Cargando…
Comparison of effectiveness and safety of high-power vs. conventional-power radiofrequency ablation for treatment of atrial fibrillation
AIM: To compare high-power (HP) vs. conventional-power (CP) radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled AF patients undergoing CP (30–40 W, 43 patients) or HP (50 W, 49 patients) radiofrequency ablation. Immediate pulmonary vein (PV) single-circle isola...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9763616/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36561771 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.988602 |
_version_ | 1784853099448369152 |
---|---|
author | Cui, Penghui Qu, Yunpeng Zhang, Jichang Wu, Junduo Zhang, Jing Shi, Yongfeng Liu, Bin |
author_facet | Cui, Penghui Qu, Yunpeng Zhang, Jichang Wu, Junduo Zhang, Jing Shi, Yongfeng Liu, Bin |
author_sort | Cui, Penghui |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIM: To compare high-power (HP) vs. conventional-power (CP) radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled AF patients undergoing CP (30–40 W, 43 patients) or HP (50 W, 49 patients) radiofrequency ablation. Immediate pulmonary vein (PV) single-circle isolation, PV-ablation time, AF recurrence, AF recurrence-free survival, and complications were analyzed. RESULTS: Diabetes was more common in the CP group than in the HP group (27.91% vs. 10.20%, P = 0.029). The left PV single-circle isolation rate (62.79% vs. 65.31%), right PV single-circle isolation rate (48.84% vs. 53.06%), and bilateral PV single-circle isolation rate (32.56% vs. 38.78%; all P > 0.05) did not differ between the groups. Single-circle ablation times for the left PVs (12.79 ± 3.39 vs. 22.94 ± 6.39 min), right PVs (12.18 ± 3.46 vs. 20.67 ± 5.44 min), and all PVs (25.85 ± 6.04 vs. 45.66 ± 11.11 min; all P < 0.001) were shorter in the HP group. Atrial fibrillation recurrence within 3 months (13.95% vs. 18.37%), at 3 months (11.63% vs. 8.16%), and at 6 months after ablation (18.60% vs. 12.24%; all P > 0.05) was similar in both groups. Atrial fibrillation recurrence-free survival did not differ between the groups (Kaplan-Meier analysis). Cardiac rupture and pericardial tamponade did not occur in any patient. Pops occurred in 2 and 0 patients in the HP and CP groups, respectively (4.08% vs. 0.00%, P = 0.533). CONCLUSION: High-power ablation improved operation time and efficiency without increasing complications. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9763616 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97636162022-12-21 Comparison of effectiveness and safety of high-power vs. conventional-power radiofrequency ablation for treatment of atrial fibrillation Cui, Penghui Qu, Yunpeng Zhang, Jichang Wu, Junduo Zhang, Jing Shi, Yongfeng Liu, Bin Front Cardiovasc Med Cardiovascular Medicine AIM: To compare high-power (HP) vs. conventional-power (CP) radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled AF patients undergoing CP (30–40 W, 43 patients) or HP (50 W, 49 patients) radiofrequency ablation. Immediate pulmonary vein (PV) single-circle isolation, PV-ablation time, AF recurrence, AF recurrence-free survival, and complications were analyzed. RESULTS: Diabetes was more common in the CP group than in the HP group (27.91% vs. 10.20%, P = 0.029). The left PV single-circle isolation rate (62.79% vs. 65.31%), right PV single-circle isolation rate (48.84% vs. 53.06%), and bilateral PV single-circle isolation rate (32.56% vs. 38.78%; all P > 0.05) did not differ between the groups. Single-circle ablation times for the left PVs (12.79 ± 3.39 vs. 22.94 ± 6.39 min), right PVs (12.18 ± 3.46 vs. 20.67 ± 5.44 min), and all PVs (25.85 ± 6.04 vs. 45.66 ± 11.11 min; all P < 0.001) were shorter in the HP group. Atrial fibrillation recurrence within 3 months (13.95% vs. 18.37%), at 3 months (11.63% vs. 8.16%), and at 6 months after ablation (18.60% vs. 12.24%; all P > 0.05) was similar in both groups. Atrial fibrillation recurrence-free survival did not differ between the groups (Kaplan-Meier analysis). Cardiac rupture and pericardial tamponade did not occur in any patient. Pops occurred in 2 and 0 patients in the HP and CP groups, respectively (4.08% vs. 0.00%, P = 0.533). CONCLUSION: High-power ablation improved operation time and efficiency without increasing complications. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-12-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9763616/ /pubmed/36561771 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.988602 Text en Copyright © 2022 Cui, Qu, Zhang, Wu, Zhang, Shi and Liu. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Cardiovascular Medicine Cui, Penghui Qu, Yunpeng Zhang, Jichang Wu, Junduo Zhang, Jing Shi, Yongfeng Liu, Bin Comparison of effectiveness and safety of high-power vs. conventional-power radiofrequency ablation for treatment of atrial fibrillation |
title | Comparison of effectiveness and safety of high-power vs. conventional-power radiofrequency ablation for treatment of atrial fibrillation |
title_full | Comparison of effectiveness and safety of high-power vs. conventional-power radiofrequency ablation for treatment of atrial fibrillation |
title_fullStr | Comparison of effectiveness and safety of high-power vs. conventional-power radiofrequency ablation for treatment of atrial fibrillation |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of effectiveness and safety of high-power vs. conventional-power radiofrequency ablation for treatment of atrial fibrillation |
title_short | Comparison of effectiveness and safety of high-power vs. conventional-power radiofrequency ablation for treatment of atrial fibrillation |
title_sort | comparison of effectiveness and safety of high-power vs. conventional-power radiofrequency ablation for treatment of atrial fibrillation |
topic | Cardiovascular Medicine |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9763616/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36561771 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.988602 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT cuipenghui comparisonofeffectivenessandsafetyofhighpowervsconventionalpowerradiofrequencyablationfortreatmentofatrialfibrillation AT quyunpeng comparisonofeffectivenessandsafetyofhighpowervsconventionalpowerradiofrequencyablationfortreatmentofatrialfibrillation AT zhangjichang comparisonofeffectivenessandsafetyofhighpowervsconventionalpowerradiofrequencyablationfortreatmentofatrialfibrillation AT wujunduo comparisonofeffectivenessandsafetyofhighpowervsconventionalpowerradiofrequencyablationfortreatmentofatrialfibrillation AT zhangjing comparisonofeffectivenessandsafetyofhighpowervsconventionalpowerradiofrequencyablationfortreatmentofatrialfibrillation AT shiyongfeng comparisonofeffectivenessandsafetyofhighpowervsconventionalpowerradiofrequencyablationfortreatmentofatrialfibrillation AT liubin comparisonofeffectivenessandsafetyofhighpowervsconventionalpowerradiofrequencyablationfortreatmentofatrialfibrillation |