The use of minimal fluoroscopy for cardiac electrophysiology procedures: A meta-analysis and review of the literature.

Abstract

BackgroundConventional catheter ablation involves prolonged exposure to ionizing radiation, potentially leading to detrimental health effects. Minimal fluoroscopy (MF) represents a safer alternative, which should be explored. Data on the safety and efficacy of this technique are limited.HypothesisOur hypothesis is that MF is of equal efficacy and safety to conventional catheter ablation with the use of fluoroscopy by performing a meta‐analysis of both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real‐world registry studies.MethodsPubmed and Embase were searched from their inception to July 2020 for RCTs, cohort and observational studies that assessed the outcomes of catheter ablation using a MF technique versus the conventional approach.ResultsFifteen studies involving 3795 patients were included in this meta‐analysis. There was a significant reduction in fluoroscopy and procedural time with no difference in acute success (odds ratio [OR]:0.74, 95% CI: 0.50–1.10, p = .14), long‐term success (OR:0.92, 95% CI: 0.65–1.31, p = .38), arrhythmia recurrence (OR:1.24, 95% CI: 0.75–2.06, p = .97) or rate of complications. (OR:0.83, 95% CI: 0.46–1.48, p = .65). Additionally sub‐group analysis for those undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) did not demonstrate a difference in success or complication rates (OR:0.86, 95% CI: 0.30–2.42, p = .77). Multivariate meta‐regression did not identify the presence of moderator variables.ConclusionThis updated meta‐analysis demonstrated an overall reduction in procedural and fluoroscopy time for those undergoing a minimal fluoroscopic approach. There was no significant difference in either acute or chronic success rates or complications between a MF approach and conventional approach for the management of all arrhythmias including those undergoing catheter ablation for AF.