Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine (Dec 2022)

Comparison of effectiveness and safety of high-power vs. conventional-power radiofrequency ablation for treatment of atrial fibrillation

  • Penghui Cui,
  • Yunpeng Qu,
  • Jichang Zhang,
  • Junduo Wu,
  • Jing Zhang,
  • Yongfeng Shi,
  • Bin Liu

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.988602
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 9

Abstract

Read online

AimTo compare high-power (HP) vs. conventional-power (CP) radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF).MethodsWe retrospectively enrolled AF patients undergoing CP (30–40 W, 43 patients) or HP (50 W, 49 patients) radiofrequency ablation. Immediate pulmonary vein (PV) single-circle isolation, PV-ablation time, AF recurrence, AF recurrence-free survival, and complications were analyzed.ResultsDiabetes was more common in the CP group than in the HP group (27.91% vs. 10.20%, P = 0.029). The left PV single-circle isolation rate (62.79% vs. 65.31%), right PV single-circle isolation rate (48.84% vs. 53.06%), and bilateral PV single-circle isolation rate (32.56% vs. 38.78%; all P > 0.05) did not differ between the groups. Single-circle ablation times for the left PVs (12.79 ± 3.39 vs. 22.94 ± 6.39 min), right PVs (12.18 ± 3.46 vs. 20.67 ± 5.44 min), and all PVs (25.85 ± 6.04 vs. 45.66 ± 11.11 min; all P < 0.001) were shorter in the HP group. Atrial fibrillation recurrence within 3 months (13.95% vs. 18.37%), at 3 months (11.63% vs. 8.16%), and at 6 months after ablation (18.60% vs. 12.24%; all P > 0.05) was similar in both groups. Atrial fibrillation recurrence-free survival did not differ between the groups (Kaplan-Meier analysis). Cardiac rupture and pericardial tamponade did not occur in any patient. Pops occurred in 2 and 0 patients in the HP and CP groups, respectively (4.08% vs. 0.00%, P = 0.533).ConclusionHigh-power ablation improved operation time and efficiency without increasing complications.

Keywords