Porous tip contact force–sensing catheters for pulmonary vein isolation: performance in a clinical routine setting

Plenge, Tobias; Bruck, Jan-Hendrik van den; Lüker, Jakob; Sultan, Arian; Steven, Daniel

doi:10.1007/s10840-019-00591-2

Cited by 10 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, Plenge et al presented the first prospective trial and controlled data comparing STSFc with STc. It was found that when using STSFc, this resulted in shorter ablation times; additionally, the rate of recrudescence and complications were similar for both groups …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…A total of 727 patients were enrolled in these trials (471 were allocated to the STSFc group and 256 were allocated to the STc group). Three of the four trials had a prospective design, and most of the trials had patients that were matched on age, gender, body mass index (BMI) and left atrium diameter between the STSFc and STc groups. One study by Chopra et al expounded that patient baseline characteristics and medical history sections were not significantly different between the two groups, but did not show detailed data in the articles .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It was found that when using STSFc, this resulted in shorter ablation times; additionally, the rate of recrudescence and complications were similar for both groups. 16 In an additional prospective trial by Maurer et al, it was shown that 79.7% of patients from the STSFc group were free from AF (74.3% in the STc group) after a mean follow-up of 12 ± 3 months, even though the result did not reach statistical significance (P = .18), there was a trend towards improved efficacy of the STSFc when compared to STc. 18 Additionally, the Ablation Index (AI), which represents a new lesion quality marker, has been shown to allow acute durable PVI followed by increased long-term success.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Safety and efficacy of the ThermoCool SmartTouch SurroundFlow catheter for atrial fibrillation ablation: A meta‐analysis

Chen

Gao

Liu

et al. 2019

Clinical Cardiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The ThermoCool Smarttouch Surroundflow catheter (STSFc) is an advanced catheter, which integrating contact force sensing and surroundflow technology. However, comparative data between STSFc and contact force sensing catheter (Thermocool SmartTouch catheter [STc]) are limited. Hypothesis We thought that STSFc might bring more clinical benefits. The aim of this meta‐analysis was to compare the safety and efficiency between the STSFc and the STc for treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods The Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies comparing STSFc and STc. Results Four trials involving 727 patients were included in the study. Pool‐analyses demonstrated that, as compared STc ablation, STSFc ablation was more beneficial in terms of procedural times (standard mean difference [SMD]: −0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], −0.37 to −0.07, P = .005) and irrigation fluid volume (SMD: −1.94; 95% CI, −2.65 to −1.22, P < .0001). There was no significant difference between STSFc and STc (risk ratio [RR]: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.21, P = .79) for free from AF. Evidence of complications were low and similar for both groups (RR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.19‐3.55, P = .80). Additionally, patients administered STSFc ablation tended to have shorter fluoroscopic times (SMD: −0.20; 95% CI, −0.63‐0.23, P = .21). Conclusions STSFc ablation was associated with reducing procedural times and irrigation fluid volume. Further, STSFc ablation tended to shorten fluoroscopic times. Therefore, STSFc ablation would be a better choice for AF patients especially in patients with heart failure.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 85%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Safety and efficacy of the ThermoCool SmartTouch SurroundFlow catheter for atrial fibrillation ablation: A meta‐analysis

Chen

Gao

Liu

et al. 2019

Clinical Cardiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The increase in volume overload and urinary tract infections (presumably related to the use of indwelling foley catheters 16 ) are likely related to the volume and salt load from the continuous irrigation of RFA catheters. Volume overload could be mitigated by RFA catheters that require less irrigation 17 or through prophylactic diuretic use in higher‐risk patients. Differences in urinary tract infections could potentially be mitigated by minimizing the use of foley catheters 16 or using prophylactic antibiotics 18 when indwelling bladder catheterization is required.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Procedure characteristics and outcomes of atrial fibrillation ablation procedures using cryoballoon versus radiofrequency ablation: A report from the GWTG‐AFIB registry

Friedman

Holmes

Curtis

et al. 2021

Cardiovasc electrophysiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Cryoballoon ablation (CBA) is an alternative to radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) and real‐world comparisons of this strategy are lacking. As such, we sought to compare patient and periprocedural characteristics and outcomes of CBA versus RFA in the Get With the Guidelines AFIB Registry. Methods Categorical variables were compared via the χ2 test and continuous variables were compared via the Wilcoxon rank‐sum test. Adjusted analyses were performed using overlap weighting of propensity scores. Results A total of 5247 (1465 CBA, 3782 RFA) ablation procedures were reported from 33 sites. Those undergoing CBA more often had paroxysmal AF (60.0% vs. 48.8%) and no prior AF ablation (87.5% vs. 73.8%). CHA2DS2‐VASc scores were similar. Among de novo ablations, most ablations involved intracardiac echocardiography and electroanatomic mapping, but both were less common with CBA (87.3% vs. 93.9%, p < .0001, and 87.7% vs. 94.6%, p < .0001, respectively). CBA was associated with shorter procedures (129 vs. 179 min, p < .0001), increased fluoroscopy use (19 vs. 11 min, p < .0001), and similar ablation times (27 vs. 35 min, p = .15). Nonpulmonary vein ablation was common with CBA: roof line 38.6%, floor line 20.4%, cavotricuspid isthmus 27.7%. RFA was associated with more total complications compared to CBA (5.4% vs. 2.3%, p < .0001), due to more volume overload and “other” events, although phrenic nerve injury was more common with CBA (0.9% vs 0.1%, p = .0001). In the adjusted model, any complication was less common among CBA cases (odds ratio, 0.45; confidence interval, 0.25–0.79, p = .0056). Conclusion CBA was associated with fewer complications, and shorter procedure times, and greater fluoroscopy times, compared to RFA. Nonpulmonary vein ablation and electroanatomic mapping system use was common with CBA.

show abstract

“…Several animal studies suggested that HPSD was superior to LPLD with lower complication rate 2,21 . Some human studies using HPSD showed excellent clinical outcomes with fewer complications 15,35,36 . In the present study, the pooled analysis of included studies also showed that the rate of complications similar between two groups.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety and Efficacy of High Power Shorter duration Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Chen

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Radiofrequency ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is effective but hampered by pulmonary veins reconnection due to insufficient lesions. High power shorter duration ablation (HPSD) seen to increase efficacy and safety. This analysis aimed to evaluate the clinical benefits of HPSD in patients with AF. Methods: The Medline, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies comparing HPSD and Low power longer duration (LPLD) ablation. Results: A total of seven trials with 2023 patients were included in the analysis. Pooled analyses demonstrated that HPSD showed a benefit of first-pass pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) [

show abstract

Porous tip contact force–sensing catheters for pulmonary vein isolation: performance in a clinical routine setting

Cited by 10 publications

References 30 publications

Safety and efficacy of the ThermoCool SmartTouch SurroundFlow catheter for atrial fibrillation ablation: A meta‐analysis

Safety and efficacy of the ThermoCool SmartTouch SurroundFlow catheter for atrial fibrillation ablation: A meta‐analysis

Procedure characteristics and outcomes of atrial fibrillation ablation procedures using cryoballoon versus radiofrequency ablation: A report from the GWTG‐AFIB registry

Safety and Efficacy of High Power Shorter duration Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About