In plain language
In 200 atrial fibrillation ablations by one electrophysiologist, an ultrasound- and contact-force-guided technique avoided fluoroscopy entirely, with similar success and shorter procedures than earlier fluoroscopy-guided cases. Staff radiation and health outcomes were not measured.
At a glance
- Type of study
- Original research, Retrospective cohort study
- Who was studied
- Electrophysiologists, Patients
- Size
- n = 200 procedures
- Summary based on
- the abstract
What it found
All 200 consecutive atrial fibrillation (AF) ablations were completed without any fluoroscopy, using ICE and contact force sensing.
Key figures: 0 fluoroscopy in 200 ablations
Procedure time was shorter than the last 50 fluoroscopy-guided standard ablations.
Key figures: 106.2 ± 23.2 min vs 127.9 ± 38.2 min (P < 0.01)
Success rate was similar to fluoroscopy-guided ablations.
Key figures: 76% vs 74% (mean follow-up 11 months)
Complications were few: one partial phrenic nerve palsy and one femoral pseudoaneurysm.
Key figures: 2 complications in 200 cases
Catheter costs fell compared with previous approaches.
Key figures: $2,168-$4,568/case
Limits to keep in mind
Single-operator, single-centre consecutive series compared with a historical cohort of 50 fluoroscopy-guided cases that also differed in contact force use; staff dose was not measured directly and follow-up was short.
Related research summaries
- Fluoroscopy-minimization strategy for catheter ablation of Supraventricular Tachycardia by wOmen OPerators: the STOOP Multicentre Registry (2026, Prospective cohort 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)
- Decreased Operator X-Ray Exposure By Optimized Fluoroscopy During Radiofrequency Ablation Of Common Atrial Flutter (2018, Prospective cohort study)
- Reducing radiation exposure during procedures performed in the electrophysiology laboratory (2017, Retrospective cohort study)
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.