Immediate Leg Mobilization is Feasible After Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation Using Large Vascular Access Sheaths (Pulsed Field and Cryoballoon Ablation).
Riya Sam, Romil Patel, Lavisha Singh, Westby Fisher, Mark Metzl, Jose Nazari, Alex Ro, Hany Demo, Jeremiah Wasserlauf
{"title":"Immediate Leg Mobilization is Feasible After Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation Using Large Vascular Access Sheaths (Pulsed Field and Cryoballoon Ablation).","authors":"Riya Sam, Romil Patel, Lavisha Singh, Westby Fisher, Mark Metzl, Jose Nazari, Alex Ro, Hany Demo, Jeremiah Wasserlauf","doi":"10.1111/jce.70050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Vascular recovery from catheter ablation (CA) has traditionally required a period of leg immobilization which can lead to discomfort and prolonged time to discharge.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this study was to compare a strategy of immediate leg mobilization (IM) using suture-mediated closure devices against traditional vascular recovery consisting of figure-of-eight suture and 4 h bed rest (BR) after CA of atrial fibrillation (AF) using large vascular access sheaths for cryoballoon ablation (CBA) and pulsed field ablation (PFA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two hundred subjects were retrospectively analyzed: 100 IM and 100 BR. Vascular closure in IM consisted of a single suture-mediated closure delivered to each of three venotomies. Following the procedure, both legs could be mobilized immediately with no head-of-bed restriction. Ambulation was instructed at 1 h, and discharge at 3 h postprocedure. Hemostasis in BR was achieved using figure-of-eight sutures and 4 h of BR. The primary endpoint was the incidence of vascular complications. The secondary endpoint was time to discharge.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean age was 68.4 ± 11.7 years. In total, 72% of subjects in IM and 5% of the subjects in BR were treated with PFA. There was no difference in vascular complications (1 IM vs. 0 BR, p = 0.316). Time to discharge was shorter in IM (4.2 ± 2.6 h vs. 6.0 ± 2.7 h, p < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Immediate mobilization with suture-mediated vascular closure following CBA or PFA was associated with no difference in vascular complications compared to 4 h BR and shorter time to discharge. Further studies are needed to illustrate potential benefits to patient comfort and satisfaction.</p>","PeriodicalId":15178,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jce.70050","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Vascular recovery from catheter ablation (CA) has traditionally required a period of leg immobilization which can lead to discomfort and prolonged time to discharge.
Objective: The objective of this study was to compare a strategy of immediate leg mobilization (IM) using suture-mediated closure devices against traditional vascular recovery consisting of figure-of-eight suture and 4 h bed rest (BR) after CA of atrial fibrillation (AF) using large vascular access sheaths for cryoballoon ablation (CBA) and pulsed field ablation (PFA).
Methods: Two hundred subjects were retrospectively analyzed: 100 IM and 100 BR. Vascular closure in IM consisted of a single suture-mediated closure delivered to each of three venotomies. Following the procedure, both legs could be mobilized immediately with no head-of-bed restriction. Ambulation was instructed at 1 h, and discharge at 3 h postprocedure. Hemostasis in BR was achieved using figure-of-eight sutures and 4 h of BR. The primary endpoint was the incidence of vascular complications. The secondary endpoint was time to discharge.
Results: The mean age was 68.4 ± 11.7 years. In total, 72% of subjects in IM and 5% of the subjects in BR were treated with PFA. There was no difference in vascular complications (1 IM vs. 0 BR, p = 0.316). Time to discharge was shorter in IM (4.2 ± 2.6 h vs. 6.0 ± 2.7 h, p < 0.05).
Conclusion: Immediate mobilization with suture-mediated vascular closure following CBA or PFA was associated with no difference in vascular complications compared to 4 h BR and shorter time to discharge. Further studies are needed to illustrate potential benefits to patient comfort and satisfaction.
背景:导管消融(CA)后的血管恢复传统上需要一段时间的腿部固定,这可能导致不适和延长出院时间。目的:本研究的目的是比较心房颤动(AF) CA后使用大血管通路鞘进行冷冻球囊消融(CBA)和脉冲场消融(PFA)后使用缝线介导的关闭装置进行立即腿部活动(IM)的策略与传统的8字缝合和4小时卧床(BR)的血管恢复策略。方法:对200例患者进行回顾性分析:IM 100例,BR 100例。IM中的血管闭合包括在三次静脉切开术中分别进行一次缝合介导的闭合。手术后,两条腿可以立即活动,没有床头限制。术后1小时下床,3小时出院。采用8字形缝线和4小时的BR止血。主要终点是血管并发症的发生率。次要终点为出院时间。结果:患者平均年龄68.4±11.7岁。总的来说,72%的IM组和5%的BR组接受了PFA治疗。两组血管并发症无差异(1 IM vs 0 BR, p = 0.316)。IM组的出院时间更短(4.2±2.6 h vs. 6.0±2.7 h), p结论:CBA或PFA后立即活动与缝线介导的血管关闭在血管并发症方面与4h BR和更短的出院时间没有差异。需要进一步的研究来说明对患者舒适度和满意度的潜在益处。
期刊介绍:
Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology (JCE) keeps its readership well informed of the latest developments in the study and management of arrhythmic disorders. Edited by Bradley P. Knight, M.D., and a distinguished international editorial board, JCE is the leading journal devoted to the study of the electrophysiology of the heart.