Search

Background: The study focused to identify markers of success in patients submitted to high-power short-duration (HPSD) atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation with contact force (CF) catheter. Methods: Prospective, observational study with 227 patients with first AF ablation in sinus rhythm using 50W of power and divided in two groups; success and failure according to absence or presence of AF related arrhythmias, respectively. Results: Success observed in 188 and failure in 39 patients, respectively. Median follow-up was 31±21.1 months. Left atrial time was shorter in success than in recurrence group (69.6±23.1 vs 83.2±21.2 min, p=0.008) as in total procedure time (80.1±30.2 vs 98.5±23.3min, (p=0.01). Radiofrequency time was 1,478±321.2 vs 1,888.4±584.1sec (p=0.001) in success and failure groups, respectively. Esophageal warming observed in 58 (30.9%) success and 14 (53.8%) recurrence patients (p=0.01). Higher rate of first-pass isolation observed in success than recurrence, 118 (77.6%) and 15 (50%) (p=0.039), respectively. After ablation heart rate increased from 53.8±9.7 to 66.8±11.6bpm in success and 57±7.7 to 64.4±10.4bpm in recurrence groups (p= 0.001), respectively. Conclusion: HPSD ablation identified that shorter left atrial time, lower luminal esophageal temperature heating, shorter radiofrequency time, higher heart rate increase and first-pass isolation effect were associated with better arrhythmia free-survival rates during follow-up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Different results are described after atrial fibrillation ablation and multiple predictors of recurrence are well established. Evaluate and analyze if heart rate increase (HRI) during a first atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation with low-power long-duration (LPLD) and subsequently with high-power short-duration (HPSD) can impact. Retrospectively analyzed 340 consecutive patients (pts) undergoing first AF ablation. There were 158 pts in LPLD group: 113 (71.5%) paroxysmal AF with ablation with a power of 30/20 w, on anterior and posterior left atrial (LA) wall, respectively, and contact force of 10–30g for 30 s. There were 182 pts in HPSD group: 106 (58.2%) paroxysmal AF, who underwent ablation with 45/50 w, contact force of 8–15g/10–20g and 35 mL/min flow rate on anterior and posterior left atrial wall, respectively. Median follow-up was 32 ± 16 months. Success was observed in 94 (59.5%) patients in LPLD and 152 (83.5%) in HPSD, in LPLD group we documented a median HRI of 4.3 bpm (8%), compared to preablation heart rate, while a higher HRI in HPSD group of HRI 13.5 bpm (27.2%) was noted. Heart rate increase was associated with a higher success rate in both ablation techniques and independently showed an important impact on the success rate after AF ablation. HPSD compared to LPLD showed a higher proportion of HRI and also demonstrated a superiority in maintaining sinus rhythm at a long-term follow-up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is alternative treatment to medical therapy. Most feared complication is atrioesophageal fistula Methods: Observational, retrospective analysis of consecutive 355 patients undergoing first AF ablation. Low‐power long‐duration (LPLD) group contained 158 patients, with 121 (76.58%) having paroxysmal AF who underwent ablation with power 20/30W (anterior and posterior left atrial wall), 17 mL/min flow, and a contact force of 10–30 g for 30 s. High‐power short‐duration group (HPSD) contained 197 patients, with 113 (57.36%) having paroxysmal AF who underwent ablation at 45/50W of power with a contact force of 8–15 g/10–20 g and a 35 mL/min flow rate for 6–8 s on the anterior and the posterior left atrial wall, respectively. Both groups had pulmonary veins isolated and atrial flutter was ablated when needed. For patients not in sinus rhythm, cardioversion was performed before ablation Results: There were no complications. LPLD group: Left atrial time 118.74 min, total 145.32 min, radiofrequency time 4317.99s, X‐ray 13.42 min, and elevation of luminal esophageal temperature (LET) in 132 (84.53%) patients. HPSD group: Left atrial time 72.16 min, total 93.76 min, radiofrequency time 1511.29s, X‐ray 7.6 min, and LET elevation in only 75 (38.07%) patients. A markedly higher rate of first‐pass isolation was observed in HPSD compared to LPLD, 77.16% versus 13.29%, respectively. Recurrence occurred in 64 (40.50%) and 32 (16.24%) in 28.45 and 22.35 months in LPLD and HPSD patients, respectively. In LPLD, 10 patients were submitted to endoscopy, and one (10%) had mild erythema and in HPSD, 13 performed the endoscopy, with two (15.38%) patients showing mild erythema Conclusion: HPSD technique compared to the LPLD technique showed significant reduced radiofrequency and fluoroscopy times, higher rate of first‐pass isolation, lower recurrence rate, and esophageal temperature elevation and may also have a protective effect avoiding incidental esophageal injury due to these findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Atrial fibrillation (AFib) ablation is alternative treatment to drugs. Literature suggests that use of contact force (CF) catheter with higher power for short periods is effective and safe. Methods/Results: Retrospectively analyzed 76 patients undergoing the first ablation. Third five patients‐group A: 27 (77%) paroxysmal AFib (PAFib) and 8 (23%) persistent AFib (PersAFib) who underwent ablation at the power of 30 W‐17 mL/minute flow with a CF of 10‐30 g for 30 seconds. Fourty one patients‐group B: 28 (68.3%) PAFib and 13 (31.70%) PersAFib underwent ablation using 45 W on posterior wall with CF of 8/15 g, as well as 50‐W anterior wall with CF of 10/20 g‐35 mL/minute flow for 6 seconds. Pulmonary vein isolation in both groups and ablated. For patients not in the sinus, we performed cardioversion before ablation. No complications. Group A: Left atrial time 110 ± 29 minutes, total 148 ± 33.6 minutes, radiofrequency time (RF) 4558 ± 1998 seconds, X‐ray 8.5 ± 3.5 minutes, and elevation of esophageal temperature (ET) in 26 (74.3%). group B: Left atrial time 70.7 ± 18.5 minutes (P < .00001), total 106 ± 23 minutes (P < .00001), RF 1909 ± 675.8 seconds (P < .00001), X‐ray 8.8 ± 6.6 minutes (P = .221) and elevation of ET in 21 (51.20% ‐ P = .0578). In 6 and 12 months follow‐up, we had 9 (25.71%) and 11 (31.42%) recurrences in group A and 5 (12.19%) and 7 (17.07%) in group B (P = .231 at 6 and P = .14 at 12 months), respectively. Conclusions: HPSD was safe, useful, and efficient compared with CT, and reduced procedural time and total RF time. HPSD may reduce esophageal injury because of lower heating rate and it may reduce the recurrence of atrial tachyarrythmias. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]