Key result
Intracardiac echocardiography-guided cavotricuspid isthmus ablation significantly reduced procedure time compared to fluoroscopy alone (68.06 vs 105.94 minutes, P<0.001).
Why the study?
Does intracardiac echocardiography (ICE)-guided ablation reduce procedure time and radiation exposure compared to fluoroscopy-guided ablation in patients scheduled for CTI ablation?
RCT (n=102)
Does intracardiac echocardiography (ICE)-guided ablation reduce procedure time and radiation exposure compared to fluoroscopy-guided ablation in patients scheduled for CTI ablation?
ICE-guided CTI ablation significantly reduces procedure time, fluoroscopy time, and radiation exposure compared to fluoroscopy alone.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports adopting ICE guidance for CTI ablation to cut fluoroscopy exposure; extends randomized evidence for procedural efficiency.
UNLABELLED: Randomized Trial of ICE During CTI Ablation. INTRODUCTION: Despite a high success rate, radio-frequency ablation (RFA) of the cavotricuspid isthmus (CTI) can be unusually challenging in some cases. We postulated that visualization of the CTI with intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) could maximize the success rate, decrease the procedure and ablation time, and minimize the radiation exposure. METHODS AND RESULTS: In our prospective, randomized study, we included 102 patients scheduled for CTI ablation. We randomized patients in 2 groups: guided only by fluoroscopy (n = 52) or ICE-guided (n =50) group. Procedure time, fluoroscopy time, and the time spent for RFA were significantly shorter, radiation exposure (dose-area product-DAP) and the sum of delivered radio frequency energy were significantly lower in the ICE-group (68.06 ± 15.09 minutes vs 105.94 ± 36.51 minutes, P < 0.001, 5.54 ± 3.77 minutes vs 18.63 ± 10.60 minutes, P <0.001, 482.80 ± 534.12 seconds vs 779.76 ± 620.82 seconds, P = 0.001 and 397.62 ± 380.81 cGycm(2) vs 1,312.92 ± 1,129.28 cGycm(2) , P < 0.001, 10,866.84 ± 6,930.84 Ws vs 16,393.56 ± 13,995.78 Ws, P = 0.048, respectively). Seven patients (13%) from the fluoroscopy-only group crossed over to ICE-guidance because of prolonged unsuccessful RFA and were all treated successfully. Four vascular complications and 2 recurrences were equally distributed between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: ICE-guided ablation of the CTI significantly shortens the procedure and fluoroscopy time, markedly decreases radiation exposure, and time spent for ablation in comparison with fluoroscopy-only procedures. At the same time, visualization with ICE allowed successful ablation in challenging cases. (J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol, Vol. 23, pp. 996-1000, September 2012).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bencsik et al. (2012) conducted an RCT in Cavotricuspid isthmus ablation (n=102). Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) guidance vs. Fluoroscopy-only guidance was evaluated on Procedure time (p=<0.001). Intracardiac echocardiography-guided cavotricuspid isthmus ablation significantly reduced procedure time compared to fluoroscopy alone (68.06 vs 105.94 minutes, P<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: