What is the incidence and what are the predictors of stroke and silent cerebral embolism following very high-power short-duration atrial fibrillation ablation?
Very high-power, short-duration PVI is a safe technique with no clinical strokes and an 8.2% incidence of silent cerebral embolism, which is associated with lower baseline generator impedance and loss of catheter contact.
Abstract Aims Cerebral thrombo-embolism is a dreaded complication of pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) for atrial fibrillation; its surrogate, silent cerebral embolism (SCE) can be detected by diffusion-weighted brain magnetic resonance imaging (bMRI). Initial investigations have raised a concern that very high-power, short-duration (vHPSD; 90 W/4 s) temperature-controlled PVI with the QDOT Micro catheter may be associated with a higher incidence of SCE compared with low-power long-duration ablation. We aimed to assess the incidence of procedural complications of vHPSD PVI with an emphasis on cerebral safety. Methods and results We enrolled 328 consecutive patients undergoing their PVI procedure using vHPSD. A subgroup of 61 consecutive patients underwent diffusion-weighted bMRI within 24 h of the procedure, and incidence and predictors of SCE were studied. The mean procedure time and left atrial dwell time for the overall cohort were 69.6 ± 24.1 and 46.5 ± 21.5 min, respectively. First-pass isolation was achieved in 82%. No stroke or transient ischaemic attack occurred. Silent cerebral embolism was identified in 5 of 61 patients (8.2%). Silent cerebral embolism following procedures was significantly associated with lower baseline generator impedance (105.8 vs. 112.6 Ω, P 0.0001) and with intermittent loss of catheter–tissue contact during ablation (14.1% vs. 6.1%, P 0.0001). Conclusion Very high-power, short-duration PVI is a safe technique with an excellent acute success rate. Silent cerebral embolism incidence in our cohort was below the previously reported range, with no clinically overt cerebral complications. Lower baseline generator impedance and loss of contact during ablation may contribute to a higher risk of SCEs.
Boga et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: