In plain language
In 150 left atrial ablations at one centre, halving the frame rate and removing the antiscatter grid cut patient dose area product by 64% without longer procedures. Staff dose was not measured, though lower patient dose generally lowers scatter to the team.
At a glance
- Type of study
- Original research, Retrospective cohort study
- Who was studied
- Patients
- Size
- n = 150 patients
- Summary based on
- the abstract
What it found
After switching from 4 to 2 frames per second and removing the antiscatter grid, dose area product fell by 64%.
Key figures: 630.28 ± 550.96 vs. 226.44 ± 277.44 µGym2, P < 0.001
Fluoroscopy duration was not prolonged under the new protocol.
Key figures: 14.22 ± 4.47 vs. 13.62 ± 7.11 min, P = 0.066
Procedural duration did not differ.
Key figures: 1:48 ± 0:28 vs. 1:53 ± 0:34, P = 0.525
Acute success was achieved in all procedures, with two complications before and one after the protocol change.
Key figures: 100% acute success; 2 vs. 1 complications
The grid was re-introduced in four procedures because of poor visibility in morbidly obese patients or difficult transseptal puncture.
Key figures: n = 4
Limits to keep in mind
Single-centre before-after comparison of 150 consecutive patients, not randomized. Only patient dose area product was reported, with no direct staff dosimetry.
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.