General Anesthesia Improves Efficiency of High-Power Short-Duration Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation: Comparison with Mild Conscious Sedation.
atrial fibrillation
catheter ablation
general anesthesia
high-power short duration
mild conscious sedation
Journal
Journal of personalized medicine
ISSN: 2075-4426
Titre abrégé: J Pers Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101602269
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
16 Aug 2024
16 Aug 2024
Historique:
received:
11
07
2024
revised:
28
07
2024
accepted:
13
08
2024
medline:
31
8
2024
pubmed:
31
8
2024
entrez:
29
8
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia globally. High-power, short-duration radiofrequency (RF) catheter ablation (CA) for AF has recently emerged, reducing ablation times and enhancing patient tolerability with comparable efficacy and safety. While the benefits of general anesthesia (GA) for standard-power, standard-duration CA are well-established, data comparing GA to mild conscious sedation (MCS) for high-power, short-duration CA are limited. We included patients undergoing high-power, short-duration CA for AF under GA (group 1) or MCS (group 2). Procedural characteristics, success rates, and mid-term outcomes were compared. In total, 131 patients, 47 in the GA group and 84 in the MCS group, were included. CA was performed for paroxysmal AF in 34 patients in group 1 (72.3%) and 68 patients in group 2 (80.9%). We found lower a mean total procedure time (100 [90-120] vs. 160 [130-180] min, In patients undergoing high-power, short-duration RFCA for AF, the use of GA is associated with better procedural efficiency while simultaneously associated with an early recurrence rate comparable to MCS.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia globally. High-power, short-duration radiofrequency (RF) catheter ablation (CA) for AF has recently emerged, reducing ablation times and enhancing patient tolerability with comparable efficacy and safety. While the benefits of general anesthesia (GA) for standard-power, standard-duration CA are well-established, data comparing GA to mild conscious sedation (MCS) for high-power, short-duration CA are limited.
METHODS
METHODS
We included patients undergoing high-power, short-duration CA for AF under GA (group 1) or MCS (group 2). Procedural characteristics, success rates, and mid-term outcomes were compared.
RESULTS
RESULTS
In total, 131 patients, 47 in the GA group and 84 in the MCS group, were included. CA was performed for paroxysmal AF in 34 patients in group 1 (72.3%) and 68 patients in group 2 (80.9%). We found lower a mean total procedure time (100 [90-120] vs. 160 [130-180] min,
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
In patients undergoing high-power, short-duration RFCA for AF, the use of GA is associated with better procedural efficiency while simultaneously associated with an early recurrence rate comparable to MCS.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39202056
pii: jpm14080865
doi: 10.3390/jpm14080865
pmc: PMC11355396
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
Heart Rhythm. 2011 Mar;8(3):368-72
pubmed: 21055479
Circulation. 2024 Jan 2;149(1):e1-e156
pubmed: 38033089
Europace. 2018 Jun 1;20(6):935-942
pubmed: 28444228
Heart Asia. 2019 Aug 14;11(2):e011155
pubmed: 31565074
J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2023 Mar;66(2):445-453
pubmed: 35997848
Heart Rhythm. 2019 Feb;16(2):165-169
pubmed: 30712645
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2014 Jun;37(6):781-90
pubmed: 24697803
Heart Vessels. 2017 Aug;32(8):997-1005
pubmed: 28260190
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2022 Aug;33(8):1714-1722
pubmed: 35652836
Sci Rep. 2023 Oct 11;13(1):17204
pubmed: 37821563
Europace. 2021 Dec 7;23(12):2039-2045
pubmed: 34308973
Heart Rhythm. 2024 Sep;21(9):e31-e149
pubmed: 38597857
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2016 Dec;39(12):1359-1365
pubmed: 27747896
Arrhythm Electrophysiol Rev. 2020 Feb 12;8(4):265-272
pubmed: 32685157
Eur Heart J. 2021 Feb 1;42(5):373-498
pubmed: 32860505
J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2024 Mar;67(2):227-229
pubmed: 37897536
Europace. 2013 Jan;15(1):41-7
pubmed: 22915788
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2022 Aug;33(8):1723-1724
pubmed: 35652825