Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Ablation index-guided high-power vs. moderate-power cavotricuspid isthmus ablation
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Ablation index-guided high-power vs. moderate-power cavotricuspid isthmus ablation
Do you wish to request the book?
Ablation index-guided high-power vs. moderate-power cavotricuspid isthmus ablation
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Ablation index-guided high-power vs. moderate-power cavotricuspid isthmus ablation
2023
Overview
Ablation index (AI)-guided ablation is useful for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) and cavotricuspid isthmus (CTI) ablation. However, the impact of radiofrequency (RF) application power on CTI ablation with a fixed target AI remains unclear. One-hundred-thirty drug-refractory atrial fibrillation and/or atrial flutter patients who underwent AI-guided CTI ablation with or without PVI between July 2020 and August 2021 were randomly assigned to high-power (45 W) and moderate-power (35 W) groups. We performed CTI ablation with the same target AI value in both groups: 500 for the anterior 1/3 segments and 450 for the posterior 2/3 segments. In total, first-pass conduction block of the CTI was obtained in 111 patients (85.4%), with 7 patients (5.4%) showing CTI reconnection. The rate of first-pass conduction block was significantly higher in the 45 W group (61/65, 93.8%) than in the 35 W group (50/65, 76.9%, P = 0.01). CTI ablation and CTI fluoroscopy time were significantly shorter in the 45 W group than in the 35 W group (CTI ablation time: 192.3 ± 84.8 vs. 319.8 ± 171.4 s, P < 0.0001; CTI fluoroscopy time: 125.2 ± 122.4 vs. 171.2 ± 124.0 s, P = 0.039). Although there was no significant difference, steam pops were identified in two patients from the 45 W group at the anterior segment of the CTI. The 45 W ablation strategy was faster and provided a higher probability of first-pass conduction block than the 35 W ablation strategy for CTI ablation with a fixed AI target.
Publisher
Springer Japan,Springer Nature B.V
