Natale, Andrea

Flex Tip Comparative AblationIntroductionNext‐generation catheters have been developed to reduce irrigation volume and preserve power delivery. A novel design uses a flexible tip (FlexAbility™ catheter) that directs flow to the contact surface. Because of recent safety issues with new catheters, we undertook a study in a canine heart with 3 irrigated catheters to compare efficacy and safety.MethodsEndocardial ablation was performed by 2 independent operators in 12 anesthetized canines with the FlexAbility (St. Jude Medical), ThermoCool™ (Biosense Webster), and ThermoCool™ SF (Biosense Webster) catheters. Endocardial RF lesions were delivered with each catheter in all 4 chambers of each animal for 52 ± 16 seconds. Each chamber was randomized to receive ablation from one catheter with recording of safety events. Cardiac pathology was performed with triphenyl tetrazolium chloride stain.ResultsAverage lesion dimensions were not significantly different between the 3 catheters. FlexAbility™ demonstrated a lower risk of steam pops relative to ThermoCool SF (P‐value = 0.013) despite equal mean power and radiofrequency time. High‐temperature generator shutdowns were observed with FlexAbility™ but not with either ThermoCool catheter. High‐temperature shutdowns were associated with larger average impedance drops (28.5 ohms vs. 19 ohms) without compromising lesion size.ConclusionsThe FlexAbility™ tip is safe and effective with no significant difference in lesion sizes compared to both standard ThermoCool and ThermoCool SF. FlexAbility™ has a significantly lower risk of steam pops compared to ThermoCool SF in a beating heart as defined predominantly by an abrupt rise of impedance.

Background— The Intracardiac Echocardiography Guided Cardioversion Helps Interventional Procedures study evaluated the concordance of intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) with transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods and Results— Patients with AF undergoing right heart catheterization underwent left atrium (LA) and interatrial septal (IAS) imaging by TEE and ICE. A blinded comparison of the 2 modalities was performed at a core laboratory. Ninety-five patients aged 58±12 years completed the study. The LA was profiled in all patients with both techniques, and concordance for image quality was 96%. LA appendage (LAA) imaging was achieved in 85% with ICE and 96% with TEE. There was no difference in the presence of spontaneous echo contrast between ICE and TEE during LA imaging, but there was a trend toward a greater incidence in the LAA with TEE ( P =0.109). Intracardiac thrombus was uncommonly seen (TEE, 6.9%; ICE, 5.2%). The concordance for the presence or absence of thrombus was 97% in the LA and 92% in the LAA, but the latter was detected more frequently with TEE. IAS imaging was achieved in 91% with ICE and in 97% with TEE ( P =0.177). Concordance for patent foramen ovale and atrial septal aneurysms was 100% and 96%, respectively. A negative ICE examination was associated with absence of dense echo contrast or thrombus on TEE in 86%. Conclusions— This study provides validation for the use of ICE for LA and IAS imaging. ICE imaging was less sensitive compared to TEE for LAA thrombus identification. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00281073.