Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Oral presentation
  • Open Access

Irrigation during concomitant bipolar ablation: does it matter?

  • 1Email author,
  • 1,
  • 1,
  • 1,
  • 1,
  • 1 and
  • 1
Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery20138 (Suppl 1) :O55

https://doi.org/10.1186/1749-8090-8-S1-O55

  • Published:

Keywords

  • Atrial Fibrillation
  • Catheter Ablation
  • Atrial Flutter
  • Persistent Atrial Fibrillation
  • Coronary Procedure

Background

Use of irrigation catheters increases the power supply energy to create transmural injury [Jais P., Shah D.C., Haissaguerre M. et al., 2000]. However, these data are based on the catheter procedures and concomitant monopolar endocardial ablation [Deneke T., Khargi K. et al., 2007]. The benefits of using irrigation during bipolar concomitant ablation has no reflection in the literature.

Methods

from 2007 to 2012, 407 patients (mean age 58.2 ± 10.4 years) underwent valve or coronary procedure and concomitant bipolar RF ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF). In 152 (37,3%) patients was used irrigated bipolar clamp Medtronic CardioBlate (IB group) and dry bipolar clamp AtriCure Isolator Synergy (DB group) in 255 (62,7%) cases. Most of the patients in both groups had a long standing persistent AF. There were no significant differences between groups. The follow-up data was analyzed for 36,3 ± 14,6 months. Rhythm disturbances evaluated by 24 hours Holter.

Results

No significant differences in ablation time and aortic cross-clamping: 25.2 min in BI group and 27.6 min in BD group (p = 0.271); 82.7 min in BI group and 78.3 min in BD group (p = 0.163). There was no difference in hospital mortality between the groups. Specific ablation complication (pulmonary vein perforation) occurred in 1 patient in each group: 0.66% (BI group) and 0.39% (BD group) (p = 0.576). At latest follow up freedom from AF was 81.3% in the BI group and 84.7% in the BD group (p = 0.121). Atrial flutter occurred in 5.9% (BI group) and in 1.9% (BD group) (p = 0.047). All patients with atrial flutter were underwent catheter ablation.

Conclusions

Comparative analysis revealed no any benefits of using irrigation during concomitant bipolar ablation.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
State Research Institute Blood Circulation Pathology, Novosibirsk, Russian Federation

Copyright

© Bogachev-Prokophiev et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2013

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Advertisement