Impact of high-power short-duration atrial fibrillation ablation technique on the incidence of silent cerebral embolism: a prospective randomized controlled study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background High-power short-duration (HPSD) ablation strategy has emerged as a popular approach for treating atrial fibrillation (AF), with shorter ablation time. The utilized Smart Touch Surround Flow (STSF) catheter, with 56 holes around the electrode, lowers electrode-tissue temperature and thrombus risk. Thus, we conducted this prospective, randomized study to investigate if the HPSD strategy with STSF catheter in AF ablation procedures reduces the silent cerebral embolism (SCE) risk compared to the conventional approach with the Smart Touch (ST) catheter. Methods From June 2020 to September 2021, 100 AF patients were randomized 1:1 to the HPSD group using the STSF catheter (power set at 50 W) or the conventional group using the ST catheter (power set at 30 to 35 W). Pulmonary vein isolation was performed in all patients, with additional lesions at operator’s discretion. High-resolution cerebral diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (hDWI) with slice thickness of 1 mm was performed before and 24–72 h after ablation. The incidence of new periprocedural SCE was defined as the primary outcome. Cognitive performance was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) test. Results All enrolled AF patients (median age 63, 60% male, 59% paroxysmal AF) underwent successful ablation. Post-procedural hDWI identified 106 lesions in 42 enrolled patients (42%), with 55 lesions in 22 patients (44%) in the HPSD group and 51 lesions in 20 patients (40%) in the conventional group ( p = 0.685). No significant differences were observed between two groups regarding the average number of lesions ( p = 0.751), maximum lesion diameter ( p = 0.405), and total lesion volume per patient ( p = 0.669). Persistent AF and CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score were identified as SCE determinants during AF ablation procedure by multivariable regression analysis. No significant differences in MoCA scores were observed between patients with SCE and those without, both immediately post-procedure ( p = 0.572) and at the 3-month follow-up ( p = 0.743). Conclusions Involving a small sample size of 100 AF patients, this study reveals a similar incidence of SCE in AF ablation procedures, comparing the HPSD strategy using the STSF catheter to the conventional approach with the ST catheter. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04408716. Graphical Abstract AF = Atrial fibrillation, DWI = Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging, HPSD = High-power short-duration, ST = Smart Touch, STSF = Smart Touch Surround Flow.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".