachycardia, distinguished by a macro-reentrant pathway encompassing the cavotricuspid isthmus (CTI). Radiofrequency (RF) catheter ablation stands as the favored therapeutic modality for managing recurring CTI-dependent AFL. Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) has been proposed as a method to reduce radiation exposure during CTI ablation. This study aims to comprehensively compare procedural parameters between ICE-guided CTI ablation and fluoroscopy-only procedures. A total of 370 consecutive patients were enrolled in our single-center retrospective study. In 151 patients, procedures were performed using fluoroscopy guidance only, while 219 patients underwent ICE-guided CTI ablation. ICE guidance significantly reduced fluoroscopy time (73 (36; 175) s vs. 900 (566; 1179) s; p < 0.001), fluoroscopy dose (2.45 (0.6; 5.1) mGy vs. 40.5 (25.7; 62.9) mGy; p < 0.001), and total procedure time (70 (52; 90) min vs. 87.5 (60; 102.5) min; p < 0.001). Total ablation time (657 (412; 981) s vs. 910 (616; 1367) s; p < 0.001) and the time from the first to last ablation (20 (11; 36) min vs. 40 (25; 55) min; p < 0.01) were also significantly shorter in the ICE-guided group. Acute success rate was 100% in both groups, and no major complications occurred in either group. ICE-guided CTI ablation in patients with AFL resulted in shorter procedure times, reduced fluoroscopy exposure, and decreased ablation times, compared to the standard fluoroscopy-only approach.

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

Introduction: Catheter 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. Methods: Electronic 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). Results: Our 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). Conclusion: The 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.

Visualizable vs. standard, non-visualizable steerable sheath for pulmonary vein isolation procedures: Randomized, single-centre trial.

Introduction: Steerable sheaths (SSs) are frequently used to improve catheter contact during pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) procedures. A new type of visualizable (by electroanatomical mapping system) SS has become available in clinical treatment. Purpose: We aimed to compare procedural data of visualizable vs. non-visualizable steerable sheath assisted PVI procedures in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods: In this single-centre randomized study, we enrolled a total of 100 consecutive patients who underwent PVI due to AF. Results: A total of 100 patients were randomized into 2 groups (visualizable SS group: 50; non-visualizable SS group: 50). Acute ablation success was 100% and the rate of the first pass isolation were similar (92% vs. 89%; p = 0.88). Using visualizable SS, left atrial (LA) procedure time (53.1 [41.3; 73.1] min vs. 59.5 [47.6; 74.1] min.; p = 0.04), LA fluoroscopy time (0 [0; 0] s vs. 17.5 [5.5; 69.25] s; p < 0.01) and LA fluoroscopy dose (0 [0; 0.27] mGy vs. 0.74 [0.16; 2.34] mGy; p < 0.01) was significantly less, however, there was no difference in the total procedural time (90 ± 35.2 min vs. 99.5 ± 31.8 min; p = 0.13), total fluoroscopy time (184 ± 89 s vs. 193 ± 44 s; p = 0.79), and total fluoroscopy dose (9.12 ± 1.98 mGy vs. 9.97 ± 2.27 mGy; p = 0.76). Compared to standard, non-visualizable SS group, the number of radiofrequency ablations was fewer (69 [58; 80] vs. 79 [73; 86); p < 0.01) as well as total ablation time was reduced (1049 sec. [853; 1175] vs. 1265 sec. [1085; 1441]; p < 0.01) in the visualizable SS cohort. No major complications occurred in either group. Conclusion: Compared to the standard, non-visualizable SS, visualizable SS significantly reduces the left atrial procedure time, RF delivery and fluoroscopy exposure without compromising its safety or effectiveness in patients undergoing PVI procedures for AF.