Key result
A closed-loop temperature control model for radiofrequency ablation of atrial flutter decreased coagulum formation (2% vs 12%, P<0.05) and procedure times compared to a power control model.
Why the study?
Does a closed-loop temperature control model improve procedural efficiency and safety compared to a power control model in patients undergoing radiofrequency catheter linear ablation of atrial flutter?
Population
40 patients with atrial flutter referred for radiofrequency ablation.
Comparison
Radiofrequency catheter linear ablation using a… vs Radiofrequency catheter linear ablation using a…
Design
RCT, Randomized into two groups
Authors
Loading...
Supports closed-loop temperature control for atrial flutter ablation; extends randomized evidence on procedural optimization.
RCT (n=40)
randomized
Does a closed-loop temperature control model improve procedural efficiency and safety compared to a power control model in patients undergoing radiofrequency catheter linear ablation of atrial flutter?
Absolute Event Rate: 2% vs 12%
p-value: p=<0.05
Using a closed-loop temperature control model during radiofrequency ablation of atrial flutter improves procedural efficiency and reduces coagulum formation compared to a standard power control model.
WEN et al. (1996) conducted an RCT in atrial flutter (n=40). closed-loop temperature control model vs. power control of energy output model was evaluated on coagulum formation (p=<0.05). A closed-loop temperature control model for radiofrequency ablation of atrial flutter decreased coagulum formation (2% vs 12%, P<0.05) and procedure times compared to a power control model.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: