Key result
Fluoroless radiofrequency ablation for typical atrial flutter resulted in a similar procedure duration compared to standard fluoroscopy-guided ablation (110.2 vs 114.9 minutes, p=0.69) with 100% procedural success.
Why the study?
Does fluoroless radiofrequency ablation reduce procedural duration and maintain safety compared to standard fluoroscopy-guided ablation in patients with typical CTI-dependent atrial flutter?
Population
40 patients who underwent radiofrequency ablation for typical cavotricuspid isthmus-dependent atrial…
Comparison
Fluoroless radiofrequency ablation using CARTO 3… vs Standard fluoroscopy-guided radiofrequency…
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
12 months
Authors
Loading...
Supports fluoroless ablation feasibility for typical atrial flutter; leaves open randomized confirmation of safety and outcomes.
Cohort (n=40)
No
Does fluoroless radiofrequency ablation reduce procedural duration and maintain safety compared to standard fluoroscopy-guided ablation in patients with typical CTI-dependent atrial flutter?
Absolute Event Rate: 110.2% vs 114.9%
p-value: p=0.69
Fluoroless radiofrequency ablation for typical atrial flutter is feasible, safe, and eliminates radiation exposure without significantly increasing procedure time compared to standard fluoroscopy-guided ablation.
Sandeep Gautam (2015) conducted a cohort in Typical Cavotricuspid Isthmus-dependent Atrial Flutter (n=40). Fluoroless radiofrequency ablation vs. Standard fluoroscopy-guided radiofrequency ablation was evaluated on Procedure duration (p=0.69). Fluoroless radiofrequency ablation for typical atrial flutter resulted in a similar procedure duration compared to standard fluoroscopy-guided ablation (110.2 vs 114.9 minutes, p=0.69) with 100% procedural success.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: