Key result
The SureFlex steerable sheath was associated with a 39% lower odds of inefficient contact lesions compared to the Agilis sheath during pulmonary vein isolation.
Why the study?
Stable contact force correlates with more effective radiofrequency ablation lesions and procedural outcomes, prompting a comparison of contact force stability and lesion effectiveness between two steerable sheaths.
Does the SureFlex steerable sheath improve contact force stability and lesion quality compared to the Agilis NxT sheath in patients undergoing first-time pulmonary vein isolation?
Cohort (n=30)
None
No
Does the SureFlex steerable sheath improve contact force stability and lesion quality compared to the Agilis NxT sheath in patients undergoing first-time pulmonary vein isolation?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The choice of steerable sheath during pulmonary vein isolation impacts catheter stability and lesion quality, with the SureFlex sheath demonstrating fewer inefficient contact lesions and shorter RF times than the Agilis sheath.
A stable contact force (CF) is correlated with more effective radiofrequency (RF) ablation (RFA) lesions and long-term procedural outcomes. Efforts to improve catheter stability include jet ventilation, pacing, steerable sheaths, and CF-sensing ablation catheters. This study compares CF stability and effective RF lesions between two commercially available steerable sheaths. Thirty patients underwent first-time RFA at a single center using the Agilis™ NxT (Abbott, Chicago, IL, USA) or SureFlex™ (Baylis Medical, Montreal, Canada) steerable sheath. High-power short-duration RFA was utilized, targeting a 10-Ω drop. Sheath performance was assessed for the entire procedure and around each pulmonary vein (PV) in terms of mean CF, CF variability, RF time per lesion, and inefficient contact lesions (defined as lesions with a CF of less than 5 g for at least 10% of the RF delivery time). The operator-targeted mean CF was achieved using both sheaths; however, the overall CF variability was 12.8% lower when using the SureFlex™ sheath (p = 0.08). The CF variability was generally 16% greater in the right PVs than the left PVs (p = 0.001) but trended lower with the SureFlex™ sheath. There were 8% more inefficient contact lesions created when using the Agilis™ sheath as compared to the SureFlex™ sheath (p = 0.035), especially in the right inferior PV (p = 0.009). The RF time per lesion was, on average, 12% (1.4 seconds) shorter when using the SureFlex™ sheath than the Agilis™ sheath (p < 0.05). The choice of steerable sheath may affect both catheter stability and lesion quality, especially in the right PVs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hiner et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Atrial Fibrillation (n=30). SureFlex Steerable Guiding Sheath vs. Agilis NxT Steerable Introducer was evaluated on Inefficient contact lesions (contact force < 5 g for >10% of ablation time) (OR 0.605, 95% CI 0.371-0.976, p=0.035). The SureFlex steerable sheath was associated with a 39% lower odds of inefficient contact lesions compared to the Agilis sheath during pulmonary vein isolation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: