BackgroundA new zero-fluoroscopy technique for electrophysiology catheter navigation relying on intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) has been recently reported (Ice&ICE trial). We investigated potential differences in efficacy, safety or procedural performance between conventional fluoroscopy- and ICE-guided cryothermal ablation (CA) in symptomatic AVNRT patients.
MethodsClinical and electrophysiological data of AVNRT patients included in the Ice&ICE trial (22 patients, 16 females; =zero-fluoroscopy group) were compared to those of consecutive AVNRT patients, who underwent fluoroscopy-guided CA (25 patients, 17 females; = fluoroscopy group) during the last 2 years in our institution.
ResultsSlow pathway ablation or modulation was successful in all patients. Fluoroscopy time and radiation dose in the fluoroscopy group were 11.2?±?9.0?min and 20.3?±?16.2Gycm2, whereas no fluoroscopy was used in the opposite group (p ConclusionsZero-fluoroscopy ICE-guided EP catheter navigation shows comparable efficacy and safety to fluoroscopic guidance during CA in AVNRT patients. ICE visualization of catheters and endocardial structures within the triangle of Koch shortens the cryo-application duration, though time needed for catheter placement is longer, when compared with conventional fluoroscopic guidance, which results in similar mean EPS duration with both navigation techniques.
Trial registration(German Clinical Trials Register ID: DRKS00011360 ; Registration Date 14.12.2016).