Randomized Comparison of a Radiofrequency Wire Versus a Radiofrequency Needle System for Transseptal Puncture.

BACKGROUND

Transseptal puncture is a necessary component of many electrophysiology and structural heart procedures. Improving this technique has broad ramifications for the overall efficiency and safety of these interventions. A new technology uses a specialized introducer wire to cross the septum with radiofrequency (RF) energy, eliminating the need for a transseptal needle and wire/needle exchanges.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to compare the efficacy and safety of an RF needle versus RF wire approach for transseptal puncture.

METHODS

Individuals ≥18 years of age undergoing double transseptal puncture for atrial fibrillation or left atrial flutter ablation were randomized to a transseptal approach with either an RF needle or RF wire. The primary outcome was time to achieve first transseptal puncture. Secondary outcomes included second and combined transseptal puncture time, fluoroscopy time, number of equipment exchanges, and complications.

RESULTS

A total of 75 participants were enrolled (36 RF needle, 39 RF wire). No crossovers occurred. Randomization to the RF wire resulted in a significant reduction in first transseptal time compared with the RF needle (median 9.2 [IQR: 5.7-11.2] minutes vs 6.9 [IQR: 5.2-8.4] minutes, P = 0.03). Second and combined transseptal times, and number of equipment exchanges, were also reduced with the RF wire. One participant in the RF needle group experienced transient atrioventricular block due to mechanical trauma from the sheath/dilator assembly. There were no complications in the RF wire group.

CONCLUSIONS

The RF wire technique resulted in faster time to transseptal puncture and fewer equipment exchanges compared with an RF needle with no difference in complications.