Meta-analysis of high power short duration in atrial fibrillation ablation – a superior efficient ablation strategy

References

• Lee SR, Choi EK, Lee EJ, et al. Efficacy of the optimal ablation index-targeted strategy for pulmonary vein isolation in patients with atrial fibrillation: the OPTIMUM study results. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2019;55(2):171–181.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haïssaguerre M, Jaïs P, Shah DC, et al. Haïssaguerre, spontaneous initiation of atrial fibrillation by ectopic beats originating in the pulmonary veins. N Engl J Med. 1998;339(10):659–666.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rottner L, Bellmann B, Lin T, et al. Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: state of the art and future perspectives. Cardiol Ther. 2020;9(1):45–58.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calkins H, Hindricks G, Cappato R, et al. 2017 HRS/EHRA/ECAS/APHRS/SOLAECE expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation: executive summary. J Arrhythm. 2017;33(5):369–409.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anter E, Contreras-Valdes FM, Shvilkin A, et al. Acute pulmonary vein reconnection is a predictor of atrial fibrillation recurrence following pulmonary vein isolation. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2014;39(3):225–232.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nilsson B, Chen X, Pehrson S, et al. The effectiveness of a high output/short duration radiofrequency current application technique in segmental pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation. Europace. 2006;8(11):962–965.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baher A, Kheirkhahan M, Rechenmacher SJ, et al. High-power radiofrequency catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: using late gadolinium enhancement magnetic resonance imaging as a novel index of esophageal injury. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2018;4(12):1583–1594.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Berte B, Hilfiker G, Russi I, et al. Pulmonary vein isolation using a higher power shorter duration CLOSE protocol with a surround flow ablation catheter. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2019;30(11):2199–2204.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bunch TJ, May HT, Bair TL, et al. Long-term outcomes after low power, slower movement versus high power, faster movement irrigated-tip catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. Heart Rhythm. 2020;17(2):184–189.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castrejon-Castrejon S, Martinez Cossiani M, Ortega Molina M, et al. Feasibility and safety of pulmonary vein isolation by high-power short-duration radiofrequency application: short-term results of the POWER-FAST PILOT study. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2020;57(1):57–65.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ejima K, Higuchi S, Yazaki K, et al. Comparison of high-power and conventional-power radiofrequency energy deliveries in pulmonary vein isolation using unipolar signal modification as a local endpoint. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2020;31(7):1702–1708.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaneshiro T, Kamioka M, Hijioka N, et al. Characteristics of esophageal injury in ablation of atrial fibrillation using a high-power short-duration setting. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2020;13(10):e008602.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kottmaier M, Popa M, Bourier F, et al. Safety and outcome of very high-power short-duration ablation using 70 W for pulmonary vein isolation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Europace. 2020;22(3):388–393.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Okamatsu H, Koyama J, Sakai Y, et al. High-power application is associated with shorter procedure time and higher rate of first-pass pulmonary vein isolation in ablation index-guided atrial fibrillation ablation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2019;30(12):2751–2758.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pambrun T, Durand C, Constantin M, et al. High-power (40–50 W) radiofrequency ablation guided by unipolar signal modification for pulmonary vein isolation: experimental findings and clinical results. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2019;12(6):e007304.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shin DG, Ahn J, Han SJ, et al. Efficacy of high-power and short-duration ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Europace. 2020;22(10):1495–1501.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vassallo F, Cunha C, Serpa E, et al. Comparison of high-power short-duration (HPSD) ablation of atrial fibrillation using a contact force-sensing catheter and conventional technique: initial results. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2019;30(10):1877–1883.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vassallo F, Meigre LL, Serpa E, et al. Changes and impacts in early recurrences after atrial fibrillation ablation in contact force era: comparison of high-power short-duration with conventional technique-FIRST experience data. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2020. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-020-00911-x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wielandts J-Y, Kyriakopoulou M, Almorad A, et al. Prospective randomized evaluation of high power during CLOSE-guided pulmonary vein isolation: the POWER-AF study. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2021;14(1): e009112.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yavin HD, Leshem E, Shapira-Daniels A, et al. Impact of high-power short-duration radiofrequency ablation on long-term lesion durability for atrial fibrillation ablation. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2020;6(8):973–985.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yazaki K, Ejima K, Kanai M, et al. Impedance drop predicts acute electrical reconnection of the pulmonary vein-left atrium after pulmonary vein isolation using short-duration high-power exposure. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2020;59(3):575–584.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kewcharoen J, Techorueangwiwat C, Kanitsoraphan C, et al. High-power short duration and low-power long duration in atrial fibrillation ablation: a meta-analysis. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021;32(1):71–82.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen CF, Wu J, Jin CL, et al. Comparison of high-power short-duration and low-power long-duration radiofrequency ablation for treating atrial fibrillation: systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Cardiol. 2020;43(12):1631–1640.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun X, Qi P, Yang B, et al. The procedural efficiency, efficacy and safety of high power and short duration ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol. 2021;325:76–81.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macle L, Khairy P, Weerasooriya R, et al. Adenosine-guided pulmonary vein isolation for the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: an international, multicentre, randomised superiority trial. Lancet. 2015;386(9994):672–679.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ouyang F, Antz M, Ernst S, et al. Recovered pulmonary vein conduction as a dominant factor for recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmias after complete circular isolation of the pulmonary veins: lessons from double Lasso technique. Circulation. 2005;111(2):127–135.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hussein A, Das M, Riva S, et al. Use of ablation index-guided ablation results in high rates of durable pulmonary vein isolation and freedom from arrhythmia in persistent atrial fibrillation patients: the PRAISE study results. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2018;11(9):e006576.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• El Haddad M, Taghji P, Phlips T, et al. Determinants of acute and late pulmonary vein reconnection in contact force-guided pulmonary vein isolation: identifying the weakest link in the ablation chain. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2017;10(4):e004867.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phlips T, Taghji P, El Haddad M, et al. Improving procedural and one-year outcome after contact force-guided pulmonary vein isolation: the role of interlesion distance, ablation index, and contact force variability in the ‘CLOSE’-protocol. Europace. 2018;20(FI_3):f419–f27.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ali-Ahmed F, Goyal V, Patel M, et al. High-power, low-flow, short-ablation duration-the key to avoid collateral injury? J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2019;55(1):9–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhaskaran A, Chik W, Pouliopoulos J, et al. Five seconds of 50–60 W radio frequency atrial ablations were transmural and safe: an in vitro mechanistic assessment and force-controlled in vivo validation. Europace. 2017;19(5):874–880.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bourier F, Duchateau J, Vlachos K, et al. High-power short-duration versus standard radiofrequency ablation: insights on lesion metrics. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2018;29(11):1570–1575.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leshem E, Zilberman I, Tschabrunn CM, et al. High-power and short-duration ablation for pulmonary vein isolation: biophysical characterization. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2018;4(4):467–479.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mulder MJ, Kemme MJB, Hagen AMD, et al. Impact of local left atrial wall thickness on the incidence of acute pulmonary vein reconnection after ablation index-guided atrial fibrillation ablation. Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc. 2020;29:100574.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neuzil P, Reddy VY, Kautzner J, et al. Electrical reconnection after pulmonary vein isolation is contingent on contact force during initial treatment: results from the EFFICAS I study. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2013;6(2):327–333.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar