Prospective Randomized Comparison of Irrigated-Tip Versus Conventional-Tip Catheters for Ablation of Common Flutter

Abstract

Background —Radiofrequency (RF) ablation of common flutter requires the creation of a complete ablation line to produce bidirectional conduction block in the cavotricuspid isthmus. An irrigated-tip ablation catheter has been shown to be effective in patients in whom conventional ablation has failed. This randomized study compares the efficacy and safety of this catheter with those of a conventional catheter for de novo flutter ablation. Methods and Results —Cavotricuspid ablation was performed with a conventional (n=26) or an irrigated-tip catheter (n=24). RF was applied for 60 minutes with a temperature-controlled mode: 65°C to 70°C up to 70 W with a conventional catheter or 50°C up to 50 W (with a 17-mL/min saline flow rate) with the irrigated-tip catheter. The end point was the achievement of bidirectional isthmus block, and a crossover was performed after 21 unsuccessful applications. Procedural ablation parameters as well as number of applications, x-ray exposure, procedure duration, impedance rise, and clot formation were compared for each group. A coronary angiogram was performed before and after each ablation for the first 30 patients. Complete bidirectional isthmus block was achieved for all patients. Four patients crossed over from conventional to irrigated-tip catheters. The number of applications, procedure duration, and x-ray exposure were significantly higher with the conventional than with the irrigated-tip catheter: 13±10 versus 5±3 pulses, 53±41 versus 27±16 minutes, and 18±14 versus 9±6 minutes, respectively. No significant side effects occurred, and the coronary angiograms of the first 30 patients after ablation were unchanged. Conclusions —Irrigated-tip catheters were found to be more effective than and as safe as conventional catheters for flutter ablation, facilitating the rapid achievement of bidirectional isthmus block.