Procedural time reduction associated with active esophageal cooling during pulmonary vein isolation.

Atrioesophageal fistula Catheter ablation Esophageal cooling Esophageal injury Procedure duration

Journal

Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing
ISSN: 1572-8595
Titre abrégé: J Interv Card Electrophysiol
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 9708966

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Dec 2022
Historique:
received: 20 01 2022
accepted: 28 03 2022
pubmed: 14 4 2022
medline: 15 12 2022
entrez: 13 4 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Active esophageal cooling is increasingly utilized as an alternative to luminal esophageal temperature (LET) monitoring for protection against thermal injury during pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) when treating atrial fibrillation (AF). Published data demonstrate the efficacy of active cooling in reducing thermal injury, but impacts on procedural efficiency are not as well characterized. LET monitoring compels pauses in ablation due to heat stacking and temperature overheating alarms that in turn delay progress of the PVI procedure, whereas active esophageal cooling allows avoidance of this phenomenon. Our objective was to measure the change in PVI procedure duration after implementation of active esophageal cooling as a protective measure against esophageal injury. We performed a retrospective review under IRB approval of patients with AF undergoing PVI between January 2018 and February 2020. For each patient, we recorded age, gender, and total procedure time. We then compared procedure times before and after the implementation of active esophageal cooling as a replacement for LET monitoring. A total of 373 patients received PVI over the study period. LET monitoring using a multi-sensor probe was performed in 198 patients, and active esophageal cooling using a dedicated device was performed in 175 patients. Patient characteristics did not significantly differ between groups (mean age of 67 years, and gender 37.4% female). Mean procedure time was 146 ± 51 min in the LET-monitored patients, and 110 ± 39 min in the actively cooled patients, representing a reduction of 36 min, or 24.7% of total procedure time (p < .001). Median procedure time was 141 [IQR 104 to 174] min in the LET-monitored patients and 100 [IQR 84 to 122] min in the actively cooled patients, for a reduction of 41 min, or 29.1% of total procedure time (p < .001). Implementation of active esophageal cooling for protection against esophageal injury during PVI was associated with a significantly large reduction in procedure duration.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Active esophageal cooling is increasingly utilized as an alternative to luminal esophageal temperature (LET) monitoring for protection against thermal injury during pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) when treating atrial fibrillation (AF). Published data demonstrate the efficacy of active cooling in reducing thermal injury, but impacts on procedural efficiency are not as well characterized. LET monitoring compels pauses in ablation due to heat stacking and temperature overheating alarms that in turn delay progress of the PVI procedure, whereas active esophageal cooling allows avoidance of this phenomenon. Our objective was to measure the change in PVI procedure duration after implementation of active esophageal cooling as a protective measure against esophageal injury.
METHODS METHODS
We performed a retrospective review under IRB approval of patients with AF undergoing PVI between January 2018 and February 2020. For each patient, we recorded age, gender, and total procedure time. We then compared procedure times before and after the implementation of active esophageal cooling as a replacement for LET monitoring.
RESULTS RESULTS
A total of 373 patients received PVI over the study period. LET monitoring using a multi-sensor probe was performed in 198 patients, and active esophageal cooling using a dedicated device was performed in 175 patients. Patient characteristics did not significantly differ between groups (mean age of 67 years, and gender 37.4% female). Mean procedure time was 146 ± 51 min in the LET-monitored patients, and 110 ± 39 min in the actively cooled patients, representing a reduction of 36 min, or 24.7% of total procedure time (p < .001). Median procedure time was 141 [IQR 104 to 174] min in the LET-monitored patients and 100 [IQR 84 to 122] min in the actively cooled patients, for a reduction of 41 min, or 29.1% of total procedure time (p < .001).
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Implementation of active esophageal cooling for protection against esophageal injury during PVI was associated with a significantly large reduction in procedure duration.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35416632
doi: 10.1007/s10840-022-01204-1
pii: 10.1007/s10840-022-01204-1
pmc: PMC9726815
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

617-623

Informations de copyright

© 2022. The Author(s).

Références

Heart Rhythm O2. 2021 Sep 22;2(6Part A):651-664
pubmed: 34988511
Heart Rhythm. 2020 Nov;17(11):1833-1840
pubmed: 32470628
N Engl J Med. 2015 May 7;372(19):1812-22
pubmed: 25946280
Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2020 Sep;13(9):e007944
pubmed: 32703018
Biomed Eng Online. 2020 Oct 12;19(1):77
pubmed: 33046057
J Innov Card Rhythm Manag. 2021 Oct 15;12(11):4749-4755
pubmed: 34676132
Ann Emerg Med. 2020 Jan;75(1):75-85
pubmed: 31474480
Europace. 2020 Oct 1;22(10):1487-1494
pubmed: 32820324
Heart Rhythm. 2021 Jun;18(6):926-934
pubmed: 33561587
Heart Rhythm. 2020 May;17(5 Pt A):721-727
pubmed: 31978595
Europace. 2021 Feb 5;23(2):205-215
pubmed: 33205201
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021 Sep;32(9):2441-2450
pubmed: 34260115
Burns. 2013 May;39(3):436-44
pubmed: 23149435
Europace. 2015 Aug;17(8):1229-35
pubmed: 26041872
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013 Aug 6;62(6):531-9
pubmed: 23684686
Burns. 2015 Aug;41(5):882-9
pubmed: 25820085
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021 Mar;32(3):704-712
pubmed: 33476464
JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2021 Mar;7(3):367-377
pubmed: 33516716
J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2022 Jan;63(1):197-205
pubmed: 33620619

Auteurs

Christopher Joseph (C)

University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, 75390, USA. christopher.joseph@utsouthwestern.edu.

Jacob Sherman (J)

Washington University, 1 Brookings Dr, St. Louis, MO, 63130, USA.

Alex Ro (A)

NorthShore University Health System, Evanston, IL, USA.

Westby G Fisher (WG)

NorthShore University Health System, Evanston, IL, USA.

Jose Nazari (J)

NorthShore University Health System, Evanston, IL, USA.

Mark Metzl (M)

NorthShore University Health System, Evanston, IL, USA.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH