Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Ablation index-guided ablation with milder targets for atrial fibrillation: Comparison between high power and low power ablation.
Liu, Zheng; Liu, Li-Feng; Liu, Xiao-Qin; Liu, Jiapeng; Wang, Yu-Xin; Liu, Ye; Liu, Xing-Peng; Yang, Xin-Chun; Chen, Mu-Lei.
Afiliación
  • Liu Z; Heart Center, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
  • Liu LF; Heart Center, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
  • Liu XQ; Heart Center, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
  • Liu J; Heart Center, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
  • Wang YX; Heart Center, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
  • Liu Y; Heart Center, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
  • Liu XP; Heart Center, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
  • Yang XC; Heart Center, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
  • Chen ML; Heart Center, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Front Cardiovasc Med ; 9: 949918, 2022.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35990990
ABSTRACT

Background:

High power-ablation index (HP-AI)-guided ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) targeting high AIs has been implemented in European countries. However, milder AI targets are widely used in Asia. The safety and efficacy of HP-AI-guided ablation compared with those of low-power AI-guided ablation in a milder AI-targeting setting are unknown. The goal of this study was to explore the efficacy and safety of HP-AI-guided ablation in a milder AI-targeting setting.

Methods:

Patients who underwent pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for AI-guided atrial fibrillation ablation in our center were enrolled and divided into 2 groups according to the ablation power used. In the HP-AI group, the ablation power was over 45 W, while the low power-AI group was ablated with <35 W power. The targeted AIs were 450-500 in the anterior wall and 350-400 in the posterior wall. The efficacy outcome was expressed as the single-procedure atrial arrhythmia-free survival between 91 days and 1 year. Safety outcomes included severe adverse events (SAEs), including symptomatic pulmonary vein (PV) stenosis, atrioesophagal fistula, cardiac tamponade, stroke, thromboembolism events, myocardial infarction, and major bleeding.

Results:

A total of 134 patients were enrolled, of whom 74 underwent PVI using HP-AI, while 60 received low power-AI ablation. After a mean follow-up time of 7.4 months, 22 (16.4%) patients showed arrhythmia recurrence 5 (6.8%) patients in the HP-AI group and 17 (28.3%) patients in the low power-AI group. The HP-AI group showed a significantly higher arrhythmia-free survival than the low power-AI group (p = 0.011). Two patients in the low power-AI group and 1 patient in the HP-AI group developed an SAE (p = NS). Compared with the low power-AI group, the HP-AI group demonstrated a higher PV first-pass isolation rate, shorter ablation time, and fewer patients with anatomical leakages and sites of unreached AI.

Conclusion:

In a milder AI setting, HP-AI ablation might result in significantly higher arrhythmia-free survival than low power-AI ablation and a similar safety profile.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Front Cardiovasc Med Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: China Pais de publicación: CH / SUIZA / SUÍÇA / SWITZERLAND

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Front Cardiovasc Med Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: China Pais de publicación: CH / SUIZA / SUÍÇA / SWITZERLAND