General Anesthesia Improves Efficiency of High-Power Short-Duration Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation: Comparison with Mild Conscious Sedation

• Published in: Journal of personalized medicine Vol. 14; no. 8; p. 865
• Main Authors: Minciună, Ioan-Alexandru, Tomoaia, Raluca, Suceveanu, Mihai, Cismaru, Gabriel, Puiu, Mihai, Roșu, Radu, Simu, Gelu, Irimie, Diana Andrada, Frîngu, Florina, Caloian, Bogdan, Andronache, Marius, Zdrenghea, Dumitru, Pop, Dana
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Switzerland MDPI AG 16-08-2024; MDPI
• Subjects: Ablation; Anesthesia; Antiarrhythmics; Arrhythmia; Cardiac arrhythmia; Cardiology; Catheters; Efficiency; Fibrillation; General anesthesia; Patients; Radiation; Radiofrequency ablation; Regression analysis; Software; Statistical analysis; Variables; United States > US; high-power short duration; atrial fibrillation; catheter ablation; mild conscious sedation; general anesthesia
• ISSN: 2075-4426; 2075-4426
• DOI: 10.3390/jpm14080865

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia globally. High-power, short-duration radiofrequency (RF) catheter ablation (CA) for AF has recently emerged, reducing ablation times and enhancing patient tolerability with comparable efficacy and safety. While the benefits of general anesthesia (GA) for standard-power, standard-duration CA are well-established, data comparing GA to mild conscious sedation (MCS) for high-power, short-duration CA are limited.
We included patients undergoing high-power, short-duration CA for AF under GA (group 1) or MCS (group 2). Procedural characteristics, success rates, and mid-term outcomes were compared.
In total, 131 patients, 47 in the GA group and 84 in the MCS group, were included. CA was performed for paroxysmal AF in 34 patients in group 1 (72.3%) and 68 patients in group 2 (80.9%). We found lower a mean total procedure time (100 [90-120] vs. 160 [130-180] min,
< 0.0001), lower radiation exposure (932.5 [625-1716] vs. 2445 [1228-4791] μGy,
< 0.0001 and 4.5 [3-7.1] 7.3 [4.2-13.5] min,
= 0.0003) and fewer RF applications (71 [54.8-83.8] vs. 103 [88.5-120.5],
< 0.0001) in the GA group. No major complications occurred. The 6-month AF recurrence rate was comparable between the groups (21.2% vs. 33.3%,
= 0.15).
In patients undergoing high-power, short-duration RFCA for AF, the use of GA is associated with better procedural efficiency while simultaneously associated with an early recurrence rate comparable to MCS.