Belalcazar Andres, Heist E Kevin
Biophysicist, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
Cardiac Arrhythmia Service, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2024 Dec;35(12):2382-2393. doi: 10.1111/jce.16459. Epub 2024 Oct 8.
Various catheter designs are appearing for Pulsed Field Ablation (PFA). It is unclear if they differ in terms of safety and efficiency. PFA studies have reported hemolysis, kidney injury, high troponin, among other side effects.
Using a CT-derived computer model, we compared catheter designs using two metrics: (1) efficiency: power delivered to an atrial wall target, expressed as a percent of total generator power; and (2) safety: electric current to achieve 90% transmurality (since more energy causes more collateral effects), as well as the corresponding electrode current density (ECD), a heat and bubble metric. The following catheter designs were compared: penta-spline basket, Nitinol spheres (focal 9 mm and large 1-shot), circular, balloon, and flex-circuit. Target was a 6 × 47 mm circumferential segment of atrial wall at LPV antrum. Transmurality was defined as percent of target having >600 volts per centimeter (V/cm) electric field needed for electroporation.
Efficiency was 0.9, 1.4, 2.7, 5.9, 10, and 12% for the large 1-shot and 9 mm Nitinol spheres, penta-spline, circular, flex spline, and balloon catheters, respectively. Regarding safety, currents for 90% transmurality were 70, 39,36,12.5, 5.3, and 4 Amps for the same respective catheters, with less being safer. ECD was 124, 25, 74, 83, 41, and 31 A/cm, respectively.
Computer models demonstrated a remarkable range in efficiency among catheters studied. Those having less atrial blood exposure had the highest efficiencies, with factors of up to 13X more efficiency compared to exposed ones. Higher efficiency designs have less collateral current and are safer. Confirmatory in-vivo studies are required.
多种导管设计正应用于脉冲场消融(PFA)。目前尚不清楚它们在安全性和有效性方面是否存在差异。PFA研究报告了溶血、肾损伤、肌钙蛋白升高等副作用。
我们使用基于CT的计算机模型,通过两个指标比较导管设计:(1)效率:传递到心房壁靶点的功率,以发生器总功率的百分比表示;(2)安全性:达到90%透壁率所需的电流(因为更多能量会导致更多附带效应),以及相应的电极电流密度(ECD),这是一个热和气泡指标。比较了以下导管设计:五样条篮状导管、镍钛诺球囊(聚焦9毫米和大型一次性)、圆形、球囊和柔性电路导管。靶点是左肺静脉前庭处6×47毫米的心房壁圆周节段。透壁率定义为靶点中电场>600伏/厘米(V/cm)用于电穿孔的百分比。
大型一次性和9毫米镍钛诺球囊导管、五样条导管、圆形导管、柔性样条导管和球囊导管的效率分别为0.9%、1.4%、2.7%、5.9%、10%和12%。关于安全性,相同导管达到90%透壁率的电流分别为70安培、39安培、36安培、12.5安培、5.3安培和4安培,电流越小越安全。ECD分别为124 A/cm、25 A/cm、74 A/cm、83 A/cm、41 A/cm和31 A/cm。
计算机模型显示,在所研究的导管中,效率范围显著。心房血液暴露较少的导管效率最高,与暴露导管相比,效率高达13倍。效率更高的设计附带电流更少,更安全。需要进行验证性体内研究。