Radiofrequency ablation of atrial fibrillation-50 W or 90 W?

atrial fibrillation endoscopically detected esophageal lesion prognosis pulmonary vein isolation very high-power short duration ablation

Journal

Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology
ISSN: 1540-8167
Titre abrégé: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9010756

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
12 2022
Historique:
revised: 04 08 2022
received: 28 05 2022
accepted: 01 09 2022
pubmed: 21 9 2022
medline: 16 12 2022
entrez: 20 9 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

This study sought to evaluate the short and midterm efficacy and safety of the novel very high power very short duration (vHPvSD) 90 W approach compared to HPSD 50 W for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation as well as reconnection patterns of 90 W ablations. Consecutive patients undergoing first AF ablation with vHPvSD (90 W; predefined ablation time of 3 s for posterior wall ablation and 4 s for anterior wall ablation) were compared to patients using HPSD (50 W; ablation index-guided; AI 350 for posterior wall ablation, AI 450 for anterior wall ablation) retrospectively. A total of 84 patients (67.1 ± 9.8 years; 58% male; 47% paroxysmal AF) were included (42 with 90 W, 42 with 50 W) out of a propensity score-matched cohort. 90 W ablations revealed shorter ablation times (10.5 ± 6.7 min vs. 17.4 ± 9.9 min; p = .001). No major complication occurred. 90 W ablations revealed lower first pass PVI rates (40% vs. 62%; p = .049) and higher AF recurrences during blanking period (38% vs. 12%; p = .007). After 12 months, both ablation approaches revealed comparable midterm outcomes (62% vs. 70%; log-rank p = .452). In a multivariable Cox regression model, persistent AF (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.442, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.035-2.010, p = .031) and increased procedural duration (HR: 1.011, 95% CI: 1.005-1.017, p = .001) were identified as independent predictors of AF recurrence during follow-up. AF ablation using 90 W vHPvSD reveals a similar safety profile compared to 50 W ablation with shorter ablation times. However, vHPvSD ablation was associated with lower rates of first-pass isolations and increased AF recurrences during the blanking period. After 12 months, 90 W revealed comparable efficacy results to 50 W ablations in a nonrandomized, propensity-matched comparison.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
This study sought to evaluate the short and midterm efficacy and safety of the novel very high power very short duration (vHPvSD) 90 W approach compared to HPSD 50 W for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation as well as reconnection patterns of 90 W ablations.
METHODS AND RESULTS
Consecutive patients undergoing first AF ablation with vHPvSD (90 W; predefined ablation time of 3 s for posterior wall ablation and 4 s for anterior wall ablation) were compared to patients using HPSD (50 W; ablation index-guided; AI 350 for posterior wall ablation, AI 450 for anterior wall ablation) retrospectively. A total of 84 patients (67.1 ± 9.8 years; 58% male; 47% paroxysmal AF) were included (42 with 90 W, 42 with 50 W) out of a propensity score-matched cohort. 90 W ablations revealed shorter ablation times (10.5 ± 6.7 min vs. 17.4 ± 9.9 min; p = .001). No major complication occurred. 90 W ablations revealed lower first pass PVI rates (40% vs. 62%; p = .049) and higher AF recurrences during blanking period (38% vs. 12%; p = .007). After 12 months, both ablation approaches revealed comparable midterm outcomes (62% vs. 70%; log-rank p = .452). In a multivariable Cox regression model, persistent AF (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.442, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.035-2.010, p = .031) and increased procedural duration (HR: 1.011, 95% CI: 1.005-1.017, p = .001) were identified as independent predictors of AF recurrence during follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS
AF ablation using 90 W vHPvSD reveals a similar safety profile compared to 50 W ablation with shorter ablation times. However, vHPvSD ablation was associated with lower rates of first-pass isolations and increased AF recurrences during the blanking period. After 12 months, 90 W revealed comparable efficacy results to 50 W ablations in a nonrandomized, propensity-matched comparison.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36124396
doi: 10.1111/jce.15681
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

2504-2513

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn

Informations de copyright

© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.

Références

Magnussen C, Niiranen TJ, Ojeda FM, et al. Sex differences and similarities in atrial fibrillation epidemiology, risk factors, and mortality in community cohorts: results from the BiomarCaRE consortium (biomarker for cardiovascular risk assessment in Europe). Circulation. 2017;136(17):1588-1597.
Das M, Loveday JJ, Wynn GJ, et al. Ablation index, a novel marker of ablation lesion quality: prediction of pulmonary vein reconnection at repeat electrophysiology study and regional differences in target values. EP Europace. 2017;19(5):775-783.
Leshem E, Zilberman I, Tschabrunn CM, et al. High-power and short-duration ablation for pulmonary vein isolation: biophysical characterization. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2018;4(4):467-479.
Kottmaier M, Popa M, Bourier F, et al. Safety and outcome of very high-power short-duration ablation using 70 W for pulmonary vein isolation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. EP Europace. 2020;22(3):388-393.
Kewcharoen J, Techorueangwiwat C, Kanitsoraphan C, et al. High-power short duration and low-power long duration in atrial fibrillation ablation: a meta-analysis. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021;32(1):71-82.
Yavin HD, Leshem E, Shapira-Daniels A, et al. Impact of high-power short-duration radiofrequency ablation on long-term lesion durability for atrial fibrillation ablation. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2020;6(8):973-985.
Reddy VY, Grimaldi M, De Potter T, et al. Pulmonary vein isolation with very high power, short duration, temperature-controlled lesions: the QDOT-FAST trial. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2019;5(7):778-786.
Halbfass P, Wielandts JY, Knecht S, et al. Safety of very high-power short-duration radiofrequency ablation for pulmonary vein isolation: a two-centre report with emphasis on silent oesophageal injury. EP Europace. 2021;24(3):400-405.
Mueller J, Halbfass P, Sonne K, et al. Safety aspects of very high power very short duration atrial fibrillation ablation using a modified radiofrequency RF-generator: single center experience. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2022;33:920-927.
Halbfass P, Pavlov B, Müller P, et al. Progression from esophageal thermal asymptomatic lesion to perforation complicating atrial fibrillation ablation: a single-center registry. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2017;10(8):e005233.
Ferdinand D, Otto M, Weiss C. Get the most from your data: a propensity score model comparison on real-life data. Int J Gen Med. 2016;9:123-131.
Austin PC. An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies. Multivariate Behav Res. 2011;46(3):399-424.
Shin DG, Ahn J, Han SJ, Lim HE. Efficacy of high-power and short-duration ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation: a prospective randomized controlled trial. EP Europace. 2020;22(10):1495-1501.
Leo M, Pedersen M, Rajappan K, et al. Power, lesion size index and oesophageal temperature alerts during atrial fibrillation ablation: a randomized study. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2020;13(10):e008316.
Winkle RA, Mohanty S, Patrawala RA, et al. Low complication rates using high power (45-50 W) for short duration for atrial fibrillation ablations. Heart Rhythm. 2019;16(2):165-169.
Winkle RA, Mead RH, Engel G, et al. High-power, short-duration atrial fibrillation ablations using contact force sensing catheters: outcomes and predictors of success including posterior wall isolation. Heart Rhythm. 2020;17(8):1223-1231.
Kaneshiro T, Kamioka M, Hijioka N, et al. Characteristics of esophageal injury in ablation of atrial fibrillation using a high-power short-duration setting. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2020;13(10):e008602.
Winkle RA. HPSD ablation for AF high-power short-duration RF ablation for atrial fibrillation: a review. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021;32(10):2813-2823.
Chen S, Schmidt B, Seeger A, et al. Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation using ablation index-guided high power (50 W) for pulmonary vein isolation with or without esophageal temperature probe (the AI-HP ESO II). Heart Rhythm. 2020;17(11):1833-1840.
Ninomiya Y, Inoue K, Tanaka N, et al. Absence of first-pass isolation is associated with poor pulmonary vein isolation durability and atrial fibrillation ablation outcomes. J Arrhythm. 2021;37(6):1468-1476.
Kumar S, Barbhaiya CR, Balindger S, et al. Better lesion creation and assessment during catheter ablation. J Atr Fibrillation. 2015;8(3):1189.
Nakagawa H, Ikeda A, Sharma T, et al. Comparison of in vivo tissue temperature profile and lesion geometry for radiofrequency ablation with high power-short duration and moderate power-moderate duration: effects of thermal latency and contact force on lesion formation. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2021;14(7):e009899.
Müller J, Berkovitz A, Halbfass P, et al. Acute oesophageal safety of high-power short duration with 50 W for atrial fibrillation ablation. EP Europace. 2022;24:928-937.

Auteurs

Julian Mueller (J)

Clinic for Interventional Electrophysiology, Heart Centre Bad Neustadt, Bad Neustadt an der Saale, Germany.
Department of Cardiology and Angiology, Philipps-University Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
First Department of Medicine, University Medical Centre Mannheim (UMM), Mannheim, Germany.

Karin Nentwich (K)

Clinic for Interventional Electrophysiology, Heart Centre Bad Neustadt, Bad Neustadt an der Saale, Germany.
Department of Cardiology and Angiology, Philipps-University Marburg, Marburg, Germany.

Elena Ene (E)

Clinic for Interventional Electrophysiology, Heart Centre Bad Neustadt, Bad Neustadt an der Saale, Germany.

Artur Berkovitz (A)

Clinic for Interventional Electrophysiology, Heart Centre Bad Neustadt, Bad Neustadt an der Saale, Germany.

Kai Sonne (K)

Clinic for Interventional Electrophysiology, Heart Centre Bad Neustadt, Bad Neustadt an der Saale, Germany.

Ivaylo Chakarov (I)

Clinic for Interventional Electrophysiology, Heart Centre Bad Neustadt, Bad Neustadt an der Saale, Germany.

Sebastian Barth (S)

Clinic for Interventional Electrophysiology, Heart Centre Bad Neustadt, Bad Neustadt an der Saale, Germany.
Department of Cardiology and Angiology, Philipps-University Marburg, Marburg, Germany.

Christian Waechter (C)

Department of Cardiology and Angiology, Philipps-University Marburg, Marburg, Germany.

Michael Behnes (M)

First Department of Medicine, University Medical Centre Mannheim (UMM), Mannheim, Germany.

Ibrahim Akin (I)

First Department of Medicine, University Medical Centre Mannheim (UMM), Mannheim, Germany.

Philipp Halbfass (P)

Department of Cardiology and Angiology, Philipps-University Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Department of Cardiology, University of Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany.

Thomas Deneke (T)

Clinic for Interventional Electrophysiology, Heart Centre Bad Neustadt, Bad Neustadt an der Saale, Germany.

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