Key result
Steerable sheaths increase freedom from atrial arrhythmia ~19% vs nonsteerable sheaths in AF ablation.
Why the study?
Catheter placement and stability are challenging in AF ablation, motivating this review to assess whether using steerable sheaths influences procedural outcomes.
Does steerable sheath technology improve atrial arrhythmia freedom in patients undergoing atrial fibrillation ablation?
Meta-Analysis (n=970)
Yes
Does steerable sheath technology improve atrial arrhythmia freedom in patients undergoing atrial fibrillation ablation?
Steerable sheaths for atrial fibrillation ablation significantly increase the rate of successful ablation and reduce total procedure time without increasing complications compared to nonsteerable sheaths.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Steerable sheaths may enhance arrhythmia freedom in AF ablation; extends pooled evidence from 10 studies supporting procedural optimization.
Introduction Catheter placement and stability are well‐known challenges in atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. As a result, steerable sheaths (SS) were developed to improve catheter stabilization and maintain proper catheter–tissue contact. The purpose of this systematic review and meta‐analysis is to see if employing a SS influences procedure outcome. Method We performed a comprehensive literature search for studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of SS compared to nonsteerable sheaths (NSS) in AF ablation. The primary outcome was the rate of atrial arrhythmia (AA) freedom by the time of the last follow‐up. The secondary outcomes were the procedure‐related complications and procedural characteristics. Risk ratio (RR) or the mean difference (MD) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the random‐effects model. Results A total of 10 studies, including 967 AF patients (mean age: 59.2 ± 11.1 years, 516 patients managed with SS vs. 454 with NSS), were included. SS group showed a higher rate of freedom of AA compared to NSS (RR: 1.19; 95% CI 1.09–1.29; p < .001). Both techniques had similar rate for procedural‐related complication (RR: 1.09, 95% CI 0.50–2.39; p = .83). The SS strategy had a shorter procedure time (MD −10.6 [min], 95% CI −20.97, −0.20; p = .05) but comparable fluoroscopic and radiofrequency application times to the NSS group. Conclusions The SS for AF catheter ablation not only reduced the total procedure time but also significantly increased the rate of successful ablation while maintaining a similar safety profile when compared to the traditional NSS.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mhanna et al. (2022) conducted a meta-analysis in Atrial fibrillation (n=970). Steerable sheath vs. Nonsteerable sheath was evaluated on Freedom from atrial arrhythmia by the time of last follow-up (RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.09-1.29, p=<0.001). Steerable sheaths used during atrial fibrillation catheter ablation significantly increased the rate of atrial arrhythmia freedom compared to nonsteerable sheaths (74.4% vs 62.3%, RR 1.19).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: