Key result
Active esophageal cooling linked to ~35% less fluoroscopy time during atrial ablation vs LET monitoring.
Why the study?
Active esophageal cooling avoids the need for repositioning temperature probes, but its impact on fluoroscopy use during RF ablation in a low-fluoroscopy practice was unknown.
Does active esophageal cooling reduce fluoroscopy time compared to LET monitoring in patients undergoing pulmonary vein isolation?
Observational (n=280)
No
Does active esophageal cooling reduce fluoroscopy time compared to LET monitoring in patients undergoing pulmonary vein isolation?
Effect estimate: 35% reduction
Absolute Event Rate: 126% vs 194%
p-value: p=<0.0001
Active esophageal cooling during pulmonary vein isolation significantly reduces fluoroscopy time compared to traditional luminal esophageal temperature monitoring.
May reduce fluoroscopy exposure in left atrial ablation; leaves open need for randomized trials to confirm safety benefits.
Risks to collateral structures exist with radiofrequency (RF) ablation of the left atrium to obtain pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for the treatment of atrial fibrillation. Passive luminal esophageal temperature (LET) monitoring is commonly utilized, but increasing data suggest limited benefits with LET monitoring. In contrast, active cooling of the esophagus has been shown to significantly reduce esophageal injury. Active cooling of the esophagus also avoids the need for stopping and repositioning an LET probe during use, which may reduce the need for fluoroscopy use. This study aimed to measure the impact on fluoroscopy use during RF ablation with esophageal cooling using a dedicated cooling device in a low-fluoroscopy practice. All patients who underwent PVI over a one-year timeframe by a single provider were analyzed. Patients undergoing PVI prior to the incorporation of an esophageal cooling protocol into standard ablation practice were treated with traditional LET monitoring. Patients treated after this point received active esophageal cooling, in which no LET monitoring is utilized. A total of 280 patients were treated; 91 patients were treated using LET monitoring, and 189 patients were treated with esophageal cooling. The mean total fluoroscopy time before the implementation of the esophageal cooling protocol in 91 patients was 194 seconds [standard deviation (SD): 182 seconds] per case, with a median of 144 seconds. The mean total fluoroscopy time after implementation in 189 patients was 126 seconds (SD: 120 seconds) per case with a median of 96 seconds, representing a reduction of 35% per case (p < 0.0001, Mann-Whitney U test). In this largest study to date of active esophageal cooling during PVI, a 35% reduction in fluoroscopy time compared with patients who received LET monitoring was found. This reduction was seen despite an already low fluoroscopy usage rate in place.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zagrodzky et al. (2021) conducted an observational in Atrial fibrillation (n=280). Active esophageal cooling vs. Luminal esophageal temperature (LET) monitoring was evaluated on Total fluoroscopy time (35% reduction, p=<0.0001). Active esophageal cooling during left atrial ablation reduced mean total fluoroscopy time by 35% compared to traditional luminal esophageal temperature monitoring.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: