Cargando…

Simple periprocedural precautions to reduce Doppler microembolic signals during AF ablation

BACKGROUND: Doppler microembolic signals (MES) occur during atrial fibrillation ablation despite of permanent flushed transseptal sheaths, frequent controls of periprocedural coagulation status and the use of irrigated ablation catheters PURPOSE: To investigate the number and type of MES depending o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Christoph, Marian, Poitz, David, Pfluecke, Christian, Forkmann, Mathias, Huo, Yan, Gaspar, Thomas, Schoen, Steffen, Ibrahim, Karim, Quick, Silvio, Wunderlich, Carsten
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9399063/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34060007
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10840-021-01010-1
_version_ 1784772439796875264
author Christoph, Marian
Poitz, David
Pfluecke, Christian
Forkmann, Mathias
Huo, Yan
Gaspar, Thomas
Schoen, Steffen
Ibrahim, Karim
Quick, Silvio
Wunderlich, Carsten
author_facet Christoph, Marian
Poitz, David
Pfluecke, Christian
Forkmann, Mathias
Huo, Yan
Gaspar, Thomas
Schoen, Steffen
Ibrahim, Karim
Quick, Silvio
Wunderlich, Carsten
author_sort Christoph, Marian
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Doppler microembolic signals (MES) occur during atrial fibrillation ablation despite of permanent flushed transseptal sheaths, frequent controls of periprocedural coagulation status and the use of irrigated ablation catheters PURPOSE: To investigate the number and type of MES depending on the procedure time, prespecified procedure steps, the activated clotting time (ACT) during the ablation procedure and the catheter contact force. METHODS: In a prospective trial, 53 consecutive atrial fibrillation patients underwent pulmonary vein isolation by super-irrigated “point-by-point” ablation. All patients underwent a periinterventional, continuous transcranial Doppler examination (TCD) of the bilateral middle cerebral arteries during the complete ablation procedure. RESULTS: An average of 686±226 microembolic signals were detected by permanent transcranial Doppler. Thereby, 569±208 signals were differentiated as gaseous and 117±31 as solid MES. The number of MES with regard to defined procedure steps were as follows: gaseous: [transseptal puncture, 26 ± 28; sheath flushing, 24±12; catheter change, 21±11; angiography, 101±28; mapping, 9±9; ablation, 439±192; protamine administration, 0±0]; solid: [transseptal puncture, 8±8; sheath flushing, 9±5; catheter replacement, 6±6; angiography, not measurable; mapping, 2±5; ablation, 41±22; protamine administration, 0±0]. Significantly less MES occurred with shorter procedure time, higher ACT and the use of tissue contact force monitoring. CONCLUSION: The current study demonstrates that during atrial fibrillation ablation using irrigated, “point-by-point” RF ablation, masses of microembolic signals are detected in transcranial ultrasound especially in the period of RF current application. The number of MES depends on the total procedure time and the reached ACT during ablation. The use of contact force monitoring might reduce MES during RF ablation. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10840-021-01010-1.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9399063
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93990632022-08-25 Simple periprocedural precautions to reduce Doppler microembolic signals during AF ablation Christoph, Marian Poitz, David Pfluecke, Christian Forkmann, Mathias Huo, Yan Gaspar, Thomas Schoen, Steffen Ibrahim, Karim Quick, Silvio Wunderlich, Carsten J Interv Card Electrophysiol Article BACKGROUND: Doppler microembolic signals (MES) occur during atrial fibrillation ablation despite of permanent flushed transseptal sheaths, frequent controls of periprocedural coagulation status and the use of irrigated ablation catheters PURPOSE: To investigate the number and type of MES depending on the procedure time, prespecified procedure steps, the activated clotting time (ACT) during the ablation procedure and the catheter contact force. METHODS: In a prospective trial, 53 consecutive atrial fibrillation patients underwent pulmonary vein isolation by super-irrigated “point-by-point” ablation. All patients underwent a periinterventional, continuous transcranial Doppler examination (TCD) of the bilateral middle cerebral arteries during the complete ablation procedure. RESULTS: An average of 686±226 microembolic signals were detected by permanent transcranial Doppler. Thereby, 569±208 signals were differentiated as gaseous and 117±31 as solid MES. The number of MES with regard to defined procedure steps were as follows: gaseous: [transseptal puncture, 26 ± 28; sheath flushing, 24±12; catheter change, 21±11; angiography, 101±28; mapping, 9±9; ablation, 439±192; protamine administration, 0±0]; solid: [transseptal puncture, 8±8; sheath flushing, 9±5; catheter replacement, 6±6; angiography, not measurable; mapping, 2±5; ablation, 41±22; protamine administration, 0±0]. Significantly less MES occurred with shorter procedure time, higher ACT and the use of tissue contact force monitoring. CONCLUSION: The current study demonstrates that during atrial fibrillation ablation using irrigated, “point-by-point” RF ablation, masses of microembolic signals are detected in transcranial ultrasound especially in the period of RF current application. The number of MES depends on the total procedure time and the reached ACT during ablation. The use of contact force monitoring might reduce MES during RF ablation. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10840-021-01010-1. Springer US 2021-05-31 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9399063/ /pubmed/34060007 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10840-021-01010-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Christoph, Marian
Poitz, David
Pfluecke, Christian
Forkmann, Mathias
Huo, Yan
Gaspar, Thomas
Schoen, Steffen
Ibrahim, Karim
Quick, Silvio
Wunderlich, Carsten
Simple periprocedural precautions to reduce Doppler microembolic signals during AF ablation
title Simple periprocedural precautions to reduce Doppler microembolic signals during AF ablation
title_full Simple periprocedural precautions to reduce Doppler microembolic signals during AF ablation
title_fullStr Simple periprocedural precautions to reduce Doppler microembolic signals during AF ablation
title_full_unstemmed Simple periprocedural precautions to reduce Doppler microembolic signals during AF ablation
title_short Simple periprocedural precautions to reduce Doppler microembolic signals during AF ablation
title_sort simple periprocedural precautions to reduce doppler microembolic signals during af ablation
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9399063/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34060007
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10840-021-01010-1
work_keys_str_mv AT christophmarian simpleperiproceduralprecautionstoreducedopplermicroembolicsignalsduringafablation
AT poitzdavid simpleperiproceduralprecautionstoreducedopplermicroembolicsignalsduringafablation
AT pflueckechristian simpleperiproceduralprecautionstoreducedopplermicroembolicsignalsduringafablation
AT forkmannmathias simpleperiproceduralprecautionstoreducedopplermicroembolicsignalsduringafablation
AT huoyan simpleperiproceduralprecautionstoreducedopplermicroembolicsignalsduringafablation
AT gasparthomas simpleperiproceduralprecautionstoreducedopplermicroembolicsignalsduringafablation
AT schoensteffen simpleperiproceduralprecautionstoreducedopplermicroembolicsignalsduringafablation
AT ibrahimkarim simpleperiproceduralprecautionstoreducedopplermicroembolicsignalsduringafablation
AT quicksilvio simpleperiproceduralprecautionstoreducedopplermicroembolicsignalsduringafablation
AT wunderlichcarsten simpleperiproceduralprecautionstoreducedopplermicroembolicsignalsduringafablation