Key result
Unipolar electrogram modification during atrial flutter ablation significantly reduced mean ablation time (164.3 vs 332.8 seconds; P<0.001) compared to standard bipolar electrogram endpoints.
Why the study?
Does using the complete elimination of the negative component of the unipolar atrial electrogram as a local endpoint reduce ablation time and energy delivery compared to a bipolar electrogram endpoint in patients undergoing common atrial flutter ablation?
Cohort (n=62)
Does using the complete elimination of the negative component of the unipolar atrial electrogram as a local endpoint reduce ablation time and energy delivery compared to a bipolar electrogram endpoint in patients undergoing common atrial flutter ablation?
Using the elimination of the negative component of the unipolar atrial electrogram as a local endpoint during atrial flutter ablation significantly reduces ablation time and energy delivery without compromising procedural success.
May shorten ablation time in atrial flutter; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation.
INTRODUCTION: Complete elimination of the negative component of the unipolar atrial electrogram recently proved predictive of lesions transmurality. We prospectively assessed its relevance as a real-time local ablative endpoint for each individual lesion created across the cavotricuspid isthmus (CTI) in order to constitute a line of bidirectionnal block during common atrial flutter (AFL) ablation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Sixty-two consecutive patients underwent common AFL ablation following an electrophysiological approach guided by real-time electrogram modification analysis. In 31 patients (unipolar group), the local ablative endpoint was complete elimination of the negative component of the unipolar atrial electrogram, while the other 31 patients (control group) were treated following our standard approach based on the currently used local ablative endpoint defined by a ≥50% amplitude decrease of the bipolar atrial electrogram. Bidirectional block was achieved in all patients (mean age 67.9 ± 11.5 with 80.6% of men). Mean ablation time (164.3 ± 88.3 seconds vs 332.8 ± 151.5 seconds; P < 0.001) and mean energy delivery (7.5 ± 4.1 kJ vs 14.2 ± 6 kJ; P < 0.001) were significantly shorter in the unipolar group compared to the control group. No statistical differences were seen in procedure time (68.5 ± 22.6 min vs 77.5 ± 20.2 min; P = 0.10). CONCLUSION: Real-time unipolar electrogram modification is a relevant local endpoint during common AFL ablation and leads to a substantial reduction of ablation time and energy delivery compared to a standard ablative approach while displaying a similar short- and long-term success rate.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pambrun et al. (2015) conducted a cohort in Common atrial flutter (AFL) (n=62). Unipolar atrial electrogram modification (elimination of negative component) vs. Standard approach (≥50% amplitude decrease of bipolar atrial electrogram) was evaluated on Mean ablation time (seconds) (p=<0.001). Unipolar electrogram modification during atrial flutter ablation significantly reduced mean ablation time (164.3 vs 332.8 seconds; P<0.001) compared to standard bipolar electrogram endpoints.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: