Research summary, original research, 2015

Near zerO fluoroscopic exPosure during catheter ablAtion of supRavenTricular arrhYthmias: the NO-PARTY multicentre randomized trial

Casella M, Dello Russo A, Pelargonio G, Del Greco M, Zingarini G, Piacenti M, et al.. Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology. 2015

Read the original paper

In plain language

In a randomized trial of 262 patients undergoing ablation for supraventricular tachycardia in six Italian electrophysiology (EP) labs, 3D mapping-guided ablation cut fluoroscopy to near zero and lowered measured electrophysiologist dose per procedure from 25.33 to 1.55 µSv, with similar success rates.

At a glance

Type of study
Original research, Randomized trial
Who was studied
Electrophysiologists, Patients
Size
n = 262 patients
Where
Italy
Summary based on
the full text

What it found

  • Operator effective dose per procedure was much lower with the minimally fluoroscopic approach than with conventional fluoroscopy-guided ablation.

    Key figures: 1.55 vs 25.33 µSv per procedure; P < 0.001 (213 procedures)

  • Fluoroscopy time and patient effective dose were near zero with the minimally fluoroscopic approach.

    Key figures: 0 s (iqr 0-12) vs 859 s (iqr 545-1346); 0 mSv (iqr 0-0.08) vs 8.87 mSv (iqr 3.67-22.01); P < 0.00001

  • No X-ray was used at all in most minimally fluoroscopic procedures.

    Key figures: 72% (96/134)

  • Acute success and complication rates did not differ between groups.

    Key figures: 99% acute success both groups; complications 1.1%; P = ns

  • Modelled patient lifetime cancer incidence and mortality risks were 96% lower with the minimally fluoroscopic approach.

    Key figures: 96% reduction

Limits to keep in mind

Operator dose came from cumulative chest thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) on the first operator only, with no data for nurses, technologists or other staff and no operator risk estimates; cancer risks were modelled, not observed, and procedures were performed only by operators skilled in the technique.

How this summary was made

ORSIF prepared this summary with AI assistance from the full text 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.