A mesh‐type flexible tip catheter vs a contact force catheter for catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: A prospective nonrandomized 1:1 matched study

INTRODUCTION: Mesh-type flexible tip (MFT) catheters allow clinicians to safely generate large radiofrequency lesions during catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF), while contact force (CF) catheters provide better catheter-tissue contact. We compared the clinical outcomes of catheter ablation of AF using MFT and CF catheters in a prospective, nonrandomized manner. METHODS: We prospectively assigned 217 patients with AF (paroxysmal AF 73.5%; male 69.1%; 59.9 ± 10.7 years old) at a 1:1 ratio to ablation with MFT catheters (FlexAbility) or CF catheters (TactiCath). The primary endpoint was AF recurrence after a single procedure; the secondary endpoint was a response to antiarrhythmic drugs. RESULTS: After a mean follow-up of 22.3 ± 4.4 months, the clinical recurrence rate did not significantly differ between the two study groups (29.7% vs 30.2%; P = .941) (log-rank P = .838). The recurrence rate for atrial tachycardias (30.3% vs 9.7%; P = .035) and cardioversion rates (8.1% vs 1.9%; P = .024) were higher in the MFT group than CF group. At the final follow-up, sinus rhythm was maintained without antiarrhythmic drugs in 57.7% of the MFT group and 40.6% of the CF group (P = .010). No significant difference was found in the major complication rates between the two groups (0.9% vs 5.7%), although the ablation time was significantly longer in the MFT group (4192.1 ± 1080.2 vs 3583.8 ± 977.2 seconds; P < .001). CONCLUSION: MFT and CF catheters had similar effectiveness in achieving AF rhythm control during catheter ablation, and there was no significant difference between the two catheters with regard to overall safety.