David C B I Cabral, André Rivera, Marcelo A P Braga, Bárbara M F Passos, Iuri Ferreira Felix, Caique M P Ternes, Alexandra R D Brigido, Guilherme Dagostin de Carvalho, Abhishek J Deshmukh, Christopher V DeSimone
{"title":"房颤患者肺静脉隔离的高功率短时间消融与常规功率消融:随机对照试验的最新系统评价和荟萃分析","authors":"David C B I Cabral, André Rivera, Marcelo A P Braga, Bárbara M F Passos, Iuri Ferreira Felix, Caique M P Ternes, Alexandra R D Brigido, Guilherme Dagostin de Carvalho, Abhishek J Deshmukh, Christopher V DeSimone","doi":"10.1111/jce.16735","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>High-power short-duration (HPSD) ablation has emerged as a promising alternative to conventional power delivery (CPD) for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), though its efficacy, procedural efficiency, and safety profile remain uncertain.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To evaluate and compare the efficacy, procedural efficiency, and safety of HPSD versus CPD ablation strategies for PVI in patients with AF through a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.Gov databases were systematically searched for RCTs comparing HPSD with CPD ablation for PVI in patients with AF. Random-effects models were used to pool hazard ratios (HR) and risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). R version 4.4.2 was used for statistical analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight RCTs with 1094 patients (558 undergoing HPSD and 536 undergoing CPD ablation) were included. No significant differences were found in freedom from arrhythmia during the follow-up period (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.41-1.45; p = 0.424). AF recurrence did not differ (RR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.59-1.16; p = 0.268) between groups. HPSD had a significantly shorter procedural (mean difference [MD]: -21.93 min; 95% CI: -31.34, -12.53; p < 0.001) and RF ablation times (MD: -13.87 min; 95% CI: -19.46, -8.27; p < 0.001). No differences were observed in fluoroscopy time and first-pass isolation for right and left pulmonary veins. There was no difference in esophageal lesion rates, pericardial, or neurological complications, but there was a higher incidence of steam pops in HPSD (RR: 3.42; 95% CI: 1.45-8.09; p = 0.005).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Although HPSD ablation did not significantly improve freedom from arrhythmia or reduce AF recurrence compared to CPD, it demonstrated enhanced procedural efficiency, with shorter procedure and RF ablation times. Despite the higher rate of steam pops, the overall safety profile was similar between both groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>High-power short-duration ablation for pulmonary vein isolation in atrial fibrillation demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety to conventional power delivery, with the added benefit of shorter procedure and RF ablation times. However, HPSD ablation was associated with increased occurrence of steam pops.</p>","PeriodicalId":15178,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"High-Power Short-Duration Ablation Versus Conventional Power Ablation in Pulmonary Vein Isolation in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.\",\"authors\":\"David C B I Cabral, André Rivera, Marcelo A P Braga, Bárbara M F Passos, Iuri Ferreira Felix, Caique M P Ternes, Alexandra R D Brigido, Guilherme Dagostin de Carvalho, Abhishek J Deshmukh, Christopher V DeSimone\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jce.16735\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>High-power short-duration (HPSD) ablation has emerged as a promising alternative to conventional power delivery (CPD) for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), though its efficacy, procedural efficiency, and safety profile remain uncertain.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To evaluate and compare the efficacy, procedural efficiency, and safety of HPSD versus CPD ablation strategies for PVI in patients with AF through a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.Gov databases were systematically searched for RCTs comparing HPSD with CPD ablation for PVI in patients with AF. Random-effects models were used to pool hazard ratios (HR) and risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). R version 4.4.2 was used for statistical analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight RCTs with 1094 patients (558 undergoing HPSD and 536 undergoing CPD ablation) were included. No significant differences were found in freedom from arrhythmia during the follow-up period (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.41-1.45; p = 0.424). AF recurrence did not differ (RR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.59-1.16; p = 0.268) between groups. HPSD had a significantly shorter procedural (mean difference [MD]: -21.93 min; 95% CI: -31.34, -12.53; p < 0.001) and RF ablation times (MD: -13.87 min; 95% CI: -19.46, -8.27; p < 0.001). No differences were observed in fluoroscopy time and first-pass isolation for right and left pulmonary veins. There was no difference in esophageal lesion rates, pericardial, or neurological complications, but there was a higher incidence of steam pops in HPSD (RR: 3.42; 95% CI: 1.45-8.09; p = 0.005).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Although HPSD ablation did not significantly improve freedom from arrhythmia or reduce AF recurrence compared to CPD, it demonstrated enhanced procedural efficiency, with shorter procedure and RF ablation times. Despite the higher rate of steam pops, the overall safety profile was similar between both groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>High-power short-duration ablation for pulmonary vein isolation in atrial fibrillation demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety to conventional power delivery, with the added benefit of shorter procedure and RF ablation times. However, HPSD ablation was associated with increased occurrence of steam pops.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15178,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-31\",\"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.16735\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jce.16735","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
摘要
背景:高功率短时间(HPSD)消融已成为心房颤动(AF)患者肺静脉隔离(PVI)常规功率输送(CPD)的一种有希望的替代方法,尽管其疗效、程序效率和安全性仍不确定。目的:通过随机对照试验(rct)的系统回顾和荟萃分析,评估和比较HPSD与CPD消融策略治疗房颤患者PVI的疗效、程序效率和安全性。材料和方法:PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library和ClinicalTrials。我们系统地检索政府数据库,寻找比较HPSD与CPD消融治疗房颤患者PVI的随机对照试验。随机效应模型用于汇总95%可信区间(CI)的风险比(HR)和风险比(RR)。采用R 4.4.2版本进行统计分析。结果:纳入8项随机对照试验,共1094例患者(558例行HPSD, 536例行CPD消融)。随访期间心律失常发生率无显著差异(HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.41-1.45; p = 0.424)。两组间房颤复发率无差异(RR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.59-1.16; p = 0.268)。讨论:虽然与CPD相比,HPSD消融并没有显著改善心律失常或减少房颤复发,但它显示出更高的手术效率,缩短了手术时间和射频消融时间。尽管蒸汽爆裂率更高,但两组之间的总体安全性相似。结论:高功率短时间消融治疗房颤肺静脉隔离的疗效和安全性与传统的功率输送相当,并且具有更短的过程和射频消融时间的额外好处。然而,HPSD消融与蒸汽爆裂的发生率增加有关。
High-Power Short-Duration Ablation Versus Conventional Power Ablation in Pulmonary Vein Isolation in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Background: High-power short-duration (HPSD) ablation has emerged as a promising alternative to conventional power delivery (CPD) for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), though its efficacy, procedural efficiency, and safety profile remain uncertain.
Aims: To evaluate and compare the efficacy, procedural efficiency, and safety of HPSD versus CPD ablation strategies for PVI in patients with AF through a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
Materials and methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.Gov databases were systematically searched for RCTs comparing HPSD with CPD ablation for PVI in patients with AF. Random-effects models were used to pool hazard ratios (HR) and risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). R version 4.4.2 was used for statistical analysis.
Results: Eight RCTs with 1094 patients (558 undergoing HPSD and 536 undergoing CPD ablation) were included. No significant differences were found in freedom from arrhythmia during the follow-up period (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.41-1.45; p = 0.424). AF recurrence did not differ (RR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.59-1.16; p = 0.268) between groups. HPSD had a significantly shorter procedural (mean difference [MD]: -21.93 min; 95% CI: -31.34, -12.53; p < 0.001) and RF ablation times (MD: -13.87 min; 95% CI: -19.46, -8.27; p < 0.001). No differences were observed in fluoroscopy time and first-pass isolation for right and left pulmonary veins. There was no difference in esophageal lesion rates, pericardial, or neurological complications, but there was a higher incidence of steam pops in HPSD (RR: 3.42; 95% CI: 1.45-8.09; p = 0.005).
Discussion: Although HPSD ablation did not significantly improve freedom from arrhythmia or reduce AF recurrence compared to CPD, it demonstrated enhanced procedural efficiency, with shorter procedure and RF ablation times. Despite the higher rate of steam pops, the overall safety profile was similar between both groups.
Conclusion: High-power short-duration ablation for pulmonary vein isolation in atrial fibrillation demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety to conventional power delivery, with the added benefit of shorter procedure and RF ablation times. However, HPSD ablation was associated with increased occurrence of steam pops.
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.