Why the study?
Is cryoablation with an 8-mm tip catheter safe and effective for treating AVNRT in pediatric patients?
Is cryoablation with an 8-mm tip catheter safe and effective for treating AVNRT in pediatric patients?
Cryoablation with an 8-mm tip catheter is highly successful and safe for treating AVNRT in pediatric patients, demonstrating a low recurrence rate and no permanent AV block.
May inform cryoablation strategies in pediatric AVNRT; extends observational data but does not yet alter practice.
BACKGROUND: Cryoablation with 4- and 6-mm tip ablation catheters has been demonstrated to be safe and effective in the treatment of atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT) in pediatric patients, albeit with a higher rate of clinical recurrence. Limited information is available regarding efficacy, mid-term outcomes, and complications related to the use of the 8-mm Freezor Max Cryoablation catheter (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA) in pediatric patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of all pediatric patients with normal cardiac anatomy who underwent an ablation procedure for treatment of AVNRT using the 8-mm tip Cryoablation catheter at three large pediatric academic arrhythmia centers. RESULTS: Cryoablation with an 8-mm tip catheter was performed in 77 patients for treatment of AVNRT (female n = 40 [52%], age 14.8 +/- 2.2 years, weight 62.0 +/- 13.9 kg). Initial procedural success was achieved in 69 patients (69/76, 91%). Transient second- or third-degree atrioventricular (AV) block was noted in five patients (6.5%). There was no permanent AV block. Of the patients successfully ablated with Cryotherapy, there were two recurrences (2/70, 2.8%) over a follow-up of 11.6 +/- 3.3 months. CONCLUSION: Cryoablation with an 8-mm tip ablation catheter is both safe and effective with a low risk of recurrence for the treatment of AVNRT in pediatric patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Silver et al. (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: