Why the study?
Does high catheter contact force alter superior vena cava mapping and improve phrenic nerve localization compared to low contact force in atrial fibrillation patients?
Does high catheter contact force alter superior vena cava mapping and improve phrenic nerve localization compared to low contact force in atrial fibrillation patients?
Higher catheter contact force distorts the superior vena cava geometry and significantly increases the likelihood and area of phrenic nerve capture during high-output pacing, highlighting the importance of contact force awareness to avoid phrenic nerve injury during ablation.
BACKGROUND: Right phrenic nerve injury (PNI) is a major concern during superior vena cava (SVC) isolation. Phrenic nerve (PN) localization by high-output pacing is a standard technique for anticipating PNI. This study evaluated the impact of catheter contact force (CF) on SVC mapping and PN localization. METHODS: Twenty-one atrial fibrillation patients undergoing cardiac enhanced computed tomography (CT) were prospectively enrolled. SVC geometries were created at the SVC-right atrium junction level with low (<10 × g) and high (>10 × g) CFs. The PN was localized by high-output pacing (10 V, 2 milliseconds) at the SVC and anterior right superior pulmonary vein (RSPV) with different CFs. RESULTS: The SVC cross-sectional area was significantly greater when created with high (22.1 ± 4.9 × g) compared with low CFs (4.2 ± 1.3 × g) (5.3 ± 1.4 cm2 vs. 2.3 ± 0.7 cm2 , P < 0.0001). High CFs distorted the SVC and anterior RSPV by a mean of 4.8 ± 2.5 and 4.4 ± 1.7 mm, with minimal distortion at the anteroseptal SVC. The PN was more frequently captured with a high compared with low CF at the SVC (95.2% vs. 71.4%, P = 0.038) and RSPV (66.7% vs. 14.3%, P = 0.0005). The PN capture area was also wider with a high compared with low CF at the SVC (9.0 ± 4.1 mm vs. 4.5 ± 2.8 mm, P = 0.001). The PN location was at the anterolateral, lateral, and posterolateral SVC in 3 (14.3%), 13 (61.9%), and 5 (23.8%) patients, respectively, which was identical to that identified on CT. No PNs located >1.98 mm from the RSPV were captured by RSPV pacing. CONCLUSIONS: CF impacted the SVC mapping and PN localization. Cardiac CT identified the PN location, and the distance from the pacing site influenced PN capture.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ichihara et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: