» Articles » PMID: 8540455

Complications of Diagnostic Electrophysiologic Studies and Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation in Patients with Tachyarrhythmias: an Eight-year Survey of 3,966 Consecutive Procedures in a Tertiary Referral Center

Overview
Journal Am J Cardiol
Date 1996 Jan 1
PMID 8540455
Citations 27
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Predictors and comparisons of complications in patients with electrophysiologic study or radiofrequency ablation have not been assessed in previous published reports. The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate the procedure-specific complications and investigate the possible causes and predictors of complications in electrophysiologic study and radiofrequency ablation. Data of diagnostic electrophysiologic studies and radiofrequency ablation were prospective, and represented a consecutive series of 2,593 patients with 3,966 procedures. The present study showed that a significantly higher complication rate occurred in radiofrequency ablation than in electrophysiologic study (3.1% vs. 1.1%, respectively, p = 0.00002) and a significantly higher complication rate occurred in elderly than in young patients with electrophysiologic study (2.2% vs 0.5%, p = 0.0002) or radiofrequency ablation (6.1% vs 2.0%, p = 0.00015). Multiple logistic analysis found that older age (p < 0.01) and systemic disease in elderly patients (p < 0.01) were the independent predictors of complications in both procedures. Furthermore, there was no temporal trend in the incidence of complication. We conclude that the incidence of complication was higher in radiofrequency ablation, and elderly patients had a higher incidence of complications in both electrophysiologic study and radiofrequency ablation; these procedures, when performed by experienced personnel in an appropriately staffed and equipped laboratory, can be undertaken with an acceptable risk.

Citing Articles

Antiplatelet and Anti-Coagulation Therapy for Left-Sided Catheter Ablations: What Is beyond Atrial Fibrillation?.

Nesti M, Luca F, Duncker D, De Sensi F, Malaczynska-Rajpold K, Behar J J Clin Med. 2023; 12(19).

PMID: 37834826 PMC: 10573733. DOI: 10.3390/jcm12196183.


Should we burn our bridges with AVNRT ablation?.

Purtell C, Enriquez A J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2023; 66(5):1041-1042.

PMID: 36787092 DOI: 10.1007/s10840-023-01501-3.


Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation: How to Manage and Prevent Collateral Damage?.

El Baba M, Sabayon D, Refaat M J Innov Card Rhythm Manag. 2020; 11(9):4234-4240.

PMID: 32983592 PMC: 7510472. DOI: 10.19102/icrm.2020.110901.


Pulmonary and Paradoxical Embolism after Slow Pathway Ablation: A Thrombotic Disorder Unmasked by a Rare Complication.

Habib E, Elshaer A, Shafquat A, Al-Ghamdi B J Atr Fibrillation. 2019; 11(6):2142.

PMID: 31384363 PMC: 6652791. DOI: 10.4022/jafib.2142.


Prevalence and Characteristics of Venous Thrombosis after Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation in Patients Receiving Periprocedural Direct Oral Anticoagulants.

Sasaki T, Nakamura K, Minami K, Take Y, Koyama K, Yamashita E J Atr Fibrillation. 2019; 11(4):2090.

PMID: 31139285 PMC: 6533838. DOI: 10.4022/jafib.2090.