Key result
Ultrasound-guided vascular puncture did not significantly reduce overall vascular complications (OR 0.557) but significantly reduced hematomas >5 cm (OR 0.382) and pseudoaneurysms (OR 0.160).
Why the study?
Femoral access using standard anatomic landmark guidance is often limited by peripheral artery disease and obesity, prompting evaluation of ultrasound-guided vascular puncture during catheter ablation for cardiac arrhythmias.
Does ultrasound-guided vascular puncture reduce vascular complications in patients undergoing catheter ablation for cardiac arrhythmias on uninterrupted oral anticoagulation?
Cohort (n=479)
No
Does ultrasound-guided vascular puncture reduce vascular complications in patients undergoing catheter ablation for cardiac arrhythmias on uninterrupted oral anticoagulation?
Odds Ratio: 0.557 (95% CI 0.283–1.096)
Absolute Event Rate: 6.3% vs 10.7%
Routine use of ultrasound guidance for femoral access during catheter ablation improves procedural safety by decreasing major hematomas and pseudoaneurysms, with the greatest benefit seen in obese patients.
Should not change femoral access practice in ablation; hypothesis-generating for fewer major hematomas and pseudoaneurysms, needing randomized confirmation.
Background: Femoral vascular access using the standard anatomic landmark-guided method is often limited by peripheral artery disease and obesity. We investigated the effect of ultrasound-guided vascular puncture (UGVP) on the rate of vascular complications in patients undergoing catheter ablation for atrial or ventricular arrhythmias. Methods: The data of 479 patients (59% male, mean age 68 years ± 11 years) undergoing catheter ablation for left atrial (n = 426; 89%), right atrial (n = 28; 6%) or ventricular arrhythmias (n = 28; 6%) were analyzed. All patients were on uninterrupted oral anticoagulants and heparin was administered intravenously during the procedure. Femoral access complications were compared between patients undergoing UGVP (n = 320; 67%) and patients undergoing a conventional approach (n = 159; 33%). Complication rates were also compared between patients with a BMI of >30 kg/m2 (n = 136) and patients with a BMI < 30 kg/m2 (n = 343). Results: Total vascular access complications including mild hematomas were n = 37 (7.7%). In the conventional group n = 17 (10.7%) and in the ultrasound (US) group n = 20 (6.3%) total vascular access complications occurred (OR 0.557, 95% CI 0.283−1.096). UGVP significantly reduced the risk of hematoma > 5 cm (OR 0.382, 95% CI 0.148, 0.988) or pseudoaneurysm (OR 0.160, 95% CI 0.032, 0.804). There was no significant difference between the groups regarding retroperitoneal hematomas or AV fistulas (p > 0.05). In patients with BMI > 30 kg/m2, UGVP led to a highly relevant reduction in the risk of total vascular access complications (OR 0.138, 95% CI 0.027, 0.659), hematomas > 5 cm (OR 0.051, 95% CI 0.000, 0.466) and pseudoaneurysms (OR 0.051, 95% CI 0.000, 0.466). Conclusion: UGVP significantly reduces vascular access complications. Patients with a BMI > 30 kg/m2 seem to particularly profit from a UGVP approach.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Foerschner et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in Cardiac arrhythmias requiring catheter ablation (n=479). Ultrasound-guided vascular puncture (UGVP) vs. Conventional anatomic landmark-guided access was evaluated on Occurrence of vascular complications including hematoma >5 cm, AV fistulas, pseudoaneurysms and retroperitoneal hematomas within the first 48 h (OR 0.557, 95% CI 0.283-1.096). Ultrasound-guided vascular puncture did not significantly reduce overall vascular complications (OR 0.557) but significantly reduced hematomas >5 cm (OR 0.382) and pseudoaneurysms (OR 0.160).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: