Feasibility and performance of catheter ablation with zero-fluoroscopy approach for regular supraventricular tachycardia in patients with structural and/or congenital heart disease.

Abstract

Patients with structural heart disease (SHD) are more difficult to ablate than those with a structurally healthy heart. The reason may be technical problems. We compared periprocedural data in unselected patients (including SHD group) recruited for zero-fluoroscopy catheter ablation (ZF-CA) of supraventricular arrhythmias (SVTs).Consecutive adult patients with atrioventricular nodal reentry tachycardia (AVNRT), accessory pathways (AP), atrial flutter (AFL), and atrial tachycardia (AT) were recruited. A 3-dimensional electroanatomical mapping system (Ensite Velocity, NavX, St Jude Medical, Lake Bluff, Illinois) was used to create electroanatomical maps and navigate catheters. Fluoroscopy was used on the decision of the first operator after 5 minutes of unresolved problems.Of the 1280 patients ablated with the intention to be treated with ZF approach, 174 (13.6%) patients with SHD (age: 58.2 ± 13.6; AVNRT: 23.9%; AP: 8.5%; AFL: 61.4%; and AT: 6.2%) were recruited. These patients were compared with the 1106 patients with nonstructural heart disease (NSHD) (age: 51.4 ± 16.4; AVNRT: 58.0%; AP: 17.6%; AFL: 20.7%; and AT: 3.7% P ≤ .001). Procedural time (49.9 ± 24.6 vs 49.1 ± 23.9 minutes, P = .55) and number of applications were similar between groups (P = 0.08). The rate of conversion from ZF-CA to fluoroscopy was slightly higher in SHD as compared to NSHD (13.2% vs 7.8%, P = .02) while the total time of fluoroscopy and radiation doses were comparable in the group of SHD and NSHD (P = .55; P = .48).ZF-CA is feasible and safe in majority of patients with SHD and should be incorporated into a standard approach for SHD; however, the procedure requires sufficient experience.