Abstract
Background
Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) allows visualization of cardiac structures and recognition of complications during atrial fibrillation ablation (AFA). Compared to transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), ICE is less sensitive to detecting thrombus in the atrial appendage but requires minimal sedation and fewer operators, making it attractive in a resource-constrained setting.
Objective
To compare 13 cases of AFA using ICE (AFA-ICE group) with 36 cases of AFA using TEE (AFA-TEE group).
Methods
This is a single-center prospective cohort study. The main outcome was procedure time. Secondary outcomes: fluoroscopy time, radiation dose (mGy/cm2), major complications, and length of hospital stay in hours. The clinical profile was compared using the CHA2DS2-VASc score. A p-value <0.05 was considered a statistically significant difference between groups.
Results
The median CHA2DS2-VASc score was 1 (0-3) in the AFA-ICE group and 1 (0-4) in the AFA-TEE group. The total procedure time was 129 ± 27 min in the AFA-ICE group and 189 ± 41 min in the AFA-TEE group (p<0.001); the AFA-ICE group received a lower dose of radiation (mGy/cm2, 51296 ± 24790 vs. 75874 ± 24293; p=0.002), despite the similar fluoroscopy time (27.48 ± 9. 79 vs. 26.4 ± 9.32; p=0.671). The median length of hospital stay did not differ; 48 (36-72) hours (AFA-ICE) and 48 (48-66) hours (AFA-TEE) (p=0.27).
Conclusions
In this cohort, AFA-ICE was related to shorter procedure times and less exposure to radiation without increasing the risk of complications or the length of hospital stay.
Atrial Fibrillation/complications; Catheter Ablation; Echocadiography/methods; Hospitalization; Pulmonary Veins/diagnostic imaging
Thumbnail
