Radiofrequency ablation-Real-time visualization of lesions and their correlation with underlying parameters.

lesion formation local impedance radiofrequency ablation

Journal

Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE
ISSN: 1540-8159
Titre abrégé: Pacing Clin Electrophysiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7803944

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
10 May 2024
Historique:
revised: 10 03 2024
received: 12 12 2023
accepted: 09 04 2024
medline: 10 5 2024
pubmed: 10 5 2024
entrez: 10 5 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Lesion durability and transmurality are crucial for successful radiofrequency (RF) ablation. This study provides a model of real-time RF lesion visualization and insights into the role of underlying parameters, as local impedance (LI). A force-sensing, LI-sensing catheter was used for lesion creation in an ex vivo model involving cross-sections of porcine cardiac preparations. During 60 s of RF application, one measurement per second was performed regarding lesion size and available ablation parameters. In total, 1847 measurements from n = 36 lesions were performed. Power (20-50 W) and contact force (1-5 g, 10-15 g, 20-25 g) were systematically alternated. Lesion formation was most prominent in the first seconds of RF application during which nonlinear lesion growth was observed (max. 1.08 mm/s for lesion depth and 2.71 mm/s for lesion diameter). Power levels determined the extent of lesion formation in the early phase. After 20 s, lesion size growth velocity approaches 0.1 mm/s at all power levels. LI changes were also highest in the first seconds (up to - 12 Ω/s) and decreased to less than - 0.1Ω/s after prolonged application. Lesion formation in irrigated RF ablation is a nonlinear process. Final lesion size resulting from an RF application is mainly influenced by high rates of lesion growth in the first seconds of ablation. LI seems to be a good surrogate for differentiating changes in lesion formation.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Lesion durability and transmurality are crucial for successful radiofrequency (RF) ablation. This study provides a model of real-time RF lesion visualization and insights into the role of underlying parameters, as local impedance (LI).
METHODS METHODS
A force-sensing, LI-sensing catheter was used for lesion creation in an ex vivo model involving cross-sections of porcine cardiac preparations. During 60 s of RF application, one measurement per second was performed regarding lesion size and available ablation parameters. In total, 1847 measurements from n = 36 lesions were performed. Power (20-50 W) and contact force (1-5 g, 10-15 g, 20-25 g) were systematically alternated.
RESULTS RESULTS
Lesion formation was most prominent in the first seconds of RF application during which nonlinear lesion growth was observed (max. 1.08 mm/s for lesion depth and 2.71 mm/s for lesion diameter). Power levels determined the extent of lesion formation in the early phase. After 20 s, lesion size growth velocity approaches 0.1 mm/s at all power levels. LI changes were also highest in the first seconds (up to - 12 Ω/s) and decreased to less than - 0.1Ω/s after prolonged application.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Lesion formation in irrigated RF ablation is a nonlinear process. Final lesion size resulting from an RF application is mainly influenced by high rates of lesion growth in the first seconds of ablation. LI seems to be a good surrogate for differentiating changes in lesion formation.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38728067
doi: 10.1111/pace.14992
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

© 2024 The Authors. Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.

Références

Habibi M, Berger RD, Calkins H. Radiofrequency ablation: technological trends, challenges, and opportunities. Europace. 2021;23:511‐519.
Takigawa M, Kitamura T, Martin CA, et al. Temperature‐ and flow‐controlled ablation/very‐high‐power short‐duration ablation vs conventional power‐controlled ablation: comparison of focal and linear lesion characteristics. Heart Rhythm. 2021;18:553‐561.
Bates AP, Paisey J, Yue A, Banks P, Roberts PR, Ullah W. Radiofrequency ablation of the diseased human left ventricle: biophysical and electrogram‐based analysis. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2023;9:330‐340.
Nakagawa H, Wittkampf FHM, Jackman WM. Can we produce deeper radiofrequency lesions? JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2017;3:1111‐1113.
Chu GS, Calvert P, Futyma P, Ding WY, Snowdon R, Gupta D. Local impedance for the optimization of radiofrequency lesion delivery: a review of bench and clinical data. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021;33:389‐400.
Ikeda A, Nakagawa H, Lambert H, et al. Relationship between catheter contact force and radiofrequency lesion size and incidence of steam pop in the beating canine heart. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2014;7:1174‐1180.
Calkins H, Hindricks G, Cappato R, et al. 2017 HRS/EHRA/ECAS/APHRS/SOLAECE expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation: executive summary. J Arrhythm. 2017;33:369‐409.
Sauer WH, Kreidieh O. Precision medicine and ablation of ventricular arrhythmias: the difficulty of estimating lesion size and durability. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2023;9:341‐344.
Alken FA, Scherschel K, Kahle AK, Masjedi M, Meyer C. Combined contact force and local impedance dynamics during repeat atrial fibrillation catheter ablation. Front Physiol. 2022;13:1001719.
Amemiya M, Takigawa M, Goya M, et al. Comparison of two catheters measuring local impedance: local impedance variation vs lesion characteristics and steam pops. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2022;65:419‐428.
Das M, Luik A, Shepherd E, et al. Local catheter impedance drop during pulmonary vein isolation predicts acute conduction block in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: initial results of the LOCALIZE clinical trial. EP Europace. 2021;23:1042‐1051.
Iwakawa H, Takigawa M, Goya M, et al. Clinical implications of local impedance measurement using the IntellaNav MiFi OI ablation catheter: an ex vivo study. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2021;63:185‐195.
Kawano D, Mori H, Kato R, et al. The optimal ablation setting for a local impedance guided catheter in an in vitro experimental model. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021;32:2069‐2076.
Bahlke F, Wachter A, Erhard N, et al. The influence of electrode‐tissue‐coverage on RF lesion formation and local impedance: insights from an ex vivo model. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2023;46:1170‐1181.
Chinitz J, Michaud G, Stephenson K. Impedance‐guided radiofrequency ablation: using impedance to improve ablation outcomes. J Innov Card Rhythm Manag . 2017;8:2868‐2873.
Takigawa M, Goya M, Iwakawa H, et al. Impact of a formula combining local impedance and conventional parameters on lesion size prediction. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2021;63(2):389‐398.
Nakagawa H, Yamanashi WS, Pitha JV, et al. Comparison of in vivo tissue temperature profile and lesion geometry for radiofrequency ablation with a saline‐irrigated electrode versus temperature control in a canine thigh muscle preparation. Circulation. 1995;91:2264‐2273.
Bourier F, Popa M, Kottmaier M, et al. RF electrode–tissue coverage significantly influences steam pop incidence and lesion size. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021;32:1594‐1599.
Lacko CS, Chen Q, Mendoza V, et al. Development of a clinically relevant ex vivo model of cardiac ablation for testing of ablation catheters. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2023;34:682‐692.
Kawano D, Mori H, Tsutsui K, et al. Time dependency in the radiofrequency lesion formation for a local impedance guided catheter in an ex vivo experimental model. J Arrhythm. 2022;38:1080‐1087.
Matsumoto K, Kawano D, Sasaki W, et al. Detailed investigation of the lesion formation with a novel contact force sensing catheter with a mesh‐shaped irrigation tip. J Arrhythm. 2023;39:166‐174.
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:e009899.
Bourier F, Duchateau J, Vlachos K, et al. High‐power short‐duration versus standard radiofrequency ablation: insights on lesion metrics. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2018;29:1570‐1575.
Leshem E, Zilberman I, Tschabrunn CM, et al. High‐power and short‐duration ablation for pulmonary vein isolation: biophysical characterization. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2018;4:467‐479.
Beinart R, Abbara S, Blum A, et al. Left atrial wall thickness variability measured by CT scans in patients undergoing pulmonary vein isolation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2011;22:1232‐1236.
Yen Ho S, Sanchez‐Quintana D, Cabrera JA, Anderson RH. Anatomy of the left atrium. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 1999;10:1525‐1533.
Cabrera JA, Ho SY, Climent V, Sánchez‐Quintana D. The architecture of the left lateral atrial wall: a particular anatomic region with implications for ablation of atrial fibrillation. Eur Heart J. 2008;29:356‐362.
Sánchez‐Quintana D, Cabrera JA, Climent V, Farré J, Mendonça MC, Ho SY. Anatomic relations between the esophagus and left atrium and relevance for ablation of atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 2005;112:1400‐1405.
Jankelson L, Dai M, Aizer A, et al. Lesion sequence and catheter spatial stability affect lesion quality markers in atrial fibrillation ablation. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2021;7:367‐377.
Nguyen DT, Gerstenfeld EP, Tzou WS, et al. Radiofrequency ablation using an open irrigated electrode cooled with half‐normal saline. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2017;3:1103‐1110.
Ohta M, Hayashi K, Sato H, et al. Impact of catheter contact angle on lesion formation and durability of pulmonary vein isolation. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2022;64:677‐685.
Koruth JS, Dukkipati S, Miller MA, Neuzil P, d'Avila A, Reddy VY. Bipolar irrigated radiofrequency ablation: a therapeutic option for refractory intramural atrial and ventricular tachycardia circuits. Heart Rhythm. 2012;9:1932‐1941.
Shapira‐Daniels A, Barkagan M, Rottmann M, et al. Modulating the baseline impedance: an adjunctive technique for maximizing radiofrequency lesion dimensions in deep and intramural ventricular substrate: an adjunctive technique for maximizing radiofrequency lesion dimensions in deep and intramural ventricular substrate. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2019;12:e007336.
Borne RT, Sauer WH, Zipse MM, Zheng L, Tzou W, Nguyen DT. Longer duration versus increasing power during radiofrequency ablation yields different ablation lesion characteristics. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2018;4:902‐908.
Kumar S, Haqqani HM, Chan M, et al. Predictive value of impedance changes for real‐time contact force measurements during catheter ablation of atrial arrhythmias in humans. Heart Rhythm. 2013;10:962‐969.
Bourier F, Ramirez FD, Martin CA, et al. Impedance, power, and current in radiofrequency ablation: insights from technical, ex vivo, and clinical studies. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2020;31:2836‐2845.

Auteurs

Fabian Bahlke (F)

Department of Electrophysiology, German Heart Center Munich, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.

Andreas Wachter (A)

Department of Electrophysiology, German Heart Center Munich, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.

Nico Erhard (N)

Department of Electrophysiology, German Heart Center Munich, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.

Florian Englert (F)

Department of Electrophysiology, German Heart Center Munich, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.

Jan Syväri (J)

Department of Electrophysiology, German Heart Center Munich, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.

Hannah Krafft (H)

Department of Electrophysiology, German Heart Center Munich, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.

Miruna Popa (M)

Department of Electrophysiology, German Heart Center Munich, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.

Edison Abdiu (E)

Department of Electrophysiology, German Heart Center Munich, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.

Carsten Lennerz (C)

Department of Electrophysiology, German Heart Center Munich, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.

Marta Telishevska (M)

Department of Electrophysiology, German Heart Center Munich, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.

Sarah Lengauer (S)

Department of Electrophysiology, German Heart Center Munich, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.

Tilko Reents (T)

Department of Electrophysiology, German Heart Center Munich, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.

Gabriele Hessling (G)

Department of Electrophysiology, German Heart Center Munich, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.

Isabel Deisenhofer (I)

Department of Electrophysiology, German Heart Center Munich, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.

Felix Bourier (F)

Department of Electrophysiology, German Heart Center Munich, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.

Classifications MeSH