Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Clinical experience with contact-force and flexible-tip ablation catheter designs

  • Published:
Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Lesion formation is a critical determinant of technical and clinical success of pulmonary vein isolation. Different catheter designs aim to enhance tissue contact during ablation to enable optimized lesion formation. We analyzed procedural characteristics and predictors of clinical success in patients ablated with three different contemporary ablation catheters.

Methods

Two hundred sixty-eight sequentially included patients receiving pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) with conventional (n = 122), contact-force (n = 96) and flexible-tip (n = 60) catheters were followed for a median of 14.1 months with 7d-Holter-monitoring and TTE at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. Baseline characteristics and follow-up times were homogeneous across all groups.

Results

Multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression for arrhythmia recurrence demonstrated a favorable hazard ratio for contact-force and flexible-tip catheters vs. conventional open irrigation catheters. Procedure time and fluoroscopy time were shorter for contact-force and flexible-tip catheters versus conventional catheters, but equal between. Linear lesions were applied in 58 % of contact-force and 66 % of flexible-tip cases, and CFAEs were targeted in 26 % of either.

Conclusions

Our non-randomized prospectively collected data do not show a difference in observed procedure characteristics and in clinical outcome for flexible-tip versus contact-force catheter designs, while both display improved performance against conventional open irrigated-tip catheters. Linear lesions and CFAEs ablation were not associated with improved arrhythmia-free survival.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

AFib:

Atrial fibrillation

PVI:

Pulmonary vein isolation

PV:

Pulmonary vein

HR:

Hazard ratio

WACA:

Wide area circumferential ablation

LA:

Left atrial/left atrium

References

  1. Calkins, H., Kuck, K. H., Cappato, R., et al. (2012). 2012 HRS/EHRA/ECAS Expert Consensus Statement on Catheter and Surgical Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation: recommendations for patient selection, procedural techniques, patient management and follow-up, definitions, endpoints, and research trial design. Europace, 14, 528–606.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Oral, H., Scharf, C., Chugh, A., et al. (2003). Catheter ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: segmental pulmonary vein ostial ablation versus left atrial ablation. Circulation, 108, 2355–2360.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Wakili, R., Clauss, S., Schmidt, V., et al. (2014). Impact of real-time contact force and impedance measurement in pulmonary vein isolation procedures for treatment of atrial fibrillation. Clinical Research in Cardiology, 103, 97–106.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Wutzler, A., Huemer, M., Parwani, A. S., et al. (2014). Contact force mapping during catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: procedural data and one-year follow-up. Archives of Medical Science, 10, 266–272.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Balk, E. M., Garlitski, A. C., Alsheikh-Ali, A. A., et al. (2010). Predictors of atrial fibrillation recurrence after radiofrequency catheter ablation: a systematic review. Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology, 21, 1208–1216.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Berruezo, A., Tamborero, D., Mont, L., et al. (2007). Pre-procedural predictors of atrial fibrillation recurrence after circumferential pulmonary vein ablation. European Heart Journal, 28, 836–841.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cappato, R., Calkins, H., Chen, S. A., et al. (2010). Updated worldwide survey on the methods, efficacy, and safety of catheter ablation for human atrial fibrillation. Circulation. Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology, 3, 32–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hunter, R. J., Berriman, T. J., Diab, I., et al. (2014). A randomized controlled trial of catheter ablation versus medical treatment of atrial fibrillation in heart failure (the CAMTAF trial). Circulation. Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology, 7, 31–38.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Makimoto, H., Lin, T., Rillig, A., et al. (2014). In vivo contact force analysis and correlation with tissue impedance during left atrial mapping and catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. Circulation. Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology, 7, 46–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Pezzulich, B., Taralli, S., Villata, G., Sori, P. (2015). Clinical experience with a novel, irrigated, flexible tip ablation catheter in atrial fibrillation ablation. Minerva Cardioangiologica, 63(2), 99–103.

  11. European Heart Rhythm Association, European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, Camm, A. J., et al. (2010). Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation: the Task Force for the Management of Atrial Fibrillation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Europace, 12, 1360–1420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Rostock, T., Steven, D., Hoffmann, B., et al. (2008). Chronic atrial fibrillation is a biatrial arrhythmia: data from catheter ablation of chronic atrial fibrillation aiming arrhythmia termination using a sequential ablation approach. Circulation. Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology, 1, 344–353.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Wolf, M., Saenen, J. B., Bories, W., et al. (2015). Superior efficacy of pulmonary vein isolation with online contact force measurement persists after the learning period: a prospective case control study. Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology, 43, 287–296.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Haldar, S., Jarman, J. W., Panikker, S., et al. (2013). Contact force sensing technology identifies sites of inadequate contact and reduces acute pulmonary vein reconnection: a prospective case control study. International Journal of Cardiology, 168, 1160–1166.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Anter, E., Contreras-Valdes, F. M., Shvilkin, A., et al. (2014). Acute pulmonary vein reconnection is a predictor of atrial fibrillation recurrence following pulmonary vein isolation. Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology, 39, 225–232.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Neuzil, P., Reddy, V. Y., Kautzner, J., et al. (2013). Electrical reconnection after pulmonary vein isolation is contingent on contact force during initial treatment: results from the EFFICAS I study. Circulation. Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology, 6, 327–333.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Stabile, G., Solimene, F., Calo, L., et al. (2015). Catheter-tissue contact force values do not impact mid-term clinical outcome following pulmonary vein isolation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology, 42, 21–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Marijon, E., Fazaa, S., Narayanan, K., et al. (2014). Real-time contact force sensing for pulmonary vein isolation in the setting of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: procedural and 1-year results. Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology, 25(2), 130–137.

  19. Ramoul, K., Wright, M., Sohal, M., et al. (2015). Does diffuse irrigation result in improved radiofrequency catheter ablation? A prospective randomized study of right atrial typical flutter ablation. Europace, 17, 295–299.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Moreno, J., Quintanilla, J. G., Molina-Morua, R., et al. (2014). Morphological and thermodynamic comparison of the lesions created by 4 open-irrigated catheters in 2 experimental models. Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology, 25, 1391–1399.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Sciarra, L., Golia, P., Natalizia, A., et al. (2014). Which is the best catheter to perform atrial fibrillation ablation? A comparison between standard ThermoCool, SmartTouch, and Surround Flow catheters. Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology, 39, 193–200.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. D'ascenzo, F., Corleto, A., Biondi-Zoccai, G., et al. (2013). Which are the most reliable predictors of recurrence of atrial fibrillation after transcatheter ablation?: a meta-analysis. International Journal of Cardiology, 167, 1984–1989.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Verma, A., Jiang, C. Y., Betts, T. R., et al. (2015). Approaches to catheter ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation. New England Journal of Medicine, 372, 1812–1822.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Electrophysiology Department, Kerckhoff Heart Centre, Benekestr. 2-6, 61231, Bad Nauheim, Germany

    N. Deubner, H. Greiss, E. Akkaya, A. Berkowitsch, S. Zaltsberg, C. W. Hamm, M. Kuniss & T. Neumann

Authors
  1. N. Deubner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. H. Greiss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. E. Akkaya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. A. Berkowitsch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. S. Zaltsberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. C. W. Hamm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. M. Kuniss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. T. Neumann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to N. Deubner.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

There exists no conflict of interests regarding the topic of this article for any of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Deubner, N., Greiss, H., Akkaya, E. et al. Clinical experience with contact-force and flexible-tip ablation catheter designs. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 47, 75–82 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-016-0128-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-016-0128-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation