Online first
Original Article
Published online: 2022-12-29

open access

Page views 1523
Article views/downloads 672
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

Safety and effectiveness of very-high-power, short-duration ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation: Preliminary results

Karolina Mitrzak1, Michał Peller1, Bartosz Krzowski1, Cezary Maciejewski1, Paweł Balsam1, Michał Marchel1, Marcin Grabowski1, Piotr Lodziński1


Background: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is at the forefront of rhythm control strategies in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). A very-high-power, short-duration (vHPSD) catheter, QDot MicroTM (Biosense Webster) was designed to improve the effectiveness of AF ablation within a shorter procedure time. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of PVI ablation between this vHPSD ablation mode and conventional ablation-index-guided ablation (ThermoCool Smarttouch SF catheter).

Methods: This single-center, retrospective, observational study enrolled 108 patients with AF, referred for catheter ablation between December 16, 2019 and December 3, 2021. In 54 procedures (mean age: 58.0 ± 12.3; 66.67% male), a QDot MicroTM catheter was used (vHPSD-group), and 54 patients (mean age: 57.2 ± 11.8; 70.37% male) were treated with a ThermoCool SmarttouchTM SF catheter (AI-group). The primary endpoint was freedom from AF 3 months after ablation.

Results: Atrial fibrillation was found to recur in 14.81% of patients in the vHPSD-group and in 31.48% of patients in the AI-group (p = 0.07). There was no difference in treatment-emergent adverse events between the two groups (6.3% vs. 0%; p = 0.10). One severe adverse event (a cerebral vascular accident) was observed in the vHPSD-group. The mean dose of remifentanil was reported to be lower during QDot MicroTM catheter-based PVI (p < 0.01). The vHPSD-based PVI was associated with shorter radiofrequency application time (p < 0.001), fluoroscopy time (p < 0.0001), and total procedure time (p < 0.0001).

Conclusions: This study suggests vHPSD ablation is safe, can reduce the dosage of analgesics during significantly shorter procedures and may enhance the success rate of catheter-based PVI.

Article available in PDF format

View PDF Download PDF file


  1. Zoni-Berisso M, Lercari F, Carazza T, et al. Epidemiology of atrial fibrillation: European perspective. Clin Epidemiol. 2014; 6: 213–220.
  2. Hindricks G, Potpara T, Dagres N, et al. ESC Scientific Document Group. 2020 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS): The Task Force for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Developed with the special contribution of the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J. 2021; 42(5): 373–498.
  3. Mark DB, Anstrom KJ, Sheng S, et al. CABANA Investigators. Effect of catheter ablation vs medical therapy on quality of life among patients with atrial fibrillation: the CABANA randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2019; 321(13): 1275–1285.
  4. Marrouche NF, Brachmann J, Andresen D, et al. CASTLE-AF Investigators. Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation with heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2018; 378(5): 417–427.
  5. Morillo CA, Verma A, Connolly SJ, et al. RAAFT-2 Investigators. Radiofrequency ablation vs antiarrhythmic drugs as first-line treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (RAAFT-2): a randomized trial. JAMA. 2014; 311(7): 692–700.
  6. Turagam MK, Musikantow D, Whang W, et al. Assessment of catheter ablation or antiarrhythmic drugs for first-line therapy of atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. JAMA Cardiol. 2021; 6(6): 697–705.
  7. Hakalahti A, Biancari F, Nielsen JC, et al. Radiofrequency ablation vs. antiarrhythmic drug therapy as first line treatment of symptomatic atrial fibrillation: systematic review and meta-analysis. Europace. 2015; 17(3): 370–378.
  8. Khaykin Y, Wang X, Natale A, et al. Cost comparison of ablation versus antiarrhythmic drugs as first-line therapy for atrial fibrillation: an economic evaluation of the RAAFT pilot study. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2009; 20(1): 7–12.
  9. Kobza R, Hindricks G, Tanner H, et al. Late recurrent arrhythmias after ablation of atrial fibrillation: incidence, mechanisms, and treatment. Heart Rhythm. 2004; 1(6): 676–683.
  10. Calkins H, Hindricks G, Cappato R, et al. 2017 HRS/EHRA/ECAS/APHRS/SOLAECE expert consensus statement on catheter and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation: Executive summary. Europace. 2018; 20(1): 157–208.
  11. Garvanski I, Simova I, Angelkov L, et al. Predictors of Recurrence of AF in Patients After Radiofrequency Ablation. Eur Cardiol. 2019; 14(3): 165–168.
  12. Gaita F, Scaglione M, Battaglia A, et al. Very long-term outcome following transcatheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. Are results maintained after 10 years of follow up? Europace. 2018; 20(3): 443–450.
  13. Phlips T, Taghji P, El Haddad M, et al. Improving procedural and one-year outcome after contact force-guided pulmonary vein isolation: the role of interlesion distance, ablation index, and contact force variability in the 'CLOSE'-protocol. Europace. 2018; 20(FI_3): f419–f427.
  14. Ouyang F, Tilz R, Chun J, et al. Long-term results of catheter ablation in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: lessons from a 5-year follow-up. Circulation. 2010; 122(23): 2368–2377.
  15. Ganesan AN, Shipp NJ, Brooks AG, et al. Long-term outcomes of catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Heart Assoc. 2013; 2(2): e004549.
  16. Tofig BJ, Lukac P, Borregaard R, et al. Recurrence after pulmonary vein isolation is associated with low contact force. Scand Cardiovasc J. 2018; 52(1): 28–33.
  17. Yavin HD, Leshem E, Shapira-Daniels A, et al. Impact of high-power short-duration radiofrequency ablation on long-term lesion durability for atrial fibrillation ablation. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2020; 6(8): 973–985.
  18. Leshem E, Zilberman I, Tschabrunn CM, et al. High-Power and short-duration ablation for pulmonary vein isolation: biophysical characterization. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2018; 4(4): 467–479.
  19. Chen CF, Wu J, Jin CL, et al. Comparison of high-power short-duration and low-power long-duration radiofrequency ablation for treating atrial fibrillation: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Cardiol. 2020; 43(12): 1631–1640.
  20. Ali-Ahmed F, Goyal V, Patel M, et al. High-power, low-flow, short-ablation duration-the key to avoid collateral injury? J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2019; 55(1): 9–16.
  21. Takigawa M, Kitamura T, Martin CA, et al. Temperature- and flow-controlled ablation/very-high-power short-duration ablation vs conventional power-controlled ablation: Comparison of focal and linear lesion characteristics. Heart Rhythm. 2021; 18(4): 553–561.
  22. Barkagan M, Contreras-Valdes FM, Leshem E, et al. High-power and short-duration ablation for pulmonary vein isolation: Safety, efficacy, and long-term durability. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2018; 29(9): 1287–1296.
  23. Reddy VY, Grimaldi M, De Potter T, et al. Pulmonary vein isolation with very high power, short duration, temperature-controlled lesions: the QDOT-FAST trial. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2019; 5(7): 778–786.
  24. Wielandts JY, Almorad A, Hilfiker G, et al. Biosense Webster's QDOT Micro™ radiofrequency ablation catheter. Future Cardiol. 2021; 17(5): 817–825.
  25. Kuck KH, Brugada J, Fürnkranz A, et al. FIRE AND ICE Investigators. Cryoballoon or radiofrequency ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2016; 374(23): 2235–2245.
  26. Neuzil P, Reddy VY, Kautzner J, et al. Electrical reconnection after pulmonary vein isolation is contingent on contact force during initial treatment: results from the EFFICAS I study. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2013; 6(2): 327–333.
  27. Reddy VY, Dukkipati SR, Neuzil P, et al. Randomized, controlled trial of the safety and effectiveness of a contact force-sensing irrigated catheter for ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: results of the tacticath contact force ablation catheter study for atrial fibrillation (TOCCASTAR) study. Circulation. 2015; 132(10): 907–915.
  28. De Potter T, Grimaldi M, Jensen HK. Temperature-controlled catheter ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: the QDO-MICRO Workflow Study. J Atr Fibrillation. 2021; 13(6): 20200460.
  29. Richard Tilz R, Sano M, Vogler J, et al. Very high-power short-duration temperature-controlled ablation versus conventional power-controlled ablation for pulmonary vein isolation: The fast and furious - AF study. Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc. 2021; 35: 100847.
  30. Wielandts JY, Almorad A, Hilfiker G, et al. Biosense Webster's QDOT Micro™ radiofrequency ablation catheter. Future Cardiol. 2021; 17(5): 817–825.
  31. Rozen G, Ptaszek LM, Zilberman I, et al. Safety and efficacy of delivering high-power short-duration radiofrequency ablation lesions utilizing a novel temperature sensing technology. Europace. 2018; 20(FI_3): f444–f450.
  32. Cozowicz C, Poeran J, Zubizarreta N, et al. Non-opioid analgesic modes of pain management are associated with reduced postoperative complications and resource utilisation: a retrospective study of obstructive sleep apnoea patients undergoing elective joint arthroplasty. Br J Anaesth. 2019; 122(1): 131–140.
  33. McEvoy MD, Raymond BL, Krige A. Opioid-Sparing perioperative analgesia within enhanced recovery programs. Anesthesiol Clin. 2022; 40(1): 35–58.
  34. Zhao M, Joo DT. Enhancement of spinal N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor function by remifentanil action at delta-opioid receptors as a mechanism for acute opioid-induced hyperalgesia or tolerance. Anesthesiology. 2008; 109(2): 308–317.
  35. Thrall G, Lane D, Carroll D, et al. Quality of life in patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review. Am J Med. 2006; 119(5): 448.e1–448.19.
  36. McCabe PJ. Psychological distress in patients diagnosed with atrial fibrillation: the state of the science. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2010; 25(1): 40–51.
  37. Polikandrioti M, Koutelekos I, Vasilopoulos G, et al. Anxiety and depression in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation: prevalence and associated factors. Cardiol Res Pract. 2018; 2018: 7408129.
  38. Gonzalez J, Macle L, Deyell MW, et al. Effect of catheter ablation on quality of life in atrial fibrillation. J Atr Fibrillation. 2014; 6(6): 1063.
  39. Hamada N, Fujimichi Y. Classification of radiation effects for dose limitation purposes: history, current situation and future prospects. J Radiat Res. 2014; 55(4): 629–640.
  40. Francke A, Taha NS, Scharfe F, et al. Procedural efficacy and safety of standardized, ablation index guided fixed 50 W high-power short-duration pulmonary vein isolation and substrate modification using the CLOSE protocol. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021; 32(9): 2408–2417.
  41. Mao ZJ, Pei Y, Lin H, et al. Assessment of high-power catheter ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2021; 8: 609590.
  42. Ravi V, Poudyal A, Abid QU, et al. High-power short duration vs. conventional radiofrequency ablation of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Europace. 2021; 23(5): 710–721.
  43. Iwasawa J, Koruth JS, Petru J, et al. Temperature-Controlled radiofrequency ablation for pulmonary vein isolation in patients with atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017; 70(5): 542–553.
  44. Halbfass P, Wielandts JY, Knecht S, et al. Safety of very high-power short-duration radiofrequency ablation for pulmonary vein isolation: a two-centre report with emphasis on silent oesophageal injury. Europace. 2022; 24(3): 400–405.