Heart rhythm O2 · 2026
Zero- or minimal-fluoroscopy vs conventional fluoroscopy in catheter ablation of supraventricular tachycardias: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Khalid Ayan, Samad Zaid Abdul, Iftikhar Areej, Ibrahim Muhammad, Daniyal Shaikh Muhammad, Rasool Anas, Siddiqui Fauzaan Ahmed, Baig Burhan Mazhar, Faizan Abid Hafiz Muhammad, Nadir Muhammad Asfandyar, Ashraf Danish Ali, Hassan Ibrahim Nagmeldin, Ahmed Raheel
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation is the treatment of choice for supraventricular tachycardias. Conventional fluoroscopy (CF) enables real-time guidance but exposes patients and staff to ionizing radiation. Zero- (ZF) or minimal-fluoroscopy (MF) approaches are primarily enabled by electroanatomic mapping, with adjunctive tools such as intracardiac echocardiography used selectively when clinically indicated, to reduce radiation.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ZF/MF ablation compared with CF for supraventricular tachycardias.
METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing ZF/MF with CF ablation. The primary outcomes were acute and long-term success. Long-term success was defined as the absence of arrhythmia recurrence during the follow-up period.
RESULTS: 34 studies (5 randomized controlled trials, 29 observational; 11,635 patients) were included. Acute success was similar (risk ratio [RR] 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.99-1.01; P = .94), whereas long-term success favored ZF/MF (RR 1.02; 95% CI 1.00-1.03; P = .023). Complications were comparable (RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.26-1.61; P = .35). ZF/MF significantly reduced fluoroscopy time (mean difference [MD] -13.75 minutes; 95% CI -16.49 to -11.02; P < .01) and dose-area product (MD -1511.98 cGy·cm2; 95% CI -2358.44 to -665.53; P < .01). Procedure duration was slightly longer with ZF/MF (MD +4.47 minutes; 95% CI 0.19-8.75; P = .04).
CONCLUSION: ZF/MF ablation provides equivalent acute efficacy, marginal improvement in long-term success, and markedly reduces radiation exposure without increasing complications. These findings support ZF/MF as a safe and effective alternative to CF, with particular relevance for minimizing radiation exposure in vulnerable populations.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ZF/MF ablation compared with CF for supraventricular tachycardias.
METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing ZF/MF with CF ablation. The primary outcomes were acute and long-term success. Long-term success was defined as the absence of arrhythmia recurrence during the follow-up period.
RESULTS: 34 studies (5 randomized controlled trials, 29 observational; 11,635 patients) were included. Acute success was similar (risk ratio [RR] 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.99-1.01; P = .94), whereas long-term success favored ZF/MF (RR 1.02; 95% CI 1.00-1.03; P = .023). Complications were comparable (RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.26-1.61; P = .35). ZF/MF significantly reduced fluoroscopy time (mean difference [MD] -13.75 minutes; 95% CI -16.49 to -11.02; P < .01) and dose-area product (MD -1511.98 cGy·cm2; 95% CI -2358.44 to -665.53; P < .01). Procedure duration was slightly longer with ZF/MF (MD +4.47 minutes; 95% CI 0.19-8.75; P = .04).
CONCLUSION: ZF/MF ablation provides equivalent acute efficacy, marginal improvement in long-term success, and markedly reduces radiation exposure without increasing complications. These findings support ZF/MF as a safe and effective alternative to CF, with particular relevance for minimizing radiation exposure in vulnerable populations.