Search

Background: Application of electrocautery to a J‐wire is used to perform transseptal puncture (TSP), but with limited evidence supporting safety and efficacy. We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of this technique. Methods: Two hundred consecutive patients were randomized in a 1:1 fashion to either the ICE‐guided electrified J‐wire TSP group or a conventional Brockenbrough (BRK) needle TSP group. The TSP was performed with a 0.032″ guidewire under 20 W, "coag" mode and was compared to TSP using the BRK needle. The primary safety endpoints were complications related to TSP. The primary efficacy endpoints included the TSP success rate, the total TSP time, and the total procedure time. Results: All patients complete the procedure safely. The electrified J‐wire TSP group had a significantly shorter TSP time than BRK needle TSP group. The total procedure time, number of TSP attempts required to achieve successful LA access, width of the intra‐atrial shunt at the end of ablation were similar between the two groups. The incidence of new cerebral infarction detected by MRI were similar between the two groups (3/32 patients in the J‐wire TSP group and 2/26 patients in conventional BRK TSP group, p =.82). And no difference in the incidence of residual intra‐atrial shunt (4.3% vs. 6%, p =.654) during the 3‐month's follow up. Conclusion: Using an electrified J‐wire for TSP under the guidance of ICE appears to be as safe as and more efficient than conventional BRK needle TSP, which may be especially useful in the era of non‐fluoroscopy AF ablation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) technology has been increasingly accepted as an integral part of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation procedures. It is still unknown whether ICE can routinely replace transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) for routine thrombus screening in non‐selective AF patients. Objective: To assess whether ICE can routinely replace TEE in screening for left atrial (LA)/left atrial appendage (LAA) thrombus in general patients undergoing catheter ablation for AF. Methods: A total of 2003 consecutive patients undergoing AF ablation were included. 1155 patients (ICE group) received intra‐procedural ICE examination for LA/LAA thrombus screening, while 848 patients (TEE group) received pre‐procedure TEE examination. The incidence of thrombus, peri‐procedure complications, and hospital efficiency were assessed. Results: The LA and LAA were adequately visualized in all patients. Five patients in the ICE group and 15 patients in the TEE group were found to have LAA thrombus. The incidence of major periprocedural thrombo‐embolic events was comparable between two groups (0.2% vs. 0.1%, p =.76), none were due to undetected LA/LAA thrombus. Other major periprocedural complications occurred at similar rates in both groups, while post‐procedure fever was less common in the ICE group (12.7% vs. 17.4%, p <.001). Procedure times and hospital length of stay were both shorter in the ICE group (142 min [87–197 min] vs. 150 min [95–205 min], and 3[2–4] day vs. 4[3–5] day, respectively, both p <.001). Conclusions: ICE can replace TEE for atrial thrombus screening in AF patients undergoing ablation without increased complications. An "ICE replacing TEE" workflow can also reduce the incidence of postoperative fever and improve hospital efficiency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]