The use of minimal fluoroscopy for cardiac electrophysiology procedures: A meta-analysis and review of the literature.

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.