Electrophysiology lab efficiency comparison between cryoballoon and point-by-point radiofrequency ablation: a German sub-analysis of the FREEZE Cohort study
Standard
Electrophysiology lab efficiency comparison between cryoballoon and point-by-point radiofrequency ablation: a German sub-analysis of the FREEZE Cohort study. / Metzner, Andreas; Straube, Florian; Tilz, Roland R; Kuniss, Malte; Noelker, Georg; Tebbenjohanns, Juergen; Andresen, Dietrich; Wieneke, Heinrich; Stellbrink, Christoph; Franke, Jennifer; Dorwarth, Uwe; Carion, Phuong Lien; Holbrook, Reece; Hochadel, Matthias; Senges, Jochen; Hoffmann, Ellen; Kuck, Karl-Heinz; FREEZE Cohort Study Investigators .
in: BMC CARDIOVASC DISOR, Jahrgang 23, Nr. 1, 09.01.2023, S. 8.Publikationen: SCORING: Beitrag in Fachzeitschrift/Zeitung › SCORING: Zeitschriftenaufsatz › Forschung › Begutachtung
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Electrophysiology lab efficiency comparison between cryoballoon and point-by-point radiofrequency ablation: a German sub-analysis of the FREEZE Cohort study
AU - Metzner, Andreas
AU - Straube, Florian
AU - Tilz, Roland R
AU - Kuniss, Malte
AU - Noelker, Georg
AU - Tebbenjohanns, Juergen
AU - Andresen, Dietrich
AU - Wieneke, Heinrich
AU - Stellbrink, Christoph
AU - Franke, Jennifer
AU - Dorwarth, Uwe
AU - Carion, Phuong Lien
AU - Holbrook, Reece
AU - Hochadel, Matthias
AU - Senges, Jochen
AU - Hoffmann, Ellen
AU - Kuck, Karl-Heinz
AU - FREEZE Cohort Study Investigators
N1 - © 2023. The Author(s).
PY - 2023/1/9
Y1 - 2023/1/9
N2 - BACKGROUND: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is recommended to treat paroxysmal and persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). This analysis aimed to assess the hospital efficiency of single-shot cryoballoon ablation (CBA) and point-by-point radiofrequency ablation (RFA).METHODS: The discrete event simulation used PVI procedure times from the FREEZE Cohort study to establish the electrophysiology (EP) lab occupancy time. 1000 EP lab days were simulated according to an illustrative German hospital, including 3 PVI cases per day using CBA at one site and RFA at the other.RESULTS: The analysis included 1560 CBA patients and 1344 RFA patients from the FREEZE Cohort. Some baseline patients' characteristics were different between groups (age, AF type, and some concomitant diseases), without being statistically associated to ablation procedure time. Mean procedure time was 122.2 ± 39.4 min for CBA and 160.3 ± 53.5 min for RFA (p < 0.0001). RFA was associated with a more than five-fold increase of cumulative overtime compared to CBA over the simulated period (1285 h with RFA and 253 h with CBA). 70.7% of RFA lab days included overtime versus 25.7% for CBA. CBA was associated with more days with an additional hour at the end of the EP lab shift compared to RFA (47.8% vs 11.5% days with one hour left, respectively).CONCLUSION: CBA is faster and more predictable than point-by-point RFA, and enables improvements in EP lab efficiency, including: fewer cumulative overtime hours, more days where overtime is avoided and more days with remaining time for the staff or for any EP lab usage. Clinical trial registration NCT01360008 (first registration 25/05/2011).
AB - BACKGROUND: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is recommended to treat paroxysmal and persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). This analysis aimed to assess the hospital efficiency of single-shot cryoballoon ablation (CBA) and point-by-point radiofrequency ablation (RFA).METHODS: The discrete event simulation used PVI procedure times from the FREEZE Cohort study to establish the electrophysiology (EP) lab occupancy time. 1000 EP lab days were simulated according to an illustrative German hospital, including 3 PVI cases per day using CBA at one site and RFA at the other.RESULTS: The analysis included 1560 CBA patients and 1344 RFA patients from the FREEZE Cohort. Some baseline patients' characteristics were different between groups (age, AF type, and some concomitant diseases), without being statistically associated to ablation procedure time. Mean procedure time was 122.2 ± 39.4 min for CBA and 160.3 ± 53.5 min for RFA (p < 0.0001). RFA was associated with a more than five-fold increase of cumulative overtime compared to CBA over the simulated period (1285 h with RFA and 253 h with CBA). 70.7% of RFA lab days included overtime versus 25.7% for CBA. CBA was associated with more days with an additional hour at the end of the EP lab shift compared to RFA (47.8% vs 11.5% days with one hour left, respectively).CONCLUSION: CBA is faster and more predictable than point-by-point RFA, and enables improvements in EP lab efficiency, including: fewer cumulative overtime hours, more days where overtime is avoided and more days with remaining time for the staff or for any EP lab usage. Clinical trial registration NCT01360008 (first registration 25/05/2011).
KW - Humans
KW - Cohort Studies
KW - Cryosurgery/adverse effects
KW - Atrial Fibrillation/diagnosis
KW - Catheter Ablation/adverse effects
KW - Pulmonary Veins/surgery
KW - Electrophysiology
KW - Treatment Outcome
KW - Recurrence
U2 - 10.1186/s12872-022-03015-8
DO - 10.1186/s12872-022-03015-8
M3 - SCORING: Journal article
C2 - 36624380
VL - 23
SP - 8
JO - BMC CARDIOVASC DISOR
JF - BMC CARDIOVASC DISOR
SN - 1471-2261
IS - 1
ER -
