Procedural outcomes of fluoroscopy-less catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation

Abstract Background Radiofrequency catheter ablation is superior therapy to antiarrhythmic drugs for maintaining sinus rhythm in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. Traditional fluoroscopy-guided AF ablation poses risks of prolonged radiation exposure for both patients and medical staff. Recent advancements in fluoroscopy-less catheter ablation techniques offer potential solutions, but comprehensive data on their effectiveness and safety are lacking. Purpose To evaluate the procedural outcomes and safety of fluoroscopy-less catheter ablation for AF compared to fluoroscopy-guided ablation. Methods Retrospective observational study of consecutive AF ablations (N=881) conducted at a university teaching hospital (Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, Ontario) from November 2017 to September 2022. An electro-anatomical mapping system and ICE was used in all cases. Baseline characteristics and procedural outcomes between the fluoroscopy-less and fluoroscopy-guided groups were compared. Cases that used <60 seconds of fluoroscopy (occasionally used by operators during the placement of an esophageal probe) were included in the fluoroscopy-less group (N= 68). Results Mean age of individuals was 60.6 ± 11 years, 71.7% were male, 72.6% had paroxysmal AF, mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 1.6 ± 1.4, 11.1% had prior heart failure, and mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 57.5 ± 15%. There were no significant differences in patient baseline characteristics between the fluoroscopy-less and fluoroscopy groups. Total procedure and fluoroscopy times were lower in the fluoroscopy-less group compared to the fluoroscopy-guided group (169.3 ±42 minutes vs. 192.1 ±54 minutes, p<0.0001 and 0.024 ±0.10 vs. 10.0 ±7.4 minutes , p<0.0001). Fluoroscopy-less AF ablation remained an independent predictor of lower procedure times following adjusting for the use of general anesthesia, high-power short-duration, presence of trainees, AF pattern, redo cases, and type of mapping system. Complication rates were similar between fluoroscopy-less and fluoroscopy-guided ablation (1.9% vs. 3.8%, p=0.11). Conclusion Fluoroscopy-less catheter ablation for AF appears to have similar procedural outcomes and safety than fluoroscopy-guided AF ablation.