Kasai T, Saitoh O, Fuse K, Oikawa A, Furushima H, Chinushi M. Symmetrical recovery time course between impedance and intramyocardial temperature after bipolar radiofrequency ablation; Role of impedance monitoring to estimate temperature rise.
Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J 2024;
24:68-74. [PMID:
38096986 PMCID:
PMC11010453 DOI:
10.1016/j.ipej.2023.12.001]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/19/2023] [Revised: 11/27/2023] [Accepted: 12/07/2023] [Indexed: 12/17/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION
During radiofrequency (RF) ablation, impedance monitoring has been used to avoid steam-pop caused by excessive intramyocardial temperature (IMT) rise. However, it is uncertain why the impedance decline is related to steam-pop and whether the impedance decline is correlated to IMT.
METHODS
Twenty-one bipolar ablations (40 W, 30-g contact, 120 s) were attempted for seven perfused porcine myocardium. Immediately after ablation, a temperature electrode was inserted into the mid-myocardial portion, and the recovery process of impedance and its correlation to IMT were assessed.
RESULTS
Transmural lesion was created in all 21 applications but steam-pop occurred in 5/21 applications with large impedance decline. In the 16 applications without steam-pop, impedance and IMT soon after ablation were 97.2 ± 4.0 Ω and 66.1 ± 4.8 °C, respectively. Reasonably high linear correlation was demonstrated between the maximum IMT after ablation and impedance differences before and after ablation. Recovery processes of the decreased impedance and the elevated IMT fit well to each equation of the single exponential decay function and showed symmetric shapes with no statistical difference of time constant (100.1 ± 34.5 s in impedance vs. 108.7 ± 27.3 s in IMT) and half-time of recovery (144.5 ± 49.8 s in impedance vs. 156.9 ± 39.4 s in IMT). Recovered impedance after ablation (104.8 ± 3.9 Ω) was 5.1 ± 2.0 Ω smaller than that before ablation (109.9 ± 2.7 Ω), suggesting several factors other than IMT rise participate in impedance decline in RF ablation.
CONCLUSIONS
Recovery of impedance and IMT after ablation well correlated, which supports the usefulness of impedance monitoring for safe RF ablation.
Collapse