Clinical cardiology · 2021
The use of minimal fluoroscopy for cardiac electrophysiology procedures: A meta-analysis and review of the literature.
СтатьяМетаанализОбзорНазвание 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.
Chiang Lorraine Lok Wing, Li Christien, Hong Kathryn L, Hui Winsy Sin, Beh Sze Yi, Gong Mengqi, Liu Tong, Li Guangping, Xia Yunlong, Ho Jeffery, Roever Leonardo, Duong Sophia, Huang Grace, Tse Gary, Baranchuk Adrian, Glover Benedict M, International Health Informatics Study (IHIS) Network
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Conventional catheter ablation involves prolonged exposure to ionizing radiation, potentially leading to detrimental health effects. Minimal fluoroscopy (MF) represents a safer alternative, which should be explored. Data on the safety and efficacy of this technique are limited.
HYPOTHESIS: Our hypothesis is that MF is of equal efficacy and safety to conventional catheter ablation with the use of fluoroscopy by performing a meta-analysis of both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world registry studies.
METHODS: Pubmed and Embase were searched from their inception to July 2020 for RCTs, cohort and observational studies that assessed the outcomes of catheter ablation using a MF technique versus the conventional approach.
RESULTS: Fifteen studies involving 3795 patients were included in this meta-analysis. There was a significant reduction in fluoroscopy and procedural time with no difference in acute success (odds ratio [OR]:0.74, 95% CI: 0.50-1.10, p = .14), long-term success (OR:0.92, 95% CI: 0.65-1.31, p = .38), arrhythmia recurrence (OR:1.24, 95% CI: 0.75-2.06, p = .97) or rate of complications. (OR:0.83, 95% CI: 0.46-1.48, p = .65). Additionally sub-group analysis for those undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) did not demonstrate a difference in success or complication rates (OR:0.86, 95% CI: 0.30-2.42, p = .77). Multivariate meta-regression did not identify the presence of moderator variables.
CONCLUSION: This updated meta-analysis demonstrated an overall reduction in procedural and fluoroscopy time for those undergoing a minimal fluoroscopic approach. There was no significant difference in either acute or chronic success rates or complications between a MF approach and conventional approach for the management of all arrhythmias including those undergoing catheter ablation for AF.
HYPOTHESIS: Our hypothesis is that MF is of equal efficacy and safety to conventional catheter ablation with the use of fluoroscopy by performing a meta-analysis of both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world registry studies.
METHODS: Pubmed and Embase were searched from their inception to July 2020 for RCTs, cohort and observational studies that assessed the outcomes of catheter ablation using a MF technique versus the conventional approach.
RESULTS: Fifteen studies involving 3795 patients were included in this meta-analysis. There was a significant reduction in fluoroscopy and procedural time with no difference in acute success (odds ratio [OR]:0.74, 95% CI: 0.50-1.10, p = .14), long-term success (OR:0.92, 95% CI: 0.65-1.31, p = .38), arrhythmia recurrence (OR:1.24, 95% CI: 0.75-2.06, p = .97) or rate of complications. (OR:0.83, 95% CI: 0.46-1.48, p = .65). Additionally sub-group analysis for those undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) did not demonstrate a difference in success or complication rates (OR:0.86, 95% CI: 0.30-2.42, p = .77). Multivariate meta-regression did not identify the presence of moderator variables.
CONCLUSION: This updated meta-analysis demonstrated an overall reduction in procedural and fluoroscopy time for those undergoing a minimal fluoroscopic approach. There was no significant difference in either acute or chronic success rates or complications between a MF approach and conventional approach for the management of all arrhythmias including those undergoing catheter ablation for AF.