Contact Force-Guided versus Contact Force-Blinded Cavo-Tricuspid Isthmus Ablation for Atrial Flutter: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Contact force (CF) is a novel approach developed to increase the safety and efficacy of catheter ablation. However, the value of CF-sensing technology for atrial flutter (AFL) cavo-tricuspid isthmus ablation (CTIA) is inconclusive. To generate a comprehensive assessment of optimal extant data on CF for AFL, we synthesized randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies from Web of Science, SCOPUS, EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane until 29 November 2022, using the odds ratio (OR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Two RCTs and three observational studies with a total of 376 patients were included in our analysis. CF-guided ablation was associated with (A) a higher rate of AFL recurrence (OR: 2.26 with 95% CI [1.05, 4.87]) and total CF (MD: 2.71 with 95% CI [1.28, 4.13]); (B) no effect on total procedure duration (MD: −2.88 with 95% CI [−7.48, 1.72]), fluoroscopy duration (MD: −0.96 with 95% CI [−2.24, 0.31]), and bidirectional isthmus block (BDIB) (OR: 1.50 with 95% CI [0.72, 3.11]); and (C) decreased radiofrequency (RF) duration (MD: −1.40 with 95% CI [−2.39, −0.41]). We conclude that although CF-guided CTIA was associated with increased AFL recurrence and total CF and reduced RF duration, it did not affect total procedure duration, fluoroscopy duration, or BDIB. Thus, CF-guided CTIA may not be the optimal intervention for AFL. These findings indicate the need for (A) providers to balance the benefits and risks of CF when utilizing precision medicine to develop treatment plans for individuals with AFL and (B) clinical trials investigating CF-guided catheter ablation for AFL to provide definitive evidence of optimal CF-sensing technology.