Heart rhythm O2 · 2026
Limited benefit of half-normal vs normal saline irrigation for augmenting current delivery with open-irrigated temperature-controlled ablation.
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.
Huang Henry D, Gordon Jonathan, Winterfield Jeffrey, Santangeli Pasquale, Liang Jackson, Yavin Hagai, Aziz Zaid, Treger Jeremy, Yeshwant Srinath, Beaser Andrew, Ozcan Cevher, Upadhyay Gaurav A, Arora Rishi, Sauer William H
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Half-normal saline (HNS) irrigation increases radiofrequency (RF) lesion size during power-controlled ablation by augmenting current delivery to tissue. Whether this benefit persists with temperature-controlled ablation, which modulates power delivery on the basis of catheter tip temperature, remains unknown.
OBJECTIVE: This study sought to compare lesion characteristics using HNS vs normal saline (NS) irrigation with power-controlled and temperature-controlled open-irrigated catheters in an ex vivo model.
METHODS: RF applications were delivered to left ventricular porcine tissue using a power- and temperature-controlled irrigated catheter with NS and HNS irrigation. Lesions were performed at 10 g contact force perpendicular to tissue. Temperature-controlled ablation used manufacturer-preset maximum temperature cutoffs of 50°C at 30W and 55°C at 50W.
RESULTS: Among 104 lesions analyzed, HNS irrigation with the power-controlled catheter produced larger lesions at 30W × 30 seconds than did NS (depth: 7.5 ± 1.0 vs 6.5 ± 0.6 mm, P = .0005; width: 10.5 ± 1.1 vs 9.4 ± 1.0 mm, P = .005). However, no difference in lesion dimensions was observed with the temperature-controlled catheter using HNS vs NS at 30W (depth: 6.1 ± 0.4 vs 6.2 ± 0.7 mm, P = .44; width: 9.4 ± 0.7 vs 9.6 ± 1.2 mm, P = .23) or 50W (depth: 7.2 ± 0.7 vs 7.5 ± 0.8 mm, P = .35; width: 10.9 ±1.3 vs 11.8 ± 1.6 mm, P = .19). With HNS, the temperature-controlled catheter showed reduced average power delivery (30W: 23.3 ± 5.4 vs 27.1± 4.6 W, P < .05) and increased irrigation flow rates compared with NS, likely owing to temperature cut-off enforcement. Fewer steam pops were observed with the temperature-controlled than with the power-controlled catheter using HNS (5% vs 23%, P = .09).
CONCLUSION: Unlike power-controlled ablation, HNS irrigation does not increase lesion size with temperature-controlled ablation. Enforcement of maximum temperature cutoffs reduces actual power delivery, blunting the current augmentation benefit of HNS irrigation while potentially improving safety.
OBJECTIVE: This study sought to compare lesion characteristics using HNS vs normal saline (NS) irrigation with power-controlled and temperature-controlled open-irrigated catheters in an ex vivo model.
METHODS: RF applications were delivered to left ventricular porcine tissue using a power- and temperature-controlled irrigated catheter with NS and HNS irrigation. Lesions were performed at 10 g contact force perpendicular to tissue. Temperature-controlled ablation used manufacturer-preset maximum temperature cutoffs of 50°C at 30W and 55°C at 50W.
RESULTS: Among 104 lesions analyzed, HNS irrigation with the power-controlled catheter produced larger lesions at 30W × 30 seconds than did NS (depth: 7.5 ± 1.0 vs 6.5 ± 0.6 mm, P = .0005; width: 10.5 ± 1.1 vs 9.4 ± 1.0 mm, P = .005). However, no difference in lesion dimensions was observed with the temperature-controlled catheter using HNS vs NS at 30W (depth: 6.1 ± 0.4 vs 6.2 ± 0.7 mm, P = .44; width: 9.4 ± 0.7 vs 9.6 ± 1.2 mm, P = .23) or 50W (depth: 7.2 ± 0.7 vs 7.5 ± 0.8 mm, P = .35; width: 10.9 ±1.3 vs 11.8 ± 1.6 mm, P = .19). With HNS, the temperature-controlled catheter showed reduced average power delivery (30W: 23.3 ± 5.4 vs 27.1± 4.6 W, P < .05) and increased irrigation flow rates compared with NS, likely owing to temperature cut-off enforcement. Fewer steam pops were observed with the temperature-controlled than with the power-controlled catheter using HNS (5% vs 23%, P = .09).
CONCLUSION: Unlike power-controlled ablation, HNS irrigation does not increase lesion size with temperature-controlled ablation. Enforcement of maximum temperature cutoffs reduces actual power delivery, blunting the current augmentation benefit of HNS irrigation while potentially improving safety.