Atrial fibrillation ablation with a spring sensor-irrigated contact force-sensing catheter compared with other ablation catheters: systematic literature review and meta-analysis
Why the study?
Emerging evidence suggests improved AF ablation outcomes using CF-sensing catheters, but prior reviews included multiple distinct CF technologies.
Does percutaneous ablation with a spring sensor-irrigated contact force-sensing catheter improve freedom from recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmia in patients with paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation?
Population
Patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF undergoing percutaneous ablation
Comparison
THERMOCOOL SMARTTOUCH CF catheter vs other ablation catheters or blinded CF catheter
Design
Systematic literature review and meta-analysis
Follow-up
12 months
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
Supports contact force-sensing catheter use in paroxysmal AF ablation; extends meta-analytic confirmation of higher 12-month success.
Structured PICO
Does percutaneous ablation with a spring sensor-irrigated contact force-sensing catheter improve freedom from recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmia in patients with paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation?
P
Population
Patients with paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing percutaneous ablation
I
Intervention
Percutaneous ablation using a spring sensor-irrigated contact force (CF) catheter (THERMOCOOL SMARTTOUCH Catheter)
C
Comparator
Other ablation catheters, or the same catheter with the operator blinded to contact force data
O
Outcome
Freedom from recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT) at 12 monthshard clinical
Atrial fibrillation ablation using a spring sensor-irrigated contact force-sensing catheter improves freedom from recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmia at 12 months and reduces procedure and fluoroscopy times compared to other catheters.
Cite This Study
Macle et al. (2019) studied this question.