Key result
High-power short-duration radiofrequency catheter ablation resulted in similar one-year clinical recurrence of atrial fibrillation compared to conventional power ablation (HR 1.03), while significantly reducing procedure time.
Why the study?
The efficacy, safety, and influence on autonomic function of high-power short-duration radiofrequency catheter ablation in atrial fibrillation had not been well established in a large population.
Does high-power short-duration radiofrequency ablation reduce procedure time and maintain similar rhythm outcomes compared to conventional power ablation in patients undergoing atrial fibrillation catheter ablation?
Cohort (n=1,260)
No
Does high-power short-duration radiofrequency ablation reduce procedure time and maintain similar rhythm outcomes compared to conventional power ablation in patients undergoing atrial fibrillation catheter ablation?
Hazard Ratio: 1.03 (95% CI 0.73–1.44)
p-value: p=0.887
High-power short-duration radiofrequency ablation significantly reduces procedure time without compromising efficacy, safety, or autonomic function compared to conventional power ablation for atrial fibrillation.
May shorten procedures with similar recurrence in observational data; leaves open randomized confirmation before practice change.
Introduction: Whereas, high-power short-duration (HPSD) radiofrequency (RF) ablation is generally used in atrial fibrillation (AF) catheter ablation (CA), its efficacy, safety, and influence on autonomic function have not been well established in a large population. This study compared HPSD-AFCA and conventional power (ConvP)-AFCA in propensity score matched-population. Methods: In 3,045 consecutive patients who underwent AFCA, this study included 1,260 patients (73.9% male, 59 ± 10 years old, 58.2% paroxysmal type) after propensity score matching: 315 in 50~60W HPSD group vs. 945 in the ConvP group. This study investigated the procedural factors, complication rate, rhythm status, and 3-month heart rate variability (HRV) between the two groups and subgroups. Results: Procedure time was considerably short in the HPSD group (135 min in HPSD vs. 181 min in ConvP, p < 0.001) compared to ConvP group, but there was no significant difference in the complication rate (2.9% in HPSD vs. 3.7% in ConvP, p = 0.477) and the 3-month HRV between the two groups. At the one-year follow-up, there was no significant difference in rhythm outcomes between the two groups (Overall, Log-rank p = 0.885; anti-arrhythmic drug free, Log-rank p = 0.673). These efficacy and safety outcomes were consistently similar irrespective of the AF type or ablation lesion set. The Cox regression analysis showed that the left atrium volume index estimated by computed tomography (HR 1.01 [1.00–1.02]), p = 0.003) and extra-pulmonary vein triggers (HR 1.59 [1.03–2.44], p = 0.036) were independently associated with one-year clinical recurrence, whereas the HPSD ablation was not (HR 1.03 [0.73–1.44], p = 0.887). Conclusion: HPSD-AFCA notably reduced the procedure time with similar rhythm outcomes, complication rate, and influence on autonomic function as ConvP-AFCA, irrespective of the AF type or ablation lesion set.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Park et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Atrial Fibrillation (n=1,260). High-power short-duration (HPSD) radiofrequency catheter ablation vs. Conventional power radiofrequency catheter ablation (25-35W) was evaluated on Freedom from documented episodes of AF or AT lasting longer than 30 s after a 3-month blanking period within a year (1-year clinical recurrence) (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.73-1.44, p=0.887). High-power short-duration radiofrequency catheter ablation resulted in similar one-year clinical recurrence of atrial fibrillation compared to conventional power ablation (HR 1.03), while significantly reducing procedure time.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: