Computed tomography predictors of increased transvenous lead extraction difficulty.

BACKGROUND: The ability of computed tomography (CT) characteristics to predict the difficulty of transvenous lead extraction (TLE) is an evolving subject. OBJECTIVE: To identify CT characteristics associated with increased TLE difficulty. METHODS: All consecutive patients undergoing TLE at the University of California San Diego from January 2018 to February 2022 were analyzed, utilizing the UC San Diego Lead Extraction Registry. Patients underwent cardiac-gated chest CT scans with intravenous contrast; all scans were reviewed by a single radiologist. Lead extraction was performed per standard institutional protocol with the initial use of a laser sheath and crossover to a mechanical sheath as needed. Multivariable linear and logistic regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of individual lead-removal fluoroscopy time and mechanical sheath use, as markers of extraction difficulty. RESULTS: A total of 343 patients were analyzed. The mean age of the study population was 63.8 ± 15.4 years; 71% were male. The mean lead dwell-in duration was 8.6 ± 5.7 years. In multivariable linear regression analysis, venous occlusion detected on CT was independently associated with higher individual lead-removal fluoroscopy time (p = 0.004), when adjusting for clinical characteristics such as lead dwell time. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, calcification and venous occlusion were independently associated with a higher need for mechanical sheath use during TLE (odds ratio:5.08, p < 0.001, 95% CI: 2.54-10.46) and (odds ratio:3.72, p < 0.001, 95% CI: 1.89-7.35), respectively. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing TLE, venous occlusion identified by chest CT is associated with increased fluoroscopy time. Patients with lead-associated calcification or venous occlusion detected by chest CT are each five and three times more likely to require crossover from laser to a mechanical sheath.

Infra-Hisian Conduction Disturbance and Alternating Left Anterior/Posterior Fascicular Block.

We present an unusual case of alternating left anterior and left posterior fascicular block. Given the known risk for progression to complete atrioventricular block with alternating right bundle and left bundle branch block, we performed an electrophysiological study. Findings were consistent with infra-Hisian disease, and the patient underwent pacemaker implantation.

Open Chest Approach Lead Extraction in a Patient with a Large Vegetation: The Importance of Multidisciplinary Approach, Advanced Imaging, and Procedural Planning.

We present a complex case of cardiac implantable electronic device infection and extraction in the setting of bacteremia, large lead vegetation, and patent foramen ovale. Following a comprehensive preprocedural workup including transesophageal echocardiogram and computed tomography lead extraction protocol, in addition to the involvement of multiple subspecialties, an open chest approach to extraction was deemed a safer option for eradication of the patient's infection. Despite percutaneous techniques having evolved as the preferred extraction method during the last few decades, this case demonstrates the importance of a thorough evaluation at an experienced center to determine the need for open chest extraction.

Safety of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with surgically implanted permanent epicardial leads.

BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) safety in patients with an epicardial cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the safety and adverse effects of MRI in patients who had surgically implanted epicardial CIED. METHODS: Patients with surgically implanted CIEDs who underwent MRI with an appropriate cardiology-radiology collaborative protocol between January 2008 and January 2021 were prospectively studied in 2 clinical centers. All patients underwent close cardiac monitoring through MRI procedures. Outcomes were compared between the epicardial CIED group and the matched non-MRI-conditional transvenous CIED group. RESULTS: Twenty-nine consecutive patients with epicardial CIED (41.4% male; mean age 43 years) underwent 52 MRIs in 57 anatomic regions. Sixteen patients had a pacemaker, 9 had a cardiac defibrillator or cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator, and 4 had no device generator. No significant adverse events occurred in the epicardial or transvenous CIED groups. Battery life, pacing, sensing thresholds, lead impedance, and cardiac biomarkers were not significantly changed, except 1 patient had a transient decrease in atrial lead sensing function. CONCLUSION: MRI of CIEDs with epicardially implanted leads does not represent a greater risk than transvenous CIEDs when performed with a multidisciplinary collaborative protocol centered on patient safety.

Improved survival in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure undergoing catheter ablation compared to medical treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: Increasing evidence has suggested improved outcomes in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with heart failure (HF) undergoing catheter ablation (CA) as compared to medical therapy. We sought to investigate the benefit of CA on outcomes of patients with AF and HF as compared to medical therapy. METHODS AND RESULTS: A systematic review of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials was performed for clinical studies evaluating the benefit of CA for patients with AF and HF. Primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. Secondary endpoints included atrial-arrhythmia recurrence and improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Eight randomized controlled trials were included with a total of 2121 patients (mean age: 65 ± 5 years; 72% male). Mean follow-up duration was 32.9 ± 14.5 months. All-cause mortality in patients who underwent CA was significantly lower than in the medical treatment group (8.8% vs. 13.5%, RR 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.51-0.83, p = .0005). A 35% relative risk reduction and 4.7% absolute risk reduction in all-cause mortality was observed with CA. Rates of all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence were significantly lower in the CA group (39.9% vs. 69.6%, RR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.40-0.76, p = .0003). Improvement in LVEF was significantly higher in patients undergoing CA (+9.4 ± 7.6%) as compared to conventional treatment (+3.3 ± 8%) (mean difference 6.2, 95% CI: 3.6-8.8, p < .00001). CONCLUSION: CA for AF in patients with HF decreases all-cause mortality, improves all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence rate and LVEF when compared to medical management. CA should be considered the treatment of choice to improve survival in this select group of patients. Nonetheless, the benefit of CA in patients with severely reduced ejection fraction and New York Heart Association class IV HF has not been clearly elucidated.

Epicardial access complications during electrophysiology procedures.

INTRODUCTION: Percutaneous epicardial access (EA) was first described more than two decades ago. Since its initial introduction, indications for its utilization in the field of electrophysiology have expanded dramatically. DISCUSSION: Epicardial mapping and ablation in patients with ventricular tachycardia is routinely performed in tertiary electrophysiology centers around the world. Although limited by lack of randomized controlled trials, epicardial ablation for atrial fibrillation has been suggested as a conjunctive strategy in patients who have failed an initial endocardial catheter ablation attempt, and it is necessary for placement of some left atrial appendage occlusion devices as well. An accurate understanding of the cardiac anatomy is crucial to avoid complications such as inadvertent right ventricular puncture, injury to the coronary arteries, abdominal viscera, phrenic nerves, and esophagus during both EA and catheter ablation. CONCLUSION: The aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the cardiac anatomy, technical aspects to optimize the safety of epicardial puncture, recognize and avoid potential complications.

Focal impulse and rotor modulation guided ablation versus pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation: A meta-analysis of head-to-head comparative studies.

INTRODUCTION: Empirical pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) remains the cornerstone for catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF). Various ablation strategies and modalities are continually tested with the aim of improving ablation outcomes. Although focal impulse and rotor modulation (FIRM)-guided ablation is currently used as an adjunct to PVI, evidence supporting this strategy is conflicting. We sought to examine whether the utilization of FIRM-guided ablation with or without PVI is associated with a decrease in all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence as compared to PVI alone. METHODS: A systematic review of PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase was performed for head-to-head study designs comparing outcomes of patients who underwent FIRM-guided ablation with or without PVI to those who underwent PVI alone. The primary efficacy endpoint was all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence. The secondary endpoints were complications rates and procedural characteristics. RESULTS: Overall, six studies comprising 674 patients undergoing either FIRM-guided ablation ± PVI versus PVI were included (mean age 63.4 ± 9.2, male 74%, 9% paroxysmal AF, 91% nonparoxysmal AF). After a mean follow-up of 18.8 months, FIRM-guided ablation with or without PVI was not associated with improvement in all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence rate compared to PVI alone (43.4% vs. 45.9%, risk ratio [RR]: 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.77-1.47; p = .70). No statistically significant difference was noted in complication rates between the two groups (RR: 1.66; 95% CI: 0.08-34.54; p = .74). CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis of head-to-head comparison studies, FIRM-guided ablation with or without PVI did not provide any benefit in improving all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence at follow-up when compared to PVI alone.

Catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia in ischemic cardiomyopathy: Impact of concomitant amiodarone therapy on short- and long-term clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Substrate catheter ablation of scar-related ventricular tachycardia (VT) is a widely accepted therapeutic option for patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM). OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether concomitant amiodarone therapy affects procedural outcomes. METHODS: A total of 134 consecutive patients (89% male; age 66 ± 10 years) with ICM undergoing catheter ablation of VT were included in the study. Patients were sorted by amiodarone therapy before ablation. In all patients, a substrate-based catheter ablation (endocardial ± epicardial) in sinus rhythm abolishing all "abnormal" electrograms within the scar was performed. The endpoint of the procedure was VT noninducibility. After the ablation procedure, all antiarrhythmic medications were discontinued. All patients had an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, and recurrences were analyzed through the device. RESULTS: In 84 patients (63%), the ablation was performed on amiodarone; the remaining 50 patients (37%) were off amiodarone. Patients had comparable baseline characteristics. Mean scar size area was 143.6 ± 44.9 cm2 on amiodarone vs 139.2 ± 36.8 cm2 off amiodarone (P = .56). More radiofrequency time was necessary to achieve noninducibility in the off-amiodarone group compared to the on-amiodarone group (68.1 ± 20.1 minutes vs 51.5 ± 19.7 minutes; P <.001). In addition, due to persistent VT inducibility, more patients in the off-amiodarone group required epicardial ablation than in the on-amiodarone group (13/50 [26%] vs 5/84 [6%], respectively; P <.001). During mean follow-up of 23.9 ± 11.6 months, recurrence of any ventricular arrhythmias off antiarrhythmic drugs was 44% (37/84) in the on-amiodarone group vs 22% (11/50) in the off-amiodarone group (P = .013). CONCLUSION: Albeit, VT noninducibility after substrate catheter ablation for scar related VT was achieved faster, with less radiofrequency time and less need for epicardial ablation in patients taking amiodarone, these patients had significantly higher VT recurrence at long-term follow-up when this medication was discontinued.

Efficacy and safety of left atrial appendage electrical isolation during catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: an updated meta-analysis.

AIMS: Left atrial appendage electrical isolation (LAAEI) has been shown to improve freedom from all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence in patients with non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). The aim of this study is to investigate the long-term efficacy and safety outcomes of LAAEI in patients with non-paroxysmal AF undergoing catheter ablation. METHODS AND RESULTS: A systematic review of Medline, Cochrane, and Embase was performed for clinical studies evaluating the benefit of LAAEI in non-paroxysmal AF. Nine studies with a total of 2336 patients were included (mean age: 65 ± 9 years, 63% male). All studies included patients with persistent AF, long-standing persistent AF, or both. At a mean follow-up of 40.5 months, patients who underwent LAAEI had significantly higher freedom from all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence than patients who underwent standard ablation alone [69.3% vs. 46.4%; risk ratio (RR) 0.54; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42-0.69; P < 0.0001]. A 46% relative risk reduction and 22.9% absolute risk reduction in atrial-arrhythmia recurrence was noted with LAAEI. Rates of cerebral thromboembolism were not significantly different between the two groups (LAAEI 3% vs. standard ablation 1.6%, respectively; RR 1.76; 95% CI 0.61-5.04; P = 0.29). Furthermore, there was no significant difference in the acute procedural complication rates between the two groups (LAAEI 4% vs. standard ablation 3%, respectively; RR 1.29; 95% CI 0.83-2.02; P = 0.26). CONCLUSION: At long-term follow-up, LAAEI led to a significantly higher improvement in freedom from all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence in patients with non-paroxysmal AF, when compared to standard ablation alone. Importantly, this benefit was achieved without an increased risk of acute procedural complications or cerebral thromboembolic events.

First-line ablation of ventricular tachycardia in ischemic cardiomyopathy: stratification of outcomes by left ventricular function.

PURPOSE: First-line catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF) in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) has been associated with improved outcomes; however, most benefit seems to be in patients with moderately depressed left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Herein, outcomes were stratified based on LVEF. METHODS: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating first-line ablation versus medical therapy in patients with VT and ICM was performed. Risk estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were measured. RESULTS: Four RCTs with a total of 505 patients (mean age 66 ± 9 years, 89% male, 80% with previous revascularization) were included. Mean LVEF was 35 ± 8%. At a mean follow-up of 24 ± 9 months, a significant benefit in survival-free from appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapies was observed in all patients undergoing first-line catheter ablation compared with medical management (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.56-0.86). In patients with moderately depressed LVEF (> 30-50%), first-line VT ablation was associated with a statistically significant reduction in the composite endpoint of survival free from VT/VF and appropriate ICD therapies (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.36-0.76), whereas there was no difference in patients with severely depressed LVEF (≤30%) (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.24-1.32). Funnel plots did not show asymmetry suggesting lack of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ICM and VT undergoing first-line ablation have a significantly lower rate of appropriate ICD therapies without a mortality difference compared with patients receiving an initial approach based on medical therapy. The beneficial effect of a first-line ablation approach was only observed in patients with moderately depressed LVEF (> 30-50%).

Long-Term Outcomes of Left Atrial Appendage Electrical Isolation in Patients With Nonparoxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Left atrial appendage electrical isolation (LAAEI) has been proposed for the treatment of nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). The long-term clinical outcomes of this approach remain unclear. The objective of our study was to investigate the incremental benefit and safety of LAAEI in patients undergoing catheter ablation for nonparoxysmal AF. METHODS: Propensity score-matched analysis was performed using a prospective registry database from 2010 to 2014. All patients in the LAAEI group were matched based on baseline characteristics, echocardiographic parameters, and procedural ablation techniques. RESULTS: We identified 1842 patients who underwent catheter ablation for nonparoxysmal AF. Propensity score matching yielded 1092 patients, 546 patients with LAAEI, and 546 patients without LAAEI. At 5-year follow-up, overall freedom from all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence, off-antiarrhythmic drugs, in patients who underwent LAAEI was 68.9% versus 50.2% in those who underwent standard ablation alone (P<0.001). Acute complication rates were similar between groups (LAAEI 1.3% versus non-LAAEI 0.73%, P=0.36). At 5-year follow-up, 382 (70%) patients in the LAAEI group remained on oral anticoagulation versus 217 (39.7%) in the non-LAAEI group. At 5-year follow-up, thromboembolic events occurred in 15/546 (2.75%) in the LAAEI group and 4/546 (0.73%) in the non-LAAEI group (P=0.01). No thromboembolic events occurred in either group on-oral anticoagulation. In patients who were off-oral anticoagulation, at 5-year follow-up, thromboembolic events occurred in 15/164 (9.1%) in the LAAEI group and 4/329 (1.2%) in the non-LAAEI group (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: At 5-year follow-up, LAAEI was associated with significantly higher freedom from all-atrial arrhythmia recurrence in patients with persistent and long-standing persistent AF without increasing acute procedural complication rate. In patients off-oral anticoagulation, there appears to be a higher risk of thromboembolic events in the LAAEI group.

T-wave inversion as a manifestation of COVID-19 infection: a case series.

PURPOSE: Cardiac involvement with COVID-19 infection has become evident by elevated troponin, cardiac arrhythmias, ST segment elevation, myocarditis, fulminant heart failure, and sudden cardiac death. We aimed to describe the association of COVID-19 and T-wave inversion (TWI) in a large case series. METHODS: We conducted an observational, retrospective study of confirmed COVID-19 cases with at least one electrocardiogram (ECG) in a large hospital in New York City (March 23, 2020-April 23, 2020). Patients with new TWI or pseudonormalization were further analyzed. Mortality and the need for invasive mechanical ventilation were the main outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 3225 patients were screened; 195 (6%) were selected for further analysis: 181 with TWI and 14 with T-wave pseudonormalization. Mean age was 66 ± 7 years; 51% were male. TWI were more commonly noted in the lateral (71%), followed by anterior (64%), inferior (57%), and septal (26%) leads. A total of 44 patients (23%) had elevated troponin. A total of 50 patients died (26%). Mortality rates of 35%, and 52% were observed in patients with diffuse TWI, and elevated troponin, respectively. Mortality rate of 80% was observed in patients with both elevated troponin and diffuse TWI. Additionally, 30% of the entire cohort and 58% of patients with elevated troponin required invasive mechanical ventilation. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates that new TWI is a relatively common finding in COVID-19 patients. Importantly, our findings suggest that new TWI or T-wave pseudonormalization, particularly with elevated troponin, was associated with higher rates of mechanical ventilation and in-hospital mortality.

Is transesophageal echocardiography necessary in patients undergoing ablation of atrial fibrillation on an uninterrupted direct oral anticoagulant regimen? Results from a prospective multicenter registry.

BACKGROUND: Thromboembolic stroke is a rare but devastating consequence of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is recommended to rule out left atrial appendage thrombus; however, its use is variable. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess whether TEE is mandatory in patients undergoing AF ablation on uninterrupted direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). METHODS: Data from our prospective multicenter registry of patients with AF undergoing radiofrequency catheter ablation on uninterrupted DOACs were analyzed. All the included patients were on anticoagulation for at least 4 weeks before ablation. All AF ablation procedures were performed under intracardiac echocardiography guidance. Before transseptal puncture, heparin bolus was administered, followed by continuous infusion, with a target activated clotting time of >300 seconds. RESULTS: A total of 6186 patients (3180 on apixaban [51.4%], 2528 on rivaroxaban [40.9%], 404 on dabigatran [6.5%], and 74 on edoxaban [1.2%]) were analyzed. The mean age of the study population was 69.4 ± 10.3 years; 4194 patients (67.8%) were male, and 5120 patients (82.8%) had persistent and long-standing persistent AF. The mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 2.86 ± 1.58; the mean CHADS2 score was 1.65 ± 1.14. Intracardiac echocardiography ruled out left atrial appendage and left atrial thrombi in all patients and revealed "smoke" in 1672 patients (27.03%). Transient ischemic attack was noted in 1 patient with long-standing persistent AF in the setting of a missed dose of rivaroxaban before ablation. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that performing AF ablation in patients on uninterrupted DOACs without TEE is safe and feasible in high stroke risk patients. Elimination of routine preablation TEE would have significant economic and clinical implications.

Endo-epicardial ablation vs endocardial ablation for the management of ventricular tachycardia in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The pathologic process of ARVC (arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy) typically originates in the epicardium or subepicardial layers with progression toward endocardium. However, in the most recent ARVC international task force consensus statement, epicardial ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation is recommended as a Class I indication only in patients with at least one failed endocardial VT ablation attempt. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the outcomes of ARVC patients undergoing combined endo-epicardial VT ablation, as compared to endocardial ablation alone. METHODS: A systematic review of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane was performed for studies reporting clinical outcomes of endo-epicardial VT ablation vs endocardial-only VT ablation in patients with ARVC. Fixed-Effect model was used if I2 < 25 and the Random-Effects Model was used if I2 ≥ 25%. RESULTS: Nine studies consisting of 452 patients were included (mean age 42.3 ± 5.7 years; 70% male). After a mean follow-up of 48.1 ± 21.5 months, endo-epicardial ablation was associated with 42% relative risk reduction in VA recurrence as opposed to endocardial ablation alone (risk ratio [RR], 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45-0.75; P < .0001). No significant differences were noted between endo-epicardial and endocardial VT ablation groups in terms of all-cause mortality (RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.03-47.08; P = .93) and acute procedural complications (RR, 5.39; 95% CI, 0.60-48.74; P = .13). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that in patients with ARVC, endo-epicardial VT ablation is associated with a significant reduction in VA recurrence as opposed to endocardial ablation alone, without a significant difference in all-cause mortality or acute procedural complications.

Cavotricuspid isthmus line in patients undergoing catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation with or without history of typical atrial flutter: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is the mainstay of catheter ablation (CA) for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). However, for persistent and long-standing persistent AF, there are no established strategies to improve the success rate of CA. Despite studies indicating that prophylactic cavotricuspid isthmus (CTI) ablation provides no or limited incremental benefit in patients with AF, it is still routinely performed worldwide. OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine whether CTI ablation for AF is associated with improvement in recurrence of all-atrial arrhythmias, compared with PVI alone in patients with and without typical atrial flutter (AFL). METHODS: A systematic review of PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase was performed for clinical studies including AF patients, reporting outcomes of CTI + PVI versus PVI alone. The primary efficacy endpoint was recurrence of all-atrial arrhythmias. RESULTS: Five studies comprising 1400 patients undergoing CTI + PVI versus PVI alone were included; 1110 patients had AF without AFL, and 290 patients had coexistent AF and AFL. After a mean follow-up of 14.4 ± 4.8 months, CTI + PVI was not associated with improvement in recurrence of all-atrial arrhythmias when compared with PVI alone (risk ratio [RR]: 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.93-1.79;p = .13). In the subgroup analysis, there were no differences between both groups in patients with AF without AFL (RR: 1.55; 95% CI: 0.96-2.48; p = .07), and in patients with AF and AFL (RR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.6-1.39; p = .68). CONCLUSION: In AF patients, irrespective of the presence of typical AFL, additional CTI ablation is not associated with improvement in recurrence of all-atrial arrhythmias, compared with PVI alone.

Beyond Pulmonary Vein Isolation in Nonparoxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: Posterior Wall, Vein of Marshall, Coronary Sinus, Superior Vena Cava, and Left Atrial Appendage.

The optimal ablation strategy for non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation remains controversial. Non-PV triggers have been shown to have a major arrhythmogenic role in these patients. Common sources of non-PV triggers are: posterior wall, left atrial appendage, superior vena cava, coronary sinus, vein of Marshall, interatrial septum, crista terminalis/Eustachian ridge, and mitral and tricuspid valve annuli. These sites are targeted empirically in selected cases or if significant ectopy is noted (with or without a drug challenge), to improve outcomes in patients with non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. This article focuses on summarizing the current evidence and the approach to mapping and ablation of these frequent non-PV trigger sites.

Fluoroless Atrial Fibrillation Catheter Ablation: Technique and Clinical Outcomes.

Fluoroscopy continues to be considered an indispensable part of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation worldwide. Deleterious effects of radiation exposure to patients, physicians, and catheter laboratory personnel are gaining increased consideration. Safety and efficacy of a fluoroless approach for AF ablation is comparable with outcomes achieved with fluoroscopy use. This article focuses on AF ablation with zero fluoroscopy use as well as current evidence on efficacy and safety of this technique. In contrast, minimal fluoroscopy is an alternative. Relying on intracardiac echocardiography for transseptal access and electroanatomic mapping for catheter manipulation can help implement this approach on a wider scale.