In plain language
In 525 catheter ablations at one centre, electroanatomical mapping allowed 96% of later procedures to be done with no fluoroscopy, without loss of success or added complications. Staff dose was not measured, but eliminating fluoroscopy removes the radiation source.
At a glance
- Type of study
- Original research, Retrospective cohort study
- Who was studied
- Patients
- Size
- n = 525 procedures
- Summary based on
- the abstract
What it found
Overall, most catheter ablations in the series were performed with no fluoroscopy at all.
Key figures: 78.5% of 525 procedures
Zero-fluoroscopy procedures rose from about a third in the early period to nearly all in the later period, consistent with a learning curve.
Key figures: 38.5% (2011-2013) vs 96.2% (2014-2017)
Fluoroscopy time fell sharply in the later group.
Key figures: 1.4 ± 19.6 s vs 556.92 ± 520.76 s; P < .001
Eliminating fluoroscopy did not change acute success, complications, or procedure duration.
Limits to keep in mind
Single-centre observational before-after comparison reported only as an abstract; procedures needing transseptal puncture and nonidiopathic ventricular tachycardia (VT) were excluded, and staff dose was not measured directly.
Related research summaries
- Fluoroscopy-minimization strategy for catheter ablation of Supraventricular Tachycardia by wOmen OPerators: the STOOP Multicentre Registry (2026, Prospective cohort study)
- Two Central Nervous System Tumors in One Catheter Lab: Time to Rethink Radiation Protection (2026, Retrospective cohort study)
- Radiation Awareness for EVAR in Hybrid Operating Room: An Instant Operator Risk Chart (2021, Dosimetry measurement study)
- Utilization of a Radiation Safety Time-Out Reduces Radiation Exposure During Electrophysiology Procedures (2019, Prospective cohort study)
- Completely nonfluoroscopic catheter ablation of left atrial arrhythmias and ventricular tachycardia (2018, Case report or series)
How this summary was made
ORSIF prepared this summary with AI assistance from the abstract of the paper. A program then checked that the passage supporting each finding appears word for word in that source. A person has not yet reviewed each summary, so read the original before relying on a number. ORSIF summarizes research and does not endorse any product or company. Report a problem with this summary.
Prepared November 3, 2026.