Key result
Wall thickness-guided ablation linked to ~47% fewer pulmonary vein gaps than voltage-guided ablation.
Why the study?
The effectiveness and safety of very high power very short duration (vHPSD) ablation guided by wall thickness compared to voltage-guided ablation for atrial fibrillation remain uncertain.
Observational (n=97)
Open-label
None
Yes
Absolute Event Rate: 86% vs 72%
p-value: p=0.09
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
While the landscape of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is changing rapidly, radiofrequency (RF) remains the current gold standardThis article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Calvert et al. (2022) conducted an observational in Non-valvular atrial fibrillation (n=97). Wall thickness-guided pulmonary vein isolation vs. Voltage-guided pulmonary vein isolation was evaluated on First-pass pulmonary vein isolation success rate (p=0.09). Wall thickness-guided ablation achieved an 86% first-pass pulmonary vein isolation rate compared to 72% with voltage-guided ablation (p=0.09), and significantly reduced the incidence of pulmonary vein gaps (20% vs 38%, p=0.04).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: