Abstract 12271: Radiofrequency Ablation With Electrode in Contact With Circular Mapping Catheter: Coagulation, Char, and Pop Ocurrence Comparison With Two Types of Irrigated Ablation Catheters
Introduction: A circular mapping catheter (CMC, Biosense Webster Lasso® Catheter) is frequently used in radiofrequency (RF) ablation treatment of atrial fibrillation to aid in determining ablation targets, such as the pulmonary vein ostia. During RF delivery, the ablation electrode is often in close proximity and may sometimes be in contact with one of the electrodes of the CMC. In this study, we compare coagulation, tissue char, and pop occurrence for ablations in contact with a CMC electrode versus ablations without a CMC. Ablations were performed with open-irrigation ablation electrodes of the Biosense Webster ThermoCool® Catheter (6 hole) and ThermoCool® SF Catheter (56 hole).
Hypothesis: There will be more coagulation formation when there is contact with CMC.
Methods: The thigh muscles of 4 anesthetized pigs were exposed and a skin cradle created. A 6 hole or 56 hole catheter was placed on the muscle with 10g of force in perpendicular orientation. Some ablations were performed with the ablation catheter alone, while others were performed with a CMC resting on the thigh muscle and the ablation electrode contacting one of the CMC electrodes on top or on the side. Heparinized autologous blood (activated clotting time > 350s) at 37°C was circulated in the thigh cradle at 275-300ml/min while ablations were performed at 50W for 60s with 30ml/min irrigation for 6 hole and 15ml/min for 56 hole. Pops during ablation were noted. After the ablation, the blood pool was removed while keeping the catheters in position, the ablation site was examined, and coagulation and tissue char was noted
Results: See Table
Conclusions: When comparing ablations with a CMC versus no CMC, there was more coagulation with a CMC. When comparing a 6 hole catheter with a CMC versus a 56 hole catheter with a CMC, there was more coagulation with the 6 hole ablation catheter. There was no significant difference in pop and tissue char in any comparison
Author Disclosures: C. Oberti: None. J. Ashton: Employment; Significant; Biosense Webster, Inc. C. Birchard: Employment; Significant; Biosense Webster, Inc. O. Wazni: None. W. Saliba: None.
- © 2014 by American Heart Association, Inc.