Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Europace ; 26(5)2024 May 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38647070

ABSTRACT

AIMS: Simplified ablation technologies for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) are increasingly performed worldwide. One of the most common complications following PVI are vascular access-related complications. Lately, venous closure systems (VCSs) were introduced into clinical practice, aiming to reduce the time of bed rest, to increase the patients' comfort, and to reduce vascular access-related complications. The aim of the present study is to compare the safety and efficacy of using a VCS to achieve haemostasis following single-shot PVI to the actual standard of care [figure-of-eight suture and manual compression (MC)]. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is a prospective, multicentre, randomized, controlled, open-label trial performed at three German centres. Patients were randomized 1:1 to undergo haemostasis either by means of VCS (VCS group) or of a figure-of-eight suture and MC (F8 group). The primary efficacy endpoint was the time to ambulation, while the primary safety endpoint was the incidence of major periprocedural adverse events until hospital discharge. A total of 125 patients were randomized. The baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. The VCS group showed a shorter time to ambulation [109.0 (82.0, 160.0) vs. 269.0 (243.8, 340.5) min; P < 0.001], shorter time to haemostasis [1 (1, 2) vs. 5 (2, 10) min; P < 0.001], and shorter time to discharge eligibility [270 (270, 270) vs. 340 (300, 458) min; P < 0.001]. No major vascular access-related complication was reported in either group. A trend towards a lower incidence of minor vascular access-related complications on the day of procedure was observed in the VCS group [7 (11.1%) vs. 15 (24.2%); P = 0.063] as compared to the control group. CONCLUSION: Following AF ablation, the use of a VCS results in a significantly shorter time to ambulation, time to haemostasis, and time to discharge eligibility. No major vascular access-related complications were identified. The use of MC and a figure-of-eight suture showed a trend towards a higher incidence of minor vascular access-related complications.


Subject(s)
Atrial Fibrillation , Catheter Ablation , Pulmonary Veins , Suture Techniques , Humans , Atrial Fibrillation/surgery , Female , Male , Middle Aged , Catheter Ablation/adverse effects , Catheter Ablation/methods , Prospective Studies , Pulmonary Veins/surgery , Suture Techniques/adverse effects , Aged , Treatment Outcome , Germany , Time Factors , Vascular Closure Devices , Early Ambulation , Hemostatic Techniques/instrumentation
2.
Europace ; 25(9)2023 08 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37589146

ABSTRACT

AIMS: Catheter ablation with a cryoballoon (CB) provides effective and durable pulmonary vein (PV) isolation (PVI) associated with encouraging clinical outcome data. The novel POLARx CB incorporates unique features, which may translate into improved safety, efficacy, and outcomes. The ICE-AGE-1 study aimed to assess the efficacy, safety, and 1-year clinical follow-up of the POLARx CB in comparison to the Arctic Front Advance Pro CB (AF-CB4). METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 103 consecutive patients with paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) who underwent POLARx-based PVI (POLARx group) were prospectively enrolled and were compared to 102 consecutive patients previously treated with the AF-CB4 (AF-CB4 group). The mean age was 68.7 ± 10.2 (POLARx) and 65.7 ± 12 (AF-CB4, P = 0.0551) years. A total of 412 (POLARx) and 404 (AF-CB4) PVs were identified. All PVs, except for one PV in the POLARx group, were successfully isolated. A significant difference regarding the mean minimal CB temperature reached using the POLARx CB (-56.1 ± 8.3°C) and AF-CB4 (-46.9 ± 10.1°C) was observed (P < 0.0001). Real-time PVI was visualized in 71% of PVs in the POLARx group and 46% of them in the AF-CB4 group (P < 0.001). The mean procedure time was comparable: 54.5 ± 17.1 min for POLARx and 59.4 ± 18.6 min for AF-CB4 (P = 0.0509). No differences were observed in terms of periprocedural complications. There were comparable rates in freedom of AF or atrial tachycardia recurrence after 12 months, beyond a 90-day long blanking period: 78.9% in the POLARx group vs. 77.2% in the AF-CB4 group (P = 0.804). CONCLUSION: The novel POLARx CB showed similar safety, efficacy, and 1-year recurrence-free survival rates compared to the AF-CB4. A higher rate of real-time electrical PV recordings and significantly lower balloon temperatures were observed using the POLARx as compared to AF-CB4.


Subject(s)
Catheter Ablation , Pulmonary Veins , Humans , Middle Aged , Aged , Infant , Pulmonary Veins/surgery , Prospective Studies , Catheter Ablation/adverse effects , Temperature
3.
Europace ; 24(6): 921-927, 2022 07 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34907431

ABSTRACT

AIMS: Cryoballoon (CB) based pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is a widely used technique for treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF); however the ideal energy dosing has not yet been standardized. This was a single-centre randomized clinical trial aiming at assessing the safety, acute efficacy, and clinical outcome of an individualized vs. a fixed CB ablation protocol using the fourth-generation CB (CB4) guided by pulmonary vein (PV) potential recordings and CB temperature. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients were randomized in a 1:1 fashion to two different dosing protocols: INDI-FREEZE group (individualized protocol): freeze-cycle duration of time to effect plus 90 s or interruption of the freeze-cycle and repositioning CB if a CB temperature of -30°C was not within 40 s. Control group (fixed protocol): freeze-cycle duration of 180 s. No-bonus freeze-cycle was applied in either patient group. The primary endpoint was freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmia at 12 months. Secondary end points included procedural parameters and complications. A total of 100 patients with paroxysmal AF were prospectively enrolled. No difference was seen in the primary endpoint [INDI-FREEZE group: 38/47 (81%) vs. control group: 40/47, (85%), P = 0.583]. The total freezing time was significantly shorter in the INDI-FREEZE group (157 ± 56 s vs. 212 ± 83 s, P < 0.001), while procedure duration (57.9 ± 17.9 min vs. 63.2 ± 20.2 min, P = 0.172) was similar. No differences were seen in the minimum CB and oesophageal temperatures as well as in periprocedural complications. CONCLUSION: Compared to the fixed protocol, the individualized approach provides a similar safety profile and clinical outcome, while reducing the total freezing time.


Subject(s)
Atrial Fibrillation , Catheter Ablation , Cryosurgery , Pulmonary Veins , Atrial Fibrillation/diagnosis , Atrial Fibrillation/surgery , Catheter Ablation/adverse effects , Catheter Ablation/methods , Cryosurgery/adverse effects , Cryosurgery/methods , Freezing , Humans , Pulmonary Veins/surgery , Recurrence , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...