A minimally fluoroscopic approach in AVNRT ablation reduces radiation exposure and number of RF applications without compromising safety, effectiveness and procedural time

Abstract

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Introduction Radiofrequency ablation (RF) of atrioventricular nodal reentry tachycardia (AVNRT) using conventional fluoroscopy is associated with a significant radiation exposure to both patients and operators. 3D electro-anatomical mapping systems (EAMS) can reduce radiation exposure, but specific clinical studies on their use in AVNRT ablation still lack. Purpose The aim of this study was to determine if EAMS use in AVNRT ablation can reduce radiation exposure and to analyse its effects on clinical and procedural outcomes. Methods We selected 277 patients who underwent AVNRT RF ablation in a single center in Belgium between July 2015 and November 2019 and performed a retrospective analysis of 136 and 141 patients who respectively and consecutively underwent AVNRT ablation with a conventional fluoroscopic approach (Conventional group) and a minimally fluoroscopic approach using a 3D electro-anatomical mapping system to guide the procedure (Minimal fluoroscopy group). Conventional fluoroscopy was used in both groups to confirm AVNRT induction to avoid costs related to the use of EAMS catheters in case of non-induction. We compared radiation dose, acute success/complication rates, procedural time and the number/time of RF applications in both groups. Results Radiation dose in the minimal fluoroscopy group was significantly lower compared to the conventional group (1179 vs. 2686 mgray.cm2, p < 0,0001) and fluoroscopic time was shorter (2,5 vs. 8,6 minutes, p < 0,0001). Procedural time (70 vs. 69 min, p = NS) and acute success rate (99% vs. 98%, p = NS) were not significantly different in the minimal fluoroscopy group compared to the conventional group, and no complications were observed in both groups. The number of RF applications was significantly lower when EAMS was used (6,2 ± 4,8 vs. 8,6 ± 7,6 RF application, p = 0,01) while the RF application time was not significantly different (56,8 ± 51,2 1 vs. 65,3 ± 86 seconds, p = NS). Conclusion AVNRT catheter ablation using a minimally fluoroscopic approach with 3D electro-anatomical mapping systems reduces radiation exposure without compromising safety, effectiveness and procedural time. EAMS use is associated with a reduction in the number of RF applications suggesting a higher precision and stability of ablation catheters during RF application.