Comparison of lesion formation between contact force-guided and non-guided circumferential pulmonary vein isolation: A prospective, randomized study
Introduction
The efficacy and safety of radiofrequency (RF) catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) has been established,1 and the 2012 HRS/EHRA/ECAS Expert Consensus Statement on Catheter and Surgical Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation recommended ablation as a Class I indication for drug-refractory, symptomatic paroxysmal AF when it is performed by an electrophysiologist who has received appropriate training and is performing the procedure in an experienced center.2 This statement indicated pulmonary vein (PV) isolation as an essential procedure for AF ablation irrespective of the type of AF. The most important and urgent issue in AF ablation is the relatively high recurrence rate after ablation. It has been demonstrated that recurrence of AF after ablation is associated with resumption of conduction between the left atrium (LA) and previously isolated PV.3, 4, 5 Thus, incomplete PV isolation by ablation is responsible for AF recurrence, which indicates the necessity of achieving complete and permanent PV isolation with the use of different technologies other than conventional RF ablation strategies.
One such technology recently developed is a catheter system that can monitor the real-time contact force (CF) of the catheter tip to the endocardial wall during ablation. A recent experimental study revealed that CF is a major determinant of RF lesion size, and CF monitoring may optimize RF power and application time to maximize lesion formation and avoid steam pop and thrombus during ablation.6 Excessive CF has been shown to increase the risk of cardiac perforation.7 A recent clinical study showed that CF during AF ablation correlates with clinical outcome, and arrhythmia control is best achieved by applying an average CF >20 g, whereas clinical failure is universally noted with an average CF <10 g.8 Thus, CF monitoring during ablation is expected to facilitate effectively and safely the procedure of circumferential pulmonary vein isolation (CPVI) for AF.9 To evaluate its advantage prospectively and quantitatively, we randomly assigned AF patients to CF-guided and non-guided CPVI and compared the procedure parameters and outcomes between the 2 groups.
Section snippets
Study population
The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of our institution, and written informed consent was obtained from all patients before the study.
Thirty-eight consecutive patients undergoing CPVI for AF were randomly assigned to non–CF-guided group (non-CF group, n = 19) or CF-guided ablation group (CF group, n = 19). There were 29 men and 9 women (mean age 60 ± 11 years). Twenty-eight patients had paroxysmal AF, and the other 10 had nonparoxysmal AF. The absence of thrombus in the LA
Patient characteristics and results of ablation
Patient characteristics at baseline are given in Table 1 for non-CF and CF groups. Age, prevalence of paroxysmal AF, CHADS2 score, left ventricular ejection fraction, and LA diameter were not different between the 2 groups. All PVs were successfully isolated by CPVI in all of the study patients. There were no major complications during and after CPVI in both groups.
CF during CPVI
Mean CFs during left-side CPVI in the non-CF and CF groups were 5.9 ± 4.5 g and 11.1 ± 4.3 g (P <.001), respectively, and those
Major findings
To evaluate quantitatively the usefulness of CF monitoring in CPVI, we conducted a prospective study in which AF patients undergoing CPVI were randomly assigned to either CF-guided or non-guided ablation, and procedure parameters and outcomes were compared between the 2 groups. The results showed that the procedure time in the CF group was significantly shorter than that in the non-CF group. Mean CF for the whole CPVI was significantly greater in the CF group than in the non-CF group, mainly as
Conclusion
CF-guided CPVI is effective in reducing the procedure time and additional touch-up ablation, and may improve long-term clinical outcome.
References (12)
- et al.
The relationship between contact force and clinical outcome during radiofrequency catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation in the TOCCATA study
Heart Rhythm
(2012) - et al.
A novel radiofrequency ablation catheter using contact force sensing: Toccata study
Heart Rhythm
(2012) - et al.
Approach to the catheter ablation technique of paroxysmal and persistent atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of the randomized controlled trials
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol
(2011) - et al.
2012 HRS/EHRA/ECAS Expert Consensus Statement on Catheter and Surgical Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation: recommendations for patient selection, procedural techniques, patient management and follow-up, definitions, endpoints, and research trial design
Europace
(2012) - et al.
Prospective assessment of late conduction recurrence across radiofrequency lesions producing electrical disconnection at the pulmonary vein ostium in patients with atrial fibrillation
Circulation
(2003) - et al.
Resumption of electrical conduction in previously isolated pulmonary veins: rationale for a different strategy?
Circulation
(2004)
Cited by (117)
Role of Indices Incorporating Power, Force and Time in AF Ablation: A Systematic Review of Literature
2021, Heart Lung and CirculationElectrophysiologic mapping and cardiac ablation therapy for prevention of ventricular tachycardia
2020, Emerging Technologies for Heart Diseases: Volume 2: Treatments for Myocardial Ischemia and ArrhythmiasImpact of pulmonary veins anatomy on the outcomes of radiofrequency ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in the era of contact force-sensing ablation catheters
2023, Journal of Interventional Cardiac ElectrophysiologyImpact of open-irrigated radiofrequency catheter with contact force measurement on the efficacy and safety of atrial fibrillation ablation: a single-center direct comparison
2022, Journal of Interventional Cardiac ElectrophysiologyRequirement of larger local impedance reduction for successful lesion formation at carinal area during pulmonary vein isolation
2022, Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology
Drs. Okumura and Kimura have received speaker honoraria from Johnson & Johnson K.K. Drs. S. Sasaki and Itoh have received research grant support from Johnson & Johnson K.K. and Medtronic Japan Co. Ltd.