Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation can be safely performed without invasive hemodynamic monitoring: A multi-center study.
Iqbal, Arshad Muhammad; Li, Kai Yu; Aznaurov, Sam G; Lugo, Ricardo M; Venkataraman, Rajesh; Gautam, Sandeep.
Affiliation
  • Iqbal AM; Department of Cardiology, University of Missouri School of Medicine, One Hospital Drive, Columbia, MO, USA. arshadiqbal9090@gmail.com.
  • Li KY; University of Missouri School of Medicine, Columbia, MO, USA.
  • Aznaurov SG; Boulder Health, Boulder, CO, USA.
  • Lugo RM; Ascension Saint Thomas West Hospital, Nashville, TN, USA.
  • Venkataraman R; Houston Methodist/The Woodlands Hospital, Conroe, TX, USA.
  • Gautam S; Department of Cardiology, University of Missouri School of Medicine, One Hospital Drive, Columbia, MO, USA.
J Interv Card Electrophysiol ; 64(3): 743-749, 2022 Sep.
Article de En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35182273
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Arterial invasive monitoring is the most common method in the USA for hemodynamic monitoring during atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. Although studies have shown favorable comparison between non-invasive and invasive hemodynamic monitoring (IHM) in non-cardiac procedures under general anesthesia, limited data is available for complex cardiac procedures such as AF ablation in the USA. With progressive improvement in AF ablation procedural safety, particularly with routine use of intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) to monitor for pericardial effusion, it is unclear if invasive hemodynamic monitoring provides any advantage over non-invasive methods. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to determine whether noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring is non-inferior to invasive hemodynamic monitoring during AF ablation under general anesthesia in patients without major cardiac structural abnormality.

METHODS:

A multi-center retrospective data of AF ablation from July 2019 to December 2020 was extracted. A total of three hundred and sixty-two patients (362) were included, which were divided into group A (non-invasive hemodynamic monitoring) and group B (invasive hemodynamic monitoring). The primary outcome was to compare procedural safety between the two groups.

RESULTS:

Out of 362 patients, 184 (51%) received non-invasive and 178 (49%) received invasive hemodynamic monitoring with similar baseline characteristics. There was no significant difference between the two groups in complication rates (groin hematoma, pericardial effusion, cardiac tamponade). Mean procedure time was longer in group B with 3.35% arterial site discomfort. Urgent arterial access was required in only 1 patient in group A.

CONCLUSION:

This retrospective multicenter study strongly suggests that catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation under general anesthesia can be safely performed with noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring without requiring arterial access, with potential benefit in procedural duration and cost.
Sujet(s)
Mots clés

Texte intégral: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Base de données: MEDLINE Sujet principal: Épanchement péricardique / Fibrillation auriculaire / Ablation par cathéter / Monitorage de l'hémodynamique Type d'étude: Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limites: Humans Langue: En Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Sujet du journal: CARDIOLOGIA Année: 2022 Type de document: Article Pays d'affiliation: États-Unis d'Amérique

Texte intégral: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Base de données: MEDLINE Sujet principal: Épanchement péricardique / Fibrillation auriculaire / Ablation par cathéter / Monitorage de l'hémodynamique Type d'étude: Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limites: Humans Langue: En Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Sujet du journal: CARDIOLOGIA Année: 2022 Type de document: Article Pays d'affiliation: États-Unis d'Amérique