Why the study?
Does a tiered approach to accessory pathway ablation maintain efficacy and improve cost-effectiveness in a community-based population?
Does a tiered approach to accessory pathway ablation maintain efficacy and improve cost-effectiveness in a community-based population?
A tiered approach to accessory pathway ablation, starting with standard equipment before escalating to advanced tools, is cost-effective and maintains efficacy in a community setting.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support tiered ablation in community settings; leaves open need for randomized confirmation.
In this community-based adult and adolescent population, majority of the accessory pathways are in the left freewall and posteroseptal region and tend to be more easily ablated. A tiered approach with initial use of standard ablation equipment before the deployment of more advance tools, such as irrigated tips and 3D mapping, is cost effective without sacrificing overall efficacy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Young et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: