Comparing the effects of common ablation catheter and irrigated ablation catheter on common atrial flutter

Jingtian Peng,Haīssaguerre Michel,Jaīs Pierre,C Dipen,Hocini Mélèze
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1004-8812.2001.01.006
2001-01-01
Abstract:Objective To compare the effects of common ablation catheter and irrigated ablation catheter on common atrial flutter (CAFL). Methods 60 patients with CAFL were randomly dividied into common catheter group (CRF, 30cases) and irrigated catheter group (IRF, 30 cases). The procedure duration, fluoroscopy duration and radio frequeney duration were studied. The RF energy, impedance and temparature during the ablation were observed. Results The duration of procedure, fluoroscopy time and radio frequency ablation time were significantly shorter in IRF group than those in CRF group (P<0.01), there was also a difference in the times of ablation between two groups (P<0.05). In IRF group, the variation of impedance, RF-energy and temperature during the ablation was small, but in CRF group, the variation was obvious and there were 19 cases with coagulum formation. The degree of the chest pain was similar between two groups, there were no serious complications such as pericardial effusion, thrombi etc. Conclusion Irrigated ablation catheter should be superior to common ablation catheter in CAFL ablation.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?