Suppr超能文献

使用接触力感知导管的高功率与常规功率消融治疗心房颤动的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Comparison of higher-power and conventional power ablation of atrial fibrillation using contact force-sensing catheters: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, Zhengzhou University People's Hospital, Zhengzhou, China.

Department of Cardiology, Henan Province People's Hospital, Zhengzhou, China.

出版信息

J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2021 Oct;62(1):1-7. doi: 10.1007/s10840-021-00975-3. Epub 2021 Mar 17.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Contact force-sensing catheters have been widely used in catheter ablation. During the past few decades, more attention has been paid on the technique of high-power ablation. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy and safety of conventional power and high power on atrial fibrillation radiofrequency ablation by contact force-sensing catheters.

METHODS

We identified studies through searching MEDLINE, Embase, the Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library from inception up until July 2020. The primary outcomes were defined as recurrence of atrial tachyarrhythmia and complications. The secondary outcomes were acute reconnections of pulmonary veins (PVs), ablation time, and the total procedural time.

RESULTS

Four nonrandomized, observational studies (nROS) were selected involving 231 patients with high-power ablation and 239 patients with conventional power ablation. There were insignificant differences in the recurrence rate of atrial tachyarrhythmia (14.2% versus 20.5%, OR: 0.64, 95%CI: 0.39 to 1.04, Z = 1.82, P = 0.07) and clinical complications (1.7% versus 2.5%, OR: 0.72, 95%CI: 0.21 to 2.47, Z = 0.51, P = 0.61) between high-power and conventional power ablation. However, compared with conventional power group, the high-power group had fewer acute PVs reconnections (P = 0.0001), shorter in ablation time (P < 0.0001), and the total procedural time (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

High-power ablation could not only ablate safely and efficiently but also reduce focal ablation time and total procedural time significantly.

摘要

背景

接触力感应导管已广泛应用于导管消融术。在过去的几十年中,人们越来越关注高能消融技术。本荟萃分析的目的是比较使用接触力感应导管进行常规功率和高能消融治疗心房颤动的疗效和安全性。

方法

我们通过检索 MEDLINE、Embase、Web of Science、Scopus 和 Cochrane Library 从成立到 2020 年 7 月的文献,确定了研究。主要结局定义为房性心动过速的复发和并发症。次要结局包括肺静脉(PV)急性再通、消融时间和总手术时间。

结果

纳入了 4 项非随机、观察性研究(nROS),共纳入 231 例高能消融患者和 239 例常规功率消融患者。高能消融组和常规功率消融组房性心动过速的复发率(14.2%与 20.5%,OR:0.64,95%CI:0.39 至 1.04,Z = 1.82,P = 0.07)和临床并发症(1.7%与 2.5%,OR:0.72,95%CI:0.21 至 2.47,Z = 0.51,P = 0.61)差异无统计学意义。然而,与常规功率组相比,高能功率组急性 PV 再通更少(P = 0.0001),消融时间更短(P < 0.0001),总手术时间更短(P < 0.0001)。

结论

高能消融不仅安全有效,而且可以显著缩短局灶性消融时间和总手术时间。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验