Comparison of clinical and procedural outcomes between high-power short-duration, standard-power standard-duration, and temperature-controlled noncontact force guided ablation for atrial fibrillation

Comparison of very high-power short-duration, high-power short-duration, and low-power long-duration radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal power and duration settings for radiofrequency (RF) atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation to improve efficacy and safety is unclear. We compared low-power long-duration (LPLD), high-power short-duration (HPSD), and very HPSD (vHPSD) RF settings for AF ablation.

METHODS

This network meta-analysis (NMA) was structured according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Medline, Scopus and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched to identify relevant studies. Observational and randomized studies were included. Eligible studies compared outcomes in AF patients who underwent first-time RF ablation with the following settings: vHPSD (70-90 W, 3-10 s), HPSD (45-60 W, 5-10 s), or LPLD (20-40 W, 20-60 s).

RESULTS

Thirty-six studies comprising 10,375 patients were included (33% female). Frequentist NMA showed LPLD tended toward a lower odds of freedom from arrhythmia (FFA) versus HPSD (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.86-1.00). There was no difference in FFA between vHPSD versus HPSD. Splitwise interval estimates showed a lower odds of FFA in LPLD versus vHPSD on direct (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.65-0.93) and network estimates (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.73-0.98). Frequentist NMA showed less total procedural (TP) time with HPSD versus LPLD (generic variance 1.06, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.29) and no difference between HPSD versus vHPSD.

CONCLUSION

This NMA shows improved procedural times in HPSD and vHPSD versus LPLD. Although HPSD tended toward improved odds of FFA compared to LPLD, the overall result was not statistically significant. The odds of FFA in LPLD was lower versus vHPSD on direct and network estimates on splitwise interval analysis. Large prospective head-to-head randomized trials are needed to validate HPSD and vHPSD settings.

Impact of high-power short-duration atrial fibrillation ablation technique on the incidence of silent cerebral embolism: a prospective randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

High-power short-duration (HPSD) ablation strategy has emerged as a popular approach for treating atrial fibrillation (AF), with shorter ablation time. The utilized Smart Touch Surround Flow (STSF) catheter, with 56 holes around the electrode, lowers electrode-tissue temperature and thrombus risk. Thus, we conducted this prospective, randomized study to investigate if the HPSD strategy with STSF catheter in AF ablation procedures reduces the silent cerebral embolism (SCE) risk compared to the conventional approach with the Smart Touch (ST) catheter.

METHODS

From June 2020 to September 2021, 100 AF patients were randomized 1:1 to the HPSD group using the STSF catheter (power set at 50 W) or the conventional group using the ST catheter (power set at 30 to 35 W). Pulmonary vein isolation was performed in all patients, with additional lesions at operator's discretion. High-resolution cerebral diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (hDWI) with slice thickness of 1 mm was performed before and 24-72 h after ablation. The incidence of new periprocedural SCE was defined as the primary outcome. Cognitive performance was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) test.

RESULTS

All enrolled AF patients (median age 63, 60% male, 59% paroxysmal AF) underwent successful ablation. Post-procedural hDWI identified 106 lesions in 42 enrolled patients (42%), with 55 lesions in 22 patients (44%) in the HPSD group and 51 lesions in 20 patients (40%) in the conventional group (p = 0.685). No significant differences were observed between two groups regarding the average number of lesions (p = 0.751), maximum lesion diameter (p = 0.405), and total lesion volume per patient (p = 0.669). Persistent AF and CHA2DS2-VASc score were identified as SCE determinants during AF ablation procedure by multivariable regression analysis. No significant differences in MoCA scores were observed between patients with SCE and those without, both immediately post-procedure (p = 0.572) and at the 3-month follow-up (p = 0.743).

CONCLUSIONS

Involving a small sample size of 100 AF patients, this study reveals a similar incidence of SCE in AF ablation procedures, comparing the HPSD strategy using the STSF catheter to the conventional approach with the ST catheter.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04408716. AF = Atrial fibrillation, DWI = Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging, HPSD = High-power short-duration, ST = Smart Touch, STSF = Smart Touch Surround Flow.

Index-Guided High-Power Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Study

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Studies have suggested the superiority of high-power compared to standard-power radiofrequency ablation ablation (RFCA). This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of high-power compared to standard-power RFCA guided by ablation index (AI) or lesion index (LSI).

RECENT FINDINGS

A systematic review and meta-analysis study comparing IGHP and IGLP approaches for AF ablation was conducted. The relevant published studies comparing IGHP and IGSP methods for RFCA in AF patients until October 2022 were collected from Cochrane, ProQuest, PubMed, and ScienceDirect. A total of 2579 AF patients from 11 studies were included, 1682 received IGHP RFCA, and 897 received IGSP RFCA. To achieve successful pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), the IGHP RFCA group had a significantly shorter procedure time than the IGHP RFCA group (mean difference (MD) -19.91 min; 95% CI -25.23 to -14.59 min; p < 0.01), radiofrequency (RF) application time (MD -10.92 min; 95% CI -14.70 to -7.13 min; p < 0.01), and fewer number of lesions (MD -10.90; 95% CI -18.77 to -3.02; p < 0.01) than the IGSP RFCA. First-pass PVI was significantly greater in the IGHP RFCA group than in the IGSP RFCA group (risk ratio (RR) 1.17; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.28; p < 0.01). The IGHP RFCA is an effective and efficient strategy for AF ablation. The superiority of IGHP RFCA includes the shorter procedure time, shorter RF application time, fewer number of lesions for complete PVI, and more excellent first-pass PVI.

Network meta-analysis and systematic review comparing efficacy and safety between very high power short duration, high power short duration, and conventional radiofrequency ablation of atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

High-power short-duration (HPSD) atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation with a power of 40-50 W was proved to be safe and effective. Very high-power short-duration (vHPSD) AF ablation is a novel method using >50 W to obtain more durable AF ablation. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of vHPSD ablation compared with HPSD ablation and conventional power ablation.

METHODS

A literature search for studies that reported AF ablation outcomes, including short-term freedom from atrial arrhythmia, first-pass isolation (FPI) rate, procedure time, and major complications, was conducted utilizing MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. All relevant studies were included in this analysis. A random-effects model of network meta-analysis and surface under cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) were used to rank the treatment for all outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 29 studies with 9721 patients were included in the analysis. According to the SUCRA analysis, HPSD ablation had the highest probability of maintaining sinus rhythm. Point estimation showed an odds ratio of 1.5 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.2-1.9) between HPSD ablation and conventional power ablation and an odds ratio of 1.3 (95% CI: 0.78-2.2) between vHPSD ablation and conventional power ablation. While the odds ratio of FPI between HPSD ablation and conventional power ablation was 3.6 (95% CI: 1.5-8.9), the odds ratio between vHPSD ablation and conventional power ablation was 2.2 (95% CI: 0.61-8.6). The procedure times of vHPSD and HPSD ablations were comparable and, therefore, shorter than that of conventional power ablation. Major complications were low in all techniques.

CONCLUSION

vHPSD ablation did not yield higher efficacy than HPSD ablation and conventional power ablation. With the safety concern, vHPSD ablation outcomes were comparable with those of other techniques.

Comparison of Effectiveness and Safety between High-Power Short-Duration Ablation and Conventional Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Aim. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety between high-power short-duration (HPSD) radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and conventional RFA in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods. Studies comparing HPSD and traditional applications in patients undergoing initial catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation from inception through December 2021 were searched on Pubmed, Medline, Cochrane, and Clinicaltrials.gov. Results. The meta-analysis included seventeen studies with a total of 4934 patients. HPSD group decreased procedure duration (mean difference (MD) −38.28 min, $P<0.001$ ), RF duration (MD −20.51 min, $P<0.001$ ), fluoroscopy duration (MD −5.19 min, $P<0.001$ ), and acute pulmonary vein reconnection (Odds ratio (OR) 0.40, $P<0.001$ ), while improving the freedom from atrial arrhythmia at one year (OR 1.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12–1.94, $P=0.005$ ) and rates of first-pass isolation (OR 8.92, $P=0.001$ ). Compared with the conventional group, freedom from atrial arrhythmia at one-year follow-up was higher in the HPSD group without the guidance of AI/LSI (OR 1.66, $P=0.01$ ) and studies with a power setting of 40–50 W (OR 1.93, $P=0.002$ ). Nevertheless, the two groups had similar effectiveness with a power setting of 50 W in the HPSD RFA (OR 1.10, $P=0.52$ ). There was no difference in complications between the two groups ( $P=0.71$ ). Conclusion. HPSD RFA was associated with shorter procedure duration, higher freedom from atrial arrhythmia, and comparable safety compared to conventional RFA.

Comparison between High-Power Short-Duration and Conventional Ablation Strategy in Atrial Fibrillation: An Updated Meta-Analysis

High-power short-duration (HPSD) setting during radiofrequency ablation has become an attempt to improve atrial fibrillation (AF) treatment outcomes. This study ought to compare the efficacy, safety, and effectiveness between HPSD and conventional settings. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched. Studies that compared HPSD and conventional radiofrequency ablation settings in AF patients were included while studies performed additional ablations on nonpulmonary vein targets without clear recording were excluded. Data were pooled with random-effect model. Efficacy endpoints include first-pass pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), acute pulmonary vein (PV) reconnection, free from AF, and free from atrial tachycardia (AT) during follow-up. Safety endpoints include esophagus injury rate and major complication rate. Effectiveness endpoints include complete PVI rate, total procedure time, PVI time, and PVI radiofrequency ablation (PVI RF) time. We included 22 studies with 3867 atrial fibrillation patients in total (2393 patients received HPSD radiofrequency ablation). Perioperatively, the HPSD group showed a higher first-pass PVI rate (risk ratio, $\text{RR}=1.10$ , $P=0.0001$ ) and less acute PV reconnection rate ( $\text{RR}=0.56$ , $P=0.0004$ ) than the conventional group. During follow-up, free from AF ( $\text{RR}=1.11$ , $P=0.16$ ) or AT ( $\text{RR}=1.06$ , $P=0.24$ ) rate did not differ between HPSD and conventional groups 6-month postsurgery. However, the HPSD group showed both higher free from AF ( $\text{RR}=1.17$ , $P=0.0003$ ) and AT ( $\text{RR}=1.11$ , $P<0.0001$ ) rate than the conventional group 12-month postsurgery. The esophagus injury ( $\text{RR}=0.99$ , $P=0.98$ ) and major complications ( $\text{RR}=0.76$ , $P=0.70$ ) rates did not differ between the two groups. The HPSD group took shorter total procedure time ( $\text{MD}=-33.71$ 95% CI: -43.10 to -24.33, $P<0.00001$ ), PVI time ( $\text{MD}=-21.60$ 95% CI: -25.00 to -18.21, $P<0.00001$ ), and PVI RF time ( $\text{MD}=-13.72$ , 95% CI: -14.45 to -13.00, $P<0.00001$ ) than conventional groups while complete procedure rate did not differ between two groups ( $\text{RR}=1.00$ , $P=0.93$ ). HPSD setting during AF radiofrequency ablation has better effectiveness, efficacy, and similar safety compared with the conventional setting.

High-power short-duration versus standard-power standard-duration settings for repeat atrial fibrillation ablation

INTRODUCTION

High-power short-duration (HPSD) ablation is a novel strategy using contact force-sensing catheters optimized for radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF). No study has directly compared HPSD versus standard-power standard-duration (SPSD) contact force-sensing settings in patients presenting for repeat ablation with AF recurrence after initial ablation.

METHODS

We studied consecutive cases of patients with AF undergoing repeat ablation with SPSD or HPSD settings after their initial pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) with temperature controlled non-contact force, SPSD or HPSD settings between 6/23/14 and 3/4/20. Procedural data collected included radiofrequency ablation delivery time (RADT). Clinical data collected include sinus rhythm maintenance post-procedure.

RESULTS

A total of 61 patients underwent repeat ablation (36 SPSD, 25 HPSD). A total of 51 patients (83.6%) were found to have pulmonary vein reconnections necessitating repeat isolation, 10 patients (16.4%) had durable PVI and ablation targeted non-PV sources. RADT was shorter when comparing repeat ablation using HPSD compared to SPSD (22 vs 35 min; p = 0.01). There was no difference in sinus rhythm maintenance by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis (log rank test p = 0.87), after 3 or 12-months between groups overall, and when stratified by AF type, left atrial volume index, CHA₂DS₂-VASc score, or left ventricular ejection fraction.

CONCLUSION

We demonstrated that repeat AF ablation with HPSD reduced procedure times with similar sinus rhythm maintenance compared to SPSD in those presenting for repeat ablation.