Comparison of higher-power and conventional power ablation of atrial fibrillation using contact-force sensing catheters: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Cui, Luqian; chu, yingjie; Han, Yongmei; Dong, Shujuan

doi:10.22541/au.159769405.50106262

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…)is meta-analysis provides a more comprehensive assessment of HPSD RFA and conventional RFA in patients with AF. As in the previous studies [8,9,33,34], our results suggest that HPSD RFA may be more effective with higher first-pass isolation and freedom from atrial arrhythmia and lower acute PVR when compared with conventional RFA. Additionally, there was no difference in safety outcomes between the two groups.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Comparison of Effectiveness and Safety between High-Power Short-Duration Ablation and Conventional Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Jin

Jiang

et al. 2022

Journal of Interventional Cardiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety between high-power short-duration (HPSD) radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and conventional RFA in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods. Studies comparing HPSD and traditional applications in patients undergoing initial catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation from inception through December 2021 were searched on Pubmed, Medline, Cochrane, and Clinicaltrials.gov. Results. The meta-analysis included seventeen studies with a total of 4934 patients. HPSD group decreased procedure duration (mean difference (MD) −38.28 min, P < 0.001 ), RF duration (MD −20.51 min, P < 0.001 ), fluoroscopy duration (MD −5.19 min, P < 0.001 ), and acute pulmonary vein reconnection (Odds ratio (OR) 0.40, P < 0.001 ), while improving the freedom from atrial arrhythmia at one year (OR 1.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12–1.94, P = 0.005 ) and rates of first-pass isolation (OR 8.92, P = 0.001 ). Compared with the conventional group, freedom from atrial arrhythmia at one-year follow-up was higher in the HPSD group without the guidance of AI/LSI (OR 1.66, P = 0.01 ) and studies with a power setting of 40–50 W (OR 1.93, P = 0.002 ). Nevertheless, the two groups had similar effectiveness with a power setting of 50 W in the HPSD RFA (OR 1.10, P = 0.52 ). There was no difference in complications between the two groups ( P = 0.71 ). Conclusion. HPSD RFA was associated with shorter procedure duration, higher freedom from atrial arrhythmia, and comparable safety compared to conventional RFA.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%