Key result
Zero-fluoroscopy ablation for supraventricular arrhythmia in patients with CIED leads achieved a 100% acute procedural success rate, comparable to 97% with conventional fluoroscopy (p=1.00).
Why the study?
Data are limited regarding the feasibility and suspected risk of lead injury with zero-fluoroscopy ablation in patients with cardiac electronic implantable device leads.
Does zero-fluoroscopy ablation using 3-D mapping and ICE maintain procedural success and prevent lead-related complications compared to conventional fluoroscopy in patients with CIED leads undergoing ablation for supraventricular tachycardia?
Cohort (n=49)
Does zero-fluoroscopy ablation using 3-D mapping and ICE maintain procedural success and prevent lead-related complications compared to conventional fluoroscopy in patients with CIED leads undergoing ablation for supraventricular tachycardia?
Absolute Event Rate: 100% vs 97%
p-value: p=1.00
Zero-fluoroscopy ablation using 3-D mapping and ICE is feasible and safe in patients with CIED leads, demonstrating similar procedural success and no lead-related complications compared to conventional fluoroscopy.
Supports feasibility of zero-fluoroscopy ablation in CIED patients; leaves open need for randomized confirmation before practice change.
INTRODUCTION: Utilizing a three-dimensional (3-D) mapping system and intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) has allowed ablation procedures with less or without fluoroscopy; however, there is limited data for patients with cardiac electronic implantable device (CIED) leads regarding the suspected risk of lead injury. Therefore, we sought to explore technics to perform safe trans-septal approach and catheter manipulation technique in patients with CIED leads. METHODS AND RESULTS: This study comprised 49 consecutive patients (59% males, median 73 years old) with CIED who underwent catheter ablation for supraventricular tachycardia requiring the trans-septal approach, 15 without fluoroscopy (zero-fluoro group), and 34 with fluoroscopy (conventional-fluoro group), between July 2019 and April 2021. All procedures were performed under a 3-D mapping system and ICE guidance. We compared the differences in treatment and development of complications between the two groups. The procedures were for atrial fibrillation (82%) and atrial tachycardia (76%). Coronary sinus catheter insertion and the trans-septal procedure were successfully performed in all patients. The median time from venipuncture to trans-septal procedure (zero-fluoro vs. conventional-fluoro group: 28 [18-37] min vs. 24 [21-31] min, p = .70), total procedure time (231 [142-274] min vs. 175 [163-225] min, p = .63), and the acute procedural success rate (100% vs. 97%, p = 1.00) did not differ between both groups. No patient showed lead-related complications in both groups. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to show zero-fluoro ablation for supraventricular arrhythmia using 3-D mapping and ICE in patients with CIED leads was feasible under careful catheter manipulation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shimamoto et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Supraventricular tachycardia in patients with cardiac electronic implantable devices (n=49). Zero-fluoroscopy ablation vs. Conventional fluoroscopy ablation was evaluated on Acute procedural success rate (p=1.00). Zero-fluoroscopy ablation for supraventricular arrhythmia in patients with CIED leads achieved a 100% acute procedural success rate, comparable to 97% with conventional fluoroscopy (p=1.00).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: