Key result
Fluoroless catheter ablation achieved a significantly higher first procedure acute success rate compared to conventional catheter ablation (94.8% vs 86.3%, p<0.05) in patients with focal atrial tachycardia.
Why the study?
Does fluoroless catheter ablation improve procedural success and reduce radiation exposure compared to conventional catheter ablation in patients with focal atrial tachycardia?
Observational (n=112)
No
Does fluoroless catheter ablation improve procedural success and reduce radiation exposure compared to conventional catheter ablation in patients with focal atrial tachycardia?
Absolute Event Rate: 94.8% vs 86.3%
p-value: p=<0.05
Fluoroless catheter ablation for focal atrial tachycardia is associated with a higher first-procedure acute success rate and significantly reduced fluoroscopy and radiofrequency delivery times compared to conventional ablation.
Objective: This study sought to evaluate conventional and flouroless catheter ablation for focal atrial tachycardia.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hung et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Focal atrial tachycardia (n=112). Fluoroless catheter ablation vs. Conventional catheter ablation was evaluated on First procedure acute successful rate (p=<0.05). Fluoroless catheter ablation achieved a significantly higher first procedure acute success rate compared to conventional catheter ablation (94.8% vs 86.3%, p<0.05) in patients with focal atrial tachycardia.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: