Ablation-index guided versus conventional contact-force guided ablation in pulmonary vein isolation - Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Ablation-index guided versus conventional contact-force guided ablation in pulmonary vein isolation - Systematic review and meta-analysis.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.ipej.2019.05.001
复制
发表时间：
2019-07-01
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Huang, Ian
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Pranata, Raymond;Vania, Rachel;Huang, Ian
背景：接触力传感导管广泛应用于导管消融，但其未考虑射频功率。消融指数（AI）是一种结合接触力-时间-功率的新型指标，已被证明可可靠地预测射频输送的损伤大小和深度。我们旨在评估消融指数引导手术与传统消融手术的最新证据。方法：我们通过PubMed、EuropePMC、EBSCOhost、科克伦中心数据库和ClinicalTrials.gov对消融指数引导手术与传统手术进行了全面检索，从开始到2019年2月。结果：共纳入5项研究的1727例受试者。消融指数指导下的12个月AF/AT/AFL发生率较低，OR为0.35 [0.17，0.73]，p = 0.005; I2 58%。通过删除研究进行敏感性分析后，异质性降至0%，OR为0.26 [0.15，0.46]，p
BACKGROUND: Contact-force sensing catheter is widely used for catheter ablation, however, it did not take account of radiofrequency power. Ablation index (AI) is a novel marker incorporating contact force-time-power, was shown to be reliable in predicting lesion size and depth for radiofrequency delivery. We aimed to assess the latest evidence on ablation index guided procedure versus conventional ablation procedure.METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search on topic that assesses ablation index guided procedure versus conventional procedures from inception up until February 2019 through PubMed, EuropePMC, EBSCOhost, Cochrane Central Database, and ClinicalTrials.gov.RESULTS: A total of 1727 subjects from five studies were included. 12 months' incidence of AF/AT/AFL was lower in ablation index guided with an OR of 0.35 [0.17, 0.73], p = 0.005; I2 58%. Upon sensitivity analysis by removing a study, heterogeneity decreased to 0% with OR of 0.26 [0.15, 0.46], p