Intracardiac echocardiography–guided pulsed-field ablation for successful ablation of atrial fibrillation: a propensity-matched analysis from a large nationwide multicenter experience.

Autor: Dello Russo, Antonio, Tondo, Claudio, Schillaci, Vincenzo, Casella, Michela, Iacopino, Saverio, Bianchi, Stefano, Fassini, Gaetano, Rossillo, Antonio, Compagnucci, Paolo, Schiavone, Marco, Salito, Armando, Maggio, Ruggero, Cipolletta, Laura, Themistoclakis, Sakis, Pandozi, Claudio, Filannino, Pasquale, Rossi, Pietro, Bonanno, Carlo, Parisi, Quintino, Malacrida, Maurizio
Zdroj: Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology; Aug2024, Vol. 67 Issue 5, p1257-1266, 10p
Abstrakt: Background: Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) is increasingly employed in atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation procedures, with the potential to enhance procedural efficacy. Nevertheless, there is currently a lack of evidence assessing the impact of ICE on the efficiency, effectiveness, and safety outcomes in the context of novel pulsed-field ablation (PFA) for AF. Purpose: We aimed to assess whether the use of ICE could improve procedural parameters in a large population undergoing AF ablation with FARAPULSE™ catheter. Methods: Consecutive patients who had undergone PFA of AF from nine Italian centers were included. In procedures where the ICE catheter was employed for guidance (ICE-guided group), it was used to maneuver the PFA catheter within the left atrium to achieve optimal contact with atrial structures. Results: We analyzed 556 patients: 357 (66%) with paroxysmal AF, 499 (89.7%) de novo PVI. ICE-guided procedures (n = 138) were propensity matched with patients with a standard approach (n = 138), and their outcomes were compared. During ICE-guided procedures, no improvement in procedural metrics was recorded (ICE vs Standard, 23 ± 6 min vs 18.5 ± 9 min for time to PVI, p < 0.0001; 38.8 ± 7 vs 32.5 ± 5 number of PFA deliveries to achieve PVI, p < 0.0001; 68.8 ± 19 min vs 71.8 ± 29 min for primary operator time, p = 0.5301; 16.1 ± 8 min vs 18.2 ± 10 min for fluoroscopy time, p = 0.5476) except for support time (76.8 ± 26 min vs 91.4 ± 37 min, p = 0.0046). No major procedure-related adverse events were reported. Conclusion: Our findings confirmed that PFA could be consistently performed in a rapid, safe, and efficacious manner. The use of ICE to guide PFA was not associated with an improvement in procedural metrics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Databáze: Complementary Index
Externí odkaz: